IronFilm

The point I was making, is that if a production runs into even merely just thirty minutes of overtime, or/and has a very slight increase to post production costs, then those additional costs to production would totally wipe out any "savings" they might get from renting a cheaper camera than an ARRI/Sony/RED/Varicam.
I love this feature as a Boom Op and Sound Mixer!! (nothing to do with an actor entering the frame though, I mean for our purposes)
Huge time savings having an ARRI on set vs "random Camera X" that nobody has ever worked with before. 
A great analogy.  (to carry on this analogy: you'd save time using a F1 over a Camry at the race track, but you'd lose time if you used the F1 for a shopping trip. Ditto cameras, it could be "fast" or "slow" to use, depending on the type of set it's being used on)
Now excuse me while I go do this week's grocery shopping in a F1....

The point I was making, is that if a production runs into even merely just thirty minutes of overtime, or/and has a very slight increase to post production costs, then those additional costs to production would totally wipe out any "savings" they might get from renting a cheaper camera than an ARRI/Sony/RED/Varicam.
I love this feature as a Boom Op and Sound Mixer!! (nothing to do with an actor entering the frame though, I mean for our purposes)
Huge time savings having an ARRI on set vs "random Camera X" that nobody has ever worked with before. 
A great analogy.  (to carry on this analogy: you'd save time using a F1 over a Camry at the race track, but you'd lose time if you used the F1 for a shopping trip. Ditto cameras, it could be "fast" or "slow" to use, depending on the type of set it's being used on)
Now excuse me while I go do this week's grocery shopping in a F1....

In a lot that I've seen, they conclude in the end that the Alexa's picture is nicer, but not 20x nicer (or whatever the price multiple is).  They're completely correct.  If you're an owner-operator shooting corporate talking heads or weddings or short films with a budget of about $1k, you'd be crazy to buy an Alexa for it.
On the other hand, if you're shooting a feature film with a budget of 200 million dollars and the cost for several Alexas is about 0.2% of your budget (as IronFilm pointed out), you're probably not thinking in terms of value, but about the "best" tool to create the image.
Similarly, you'd be crazy to buy a 12-18 million dollar F1 racecar to commute to work.  It's a terrible value compared to like, a Toyota Camry.  But if you show up on the track at Interlagos on race day driving a Camry...

I hate those videos that try and compare a $1000 camera to an Alexa with a stupid thumbnail that suggests you'll be surprised by the results. Inevitably, you learn that the operator wasn't as good at using cameras as he was at making thumbnails, or they intentionally cripple the Alexa by shooting in ways to highlight the $1000 camera.
That said, I agree that probably 9 out of 10 times, nobody will realize what camera you shot your movie with as long as the story is good and engaging, but I do think that a couple of those people may feel like something was off without knowing why.
An Alexa costs 50K+ for a reason. And although I believe craft and resources lend to the final look of the film, the sensor, the Arri color science and its thick files are a piece of the puzzle.
A long time ago, I got hooked on my Canon 5Diii with ML Raw because it was the first time I had shot something where I looked at it and thought... man that almost looks like a real movie. So there are some "intangibles" involved because I am not that talented, nor that skilled. I have shot with a bunch of cameras since... GH5, GH6, Sigma FP, S5iiX, Canon R7, etc... and although the FP comes close, but even its 4K raw image is no match to my trusty, old 5D3 in gross old 1080p raw.

I am equally as confident that my camera is capable of burning in my LUT saving me hours and hours of grading per job and no client ever has, or ever will ask for me to do anything further with the end result.
But then I am the opposite end of making movies and just a hack wedding vidiot.
It will not stop them asking me however if I have any footage of random Aunt Jane who flew in from Canada chatting with uni friend Sandeep with Uncle Herbert in the background chatting with my mum.
Nor is there any more footage of your empty dance floor. 
I once had a bride list 3 things I had not captured:
1. Blossom on a particular tree outside.
2. A chandelier that was in the entrance hall.
3. A brown leather sofa.
But I digress…

I just checked eBay. Yes, you can get an original Arri Alexa for less than CAN$5000 including the viewfinder.
We live in the golden age of cameras, Kids. Go make your movie!

So true. I assistant edited on a feature shot with a 2K Alexa and they (for some reason) recorded to ProResHQ. I found the files to be some of the nicest, easiest footage to prepare for the editor. The show had a colour grader at the end but before that point, one of my tasks was to colour grade test reels and rough edits and it was so easy and fast to do as the image that it had, even in ProRes was amazing.
The image is really nice and easy and quick to make it look good in post. This has budget advantages.
Another thing the DOP told me he liked about the Alexa is that the viewfinder shows you beyond the recorded image. This way you could anticipate, say, an actor about to enter the frame. This was something he had missed from the film days. Film cameras' viewfinders would show more of the image than you're getting and would have a frame guide to show you what you would get but you could see more on the sides than that.
He also said the menu on the side panel was fast and easy to navigate. Another time saving on set.

I think I'm out. If Panny had brought out or at least announced an S1Hii late last year I probably would have sprung for it, but recently my willingness to drop 3-4K on a new body, and to schlep around 15lbs/$8k of FF gear has mostly dried up.
Gonna sell off my S5iiX and L-mount lenses and fall back to ol' reliable m4/3. The DR and ISO performance on the G9ii look to be good enough for my needs, I'll be gaining 4K120, and I'll be able to move from a Pelican to a medium-sized backpack.

Still kind of amazing that the notion of buying your way into image quality with a camera is a thing these days.
What others have said.  Don't ignore the craft.  Swap out an ARRI with a GH1 in certain production environments and you'd be, like, "Holy shit!  That looks awesome!"
Three or four stops of DR does not a good image make.  It helps, but it doesn't make it.
A decade ago a bunch of cinematic heavyweights, Coppola and the like, did a popular test screening of hybrid camera tech at the time.  They were more than pleased with what the products, like a 5dII, were delivering.  If it was good enough for them in 2010's, what the heck are we worried about? 
Also, who remembers that one talented dude guy filming in 720p on a canon rebel?  I think his name started with a "Z"?  Beautiful stuff because he knew how to use it.  Would it have been better if it was an ARRI?  Of course, but would that really affect the narrative?
Anyway...
And then, yeah, add in a bunch of YT knobs playing with the gear without any deep wisdom about gaffing, camera moves, and storytelling --of course the video examples of hybrids'll end up looking like crap.
Here's an anecdote:  I'm currently editing a documentary with a decent budget.  The cinematographer on the shoots sucked balls.  He filmed with an ARRI and two different REDS along the way.  The ARRI has a look.  It comes out of the cam with a lot of "thickness" to use, you know?  Regardless, we recently had to hire a different guy to do a half day of pick up shots and he used his lowly GH5.  He knew how to find the right light, frame an interesting composition, and (thankfully) knew how to hold a mother-f'ing-shot longer than 2 seconds.  Grrrr.
Guess which footage looked better and was more useful?
We can (and should!) chase the tech if that's what floats our boats, but real creatives don't really give too much of a rip about the tech.  "Is it working? Good. Let's tell this story."  They make it happen with what they got.

Especially the case if you use expensive lenses, filtration, and have a good post house handle the color

That's where sensor and processing comes into play. I would be curious to see this night and day difference though. While I am pretty nerdy with this stuff, these days advantage from high end cameras seems minimal when using the same lenses, lighting, grading pipeline etc. I for sure can see a difference, it's just not that stark. 

I hear everyone's lament about the lack of Panny releases and I too am concerned about how well they are positioned to continue - they certainly killed Varicam which at the time was very good and promised improvement. But I feel the criticism about longer periods without a flagship release (and the accordant undertones of feeling betrayed) is partly about being seduced by the market and the immediacy of contemporary capitalism than the tools themselves.
My S1 is still killing it as my primary hybrid camera. Within months of its annoucement, I picked it and the 24/105 up and within a year three primes and this has been the best value return system I've ever owned. My only lament is the autofocus (unsurprising), which renders it virtually unuseable in lower lighting for event photography, etc. 
For my use I could switch to Canon (a C80 and R-something for stills) but the expense of buying into that system is just too much. I don't connect with Sony imagery. I've loved Nikon but they lost me with the Z6iii - I cannot imagine contending with the variable shadow noise while shooting in uncontrolled environments. (Honestly, if it were't for that issue, I'd strongly consider the switch to Nikon). 
And then I come back to the clean sensor and the color and the robustness of the Panny... If I'm not moved by their releases in the next two months, I will likely (finally) pickup an S5ii/x for low-light autofocus to have alongside my S1 for my hybrid work and, with money saved, get the 24/70 (finally) for that gorgeous microcontrast and leave it at that. 
Lastly, the hope of the Viltrox 28mm for L-mount actually has me holding on to my S5 body since I could perhaps sell it for $600 at this point. I never really liked the S5 beyond its sensor but I think it would be a great carry most everywhere body - throw-it-in-the-glovebox-and-not-care-much camera. Everyone is rushing to spend so much more than $600 for small cameras (generally with smaller sensors), espeically if your needs dictate an evf (mine do). 
Lastly, lastly, f'ing tethering to Capture One What The FFFFFFFFFF?! I had to pick up a Fuji X-H2 for proper tethering when needed. The Panasonic workarounds are cumbersome and glitchy. Looks like with the release of the S1Rii, there is a partnership with Capture One so hopefully that will be resolved going forward.
 

Yes, but I think Andrew is right, OM is rummaging the basement retrieving the last designs left by the original Olympus team and occasionally combing through and polishing old products here and there. For this lens they only managed to make the stabilization compatible with their camera bodies (!) and little more. It's amazing, they redesigned the tripod collar, WOW.  Farewell Olympus, it's a shame because especially in wildlife photography they have a very solid user base. In this field, small, lightweight, high-performance cameras and lenses really make a difference.

I guess the other two lens upgrades you are talking about are these:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/9864806631/om-system-updates-17mm-and-25mm-f1-8-lenses-for-micro-four-thirds
Small updates with adding weather proofing. Am glad that OM is not just releasing bodies but doing "something" for their lenses too. But it's very minimal. 
  
Is interesting what happened with sony vaio laptops vs what happened with IBM's Thinkpads when they sold them off
Would be worthy of a Masters' dissertation or a research paper to dig deeply into how differently each of these two went, and others in related areas like Olympus vs OM
  
Or a Fujifilm X-M5 / X-T50 or Zfc with an APS-C sensor for way less money. 
  
That thinking really doesn't work when you could just buy a Panasonic GH7 for the same price, or a G9 II for a lot less, or a secondhand OG G9 for waaaaay less. And still be using your MFT lenses. 
 
 

Yup! I went to a meetup last night and to take pictures of the speakers I just simply brought along my compact Fujfilm camera with a Siru 23mm f1.2 on it and a Viltrox 56mm f1.7 slipped into my pocket! So easy to bring along. 

Doesn't look like she eats many crisps.
There should definitely be more thin lenses.
I have become allergic to heavy stuff.
I mean look at this pair...

So much more fun than your average worktool + heavy work zoom

Latest rumors claim an S1Rii announcement on Feb 25th with a second full-frame body announced in April. 😐

There are rumours that Leica are unhappy with Panasonic and might scope out a deal with Sony in future.
Leica own the rights to L-mount so they can keep that and still go Sony, they don't have to take E-mount as well.
Panasonic of all the camera companies aside from OM Shit and Ricohdear are most in danger of being really on the rocks.
Like I say just one activist shareholder away from being less of a sentimental business.
Less of an enthusiast enterprise, more of a topic of euthanasia.

The A/V companies have already recently been restructured which is partly why the pro-AV releases are so low key, and there's no cinema camera line-up any more - this part of the business was essentially nuked and anything remaining merged into the consumer side.
At least as I understand it, Panasonic will continue in consumer cameras... for now... but the professional side of things is ending.
And the consumer cameras will be a very low priority compared to the higher-margin parts of the business like batteries and whatever the fuck they think AI is useful for.
In the report the exec. uttered a very taboo word in the corporate world, which was "sentimental"...
Shareholders don't get rich from sentimentality and culturally important products like TVs, cameras or hifi.
They want the big growth areas and bubbles to rise up and take over, and for anything else to fade away including LUMIX.
The top Japanese execs at Panasonic attach a high sentimental value to their top consumer products of the past like TVs and cameras.
They want to continue.
They are one activist shareholder away from being forced to back down on that and then we will see the end of LUMIX altogether.

TV business is probably gone. 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-supplier-panasonic-cut-costs-101150905.html
A sword sharp enough that beheads the iconic Panasonic TV, can kill Panasonic camera too. 

I'd go for both FX30 and Osmo Pocket 3... Just sayin' ; )
Other than that, P4K and Ace Pro 2 are a must no less : )
My current fav ones.
 
Without mention some other speciality captures devices or...
Blackmagic 6K FF... with this, you're set on the Aussie manufacturer camp : D works like a charm straight to those who always claim for stabilised stuff ;- )

For $2000, the build needs to be excellent. It looks good to me. Would I buy it? No, not at that price, but I'm no longer invested in M43- sadly because I really do love the mount. Also, I don't mind the utilitarian look of the non-retro cameras.
However, I must say the OM-3 is probably going to hit the mark much better than the S9, another camera without a grip. Yes, the S9 is FF, but without smaller lenses and a proper mechanical shutter. The OM-3 just has so many lenses that work for it. IMO, it's the ecosystem that is, once again, the real strength of the OM-3- also it has most great features people want. The 17mm and 25mm look to be hits, once they're on promotion.
I'm not of the opinion that OM System = cheap Chinese scam gear of the type you see on Amazon for $100. That's preposterous.

Now imagine if the Nikon Zf had the style based on this:


 
They probably should stop making Z9s to keep up with the demand. 🙂

My two cents: kinda like the camera. 

Their design "template" is clear: want to surf the retro trend, and gone for mixing two templates; the OM-1 film camera (that I had) and the Nikon Zf (this one becomes clear for the absence of an AF joystick - the Zf don't have one either - that could be easily put on the AF-ON button).

The strange width with came from the OM1 film camera, and at least they used it for putting the bigger battery. The no grip came from the retro OM1 film styling - and I kinda don't bother much, I always use an external grip when there is no big grip, but for who wants to go "full retro" could use it with as is. You could put a grip, but not remove one. Remember: this is for people that goes for style first.

The price is unreal - but Olympus/OM always put insane prices at launch. In 2 or 3 months (except if this sells like hotcakes) this will drop to 1799.

Still expensive, and if I was OM, would have changed this:

- Stacked sensor was a bad choice in my view - is not a sports or fast action paced camera. The 20mp PDAF from the OM5 could easily be used (but people will cry IS A REHOUSED OM5, and maybe this sensor would not have the speed for all computational stuff), or even better the 25mp PDAF that Pansonic is using (but the development would be much harder, all the image pipeline shoud be remade). Both sensors are probably much cheaper than the stacked one;
- Spend a bit of the difference in a 3,69mp EVF panel;
- Another bit in a AF joystick on the AF-ON button location, put the AF-ON on the CP button location.
- And another bit in firmware people the rewrite the video codecs. The huge resolution drop in the 8-bit modes are unexcusable (no other brand have it).

And that's it. Would be a much better camera for the intended target, and probably cheaper.

In addition to the camera, three lenses were upgraded. Version II of their 100-400 zoom lens was introduced, which I was very interested in. I currently use the Lumix version a lot which is a terrible lens. Optically it is good for its price but can only be used with AF. the zoom and focus rings are practically unusable. impossible to get smooth movement, the plastic creaks and they go jerky.
The optical quality of the new 100-400 OM zoom is the same as the old version (mediocre lens) but the big difference is in the stabilization: the first version had practically no stabilization because it did not communicate with the camera. This version interfaces with the camera's stabilization but... (the devil is in the details) the synchronization works only on OM bodies and not on Lumix cameras. Damn them forever!
This is yet more proof of the uselessness of the M43 alliance. What is the point if the lenses and camera bodies are not 100% compatible among the various companies in the consortium? It really sucks, and despite investing heavily in the M43 system, I hope they fail permanently. Damn them!