Emanuel

It is not true!
(that guy is an entertainer)
Far from only 1-stop faster. It is beyond 2 stops to be conservative.

@jonpais My dear fellow of these boards, I am. Just didn't express my opinion for the subject matter.
Nice to read your heads up! : )
 
Changing topic, here's another GH5S sample from distinct settings slowmo included; seems promising:
 

There's nothing (not even) similar to FUJI... That's the most close to film capture in the digital realm, ARRIs included*.
* I only don't add here Blackmagic because I really can't :-)
 

There's nothing (not even) similar to FUJI... That's the most close to film capture in the digital realm, ARRIs included*.
* I only don't add here Blackmagic because I really can't :-)
 

Yes for raw stills. There is very little noise and when pushed its 99% luma noise which is very easy to remove or plesant to keep.
I often shoot the new Fuji sensor in daylight at iso 4000 just because of the nice grain structure.

Pretty good schtuff:
 

Quite shocking seeing the difference between the URSA Mini 4.6K and 4K, identical cameras! Except for the sensor......

But really, no surprise to us who have been following BMD over the years. 

Basically the Panasonic G85 is as good (or even a little tiny bit better) as the URSA Mini 4K for DR

How is that possible when the image circle is a constant for m43? Look at the image circle and the various aspect ratios, they all have corners that touch the circle, hence the diagonal is identical. Its 2x relative to FF, always. DCI is no different than 4:3 or 3:2 with that sensor because the image is still coming from within the same image circle - per Panasonic. So yes 2 x 0.64 or 1.28 crop with FF lenses. My previous comment you quoted didn't make any mention about IQ or codecs, just the crop factor with FF lenses and a speed booster. 
chris

Jon in his provocative best ; ) LOL :-)

I'm assembling and adjusting the first 100mm prime right now.  Samples of the 100mm and 32mm should be ready by the time Cine Gear rolls around.  Another two (50mm and 150mm) hopefully by the end of the year.  The "in-betweens", 40mm, 60mm, and 75mm will likely not appear until next year.   I'm not sure about the adapter schedule yet.

Here something that Sean Robinson (Panasonic) said on Facebook, if it helps:
 

Of course he would say that. He also says he'd use the top of the ISO range without much hesitation. He's still one of the most prominent spokepersons on behalf of Panasonic. Now... he's always been very real with us, that much is true. But they've also rather been hush hush about weaknesses and more about what others don't that they actually do, that's just healthy company policy. Atleast he knows he can't deny C-AF still has a bit of a way to go.

Better to leave it stuck on 2500 going with the GH5S... :-D

Jon in his provocative best ; ) LOL :-)

The GH5 and GH5S are both current models. Neither is outdated or replaced by the other.

My side by side testing showed Fuji APS-C out preforming the FF Sony A7 and A7rii when pushed. So they can claim anything they like as long as the X-Trans keeps delivering such quality.

I don't think there is Any dual native thing going on in Any Sony A7 series camera. There used to be the misconception that it had a different base ISO in Photo and Video. That was proven wrong also long ago. I would love to be proven wrong though. Yeah there is an extended ISO, that is not really Dual ISO's. Almost Every camera has that feature.
This was written a Long time ago on DPR. And Jim Kasson is a wiz at all this stuff and DR.
 
"JimKasson wrote:
JDLaing wrote:
What is the native ISO on the Sony a7II? 100 or 200?
Do you mean base ISO? In that case, it's 100.
I this I consider this sensor to have two "base ISO" - one for both conversion gains. ISO 100 is one of them, the other seems to be ISO 650.
I'm not sure how "base ISO" is or should be defined though, but for me it's usually been the point with the least gain amplification. And for this sensor (and the A7S) sensor there would be two such points
Let's define the base ISO of a digital cameras the ISO setting for which the gain at the output of the analog to digital converter (ADC), measured in counts per electron, is the lowest. In most cameras, it is the setting where the upper end of the linear region of the pixel voltage/electron count curve produces a full scale output from the ADC.
Let’s say that the full well capacity (FWC) of the a7RII when the ISO is set to 100 is 50,000 electrons. That’s close to the real value. You will see that the exact number doesn’t affect the conclusions of the calculation to follow. Full scale on the a7RII is 16372. But that is before the black point is subtracted. The nominal black point of the a7RII, like all the a7x cameras, is 512, so let’s say that full scale is 15860. You will see that the exact value is not important either, but it’s nice to keep things real. Thus, the gain, at ISO 100 is 15860/50000 = 0.317 counts per electron (you may be used to seeing the inverse of this number, or 3.15 electrons per count).
At ISO 500, just before the conversion gain is changed, the gain must be (500/100)*0.317 = 1.58 counts per electron.
By looking at the read noise curves here, you can see that the conversion gain change is a little over one stop. Actually, you can get the answer to the entire question by inspection of the top curve, but I’ll leave that analysis as an exercise for the interested student.
Let’s be generous and say that the conversion gain changes by a factor of three. So the gain that we’re looking at must be (640/100)*0.317/3 = 0.676. That is larger than the gain at ISO 100 by a factor of more than two, so the a7RII does not have two base ISOs.
With the a7S, it isn’t even close, since the conversion gain change happens at a much higher ISO.
Jim"

Just a few months ago I had an FS5 and Shogun Inferno with RAW update. The kit was great however I didn't't really enjoy using it. So I ditched it and went GH5, and I find the quality of my work has improved due to the creative liberation and portability you get from it. 
If I did get any of these cameras, I'd probably go C200. Got Sigma ART lenses, Canon colour and DPAF = win! Not at all on the list though. Depends on what I'm doing. 

Gotcha! My turn instead LOL : ) Shame my posts failed to convince him to go on my and in his own behalf ;-)

Luke, they want to firmly send a message these devices are at same level of those used by the big guys. It works.
I recall when I was in the €103.000,00 F900/F900R camp...
That's all!
(E :-)

I had the 24-70mm F4 and I didn't like it at all. It's very sharp but the fly by wire focus sucks and the image aesthetic is pretty boring. The body of the lens isn't the strongest either. Kinda reminds me of the Lumix 12-35mm on a GH camera. SHARP AND BORING!
Onto the camera, I've been 90% GH5 in the last few months yet still use an A6500 on a gimbal because of the AF. Rarely use the A7SII at the mo. 
I find the A7RIII interesting as a hybrid - the AF is a huge plus for gimbals work plus mega resolution stills. It's just the damn lenses and the reliability that I'm not convinced with. Got EF and M43 glass, too much to get E-mount as well. (i want ALL the glass!!) 
Cameras are so bloody distracting.