IronFilm

Well, sort of.  Now I watched the whole thing.  I guess it's more "YouTuber shills for like 5 different companies and talks to other YouTubers while near an Arri and a GH7" - though it'll be interesting to watch their short film when it's done.

Another entry in the "YouTubers shoot the GH7 side-by-side with an Arri" catalog:
 

But it also shouldn't be expected for free.  😄

It does involve a crop, and for best results you need to use a shutter angle of 45 or 90 degrees, not the more typical 180. This will make your footage look a bit choppy but that's easily fixed by adding back motion blur with Resolve. An advantage is that gyro stabilization also reduces rolling shutter artifacts. As always, the best stabilization is external: tripod, gimbal, or steadicam. Not even the best IBIS or gyro stabilization can beat it, although IBIS can stand in for a tripod on non-moving shots. It's once the camera starts moving that external stabilization beats everything else.

damn, I didn't realize quite how many of them there are: ZV-1mk1, ZV-1mk2, ZV-1F (plus all the different colors/kits)
  
It is perfect market segmentation, is the ZV-1 not right for you? That's ok, we've got the more expensive ZV-E10mk1! Still not enough for you? How about the ZV-E10mk2 or even the ZV-E1? 
No? Maybe the FX30 or FX3 then. 
And so on and so on, all the way up until they're then getting the Sony VENICE2! ha

https://artlist.io/voice-over
Imagine the blow the voice-over community receives. 
Then I keep reading comments like: yes but the human voice is inimitable and there will always be room for those who want that unmistakable touch.

Bullshit

Or the whole thing is completely overblown because four minutes of shock content on that is far easier to produce than four minutes of representative content produced by light from the great outdoors actually hitting the sensor.
I'm absolutely no fan of this fella but this is a far more representative real world performance evaluation (queued up to overheating section).
In looking at that section, he didn't have the screen out and maybe the fro was acting as a shade and no mention is made of recovery time and would have been better using a dummy battery in that situation etc etc.
So, despite this looking far more indicative of what to expect when actually using it then, again, as I say, without any explanation of the mitigation/recovery it still leaves question marks.
Funnily enough, I was in a real life camera shop (well plural actually) a couple of days ago with @Andrew Reid as we were looking for an S9 and talking to the staff about what its like etc and they didn't have a clue.
Not because they're not knowledgable, its just that they don't get any hands on with any of them until months later if at all as its now all about just pre-orders getting collected.
They don't have any training courses or even reps from the manufacturers coming to visit to show them the cameras any more either.
Everything is about the first few weeks leading up to and following the online launch and getting those pre-orders in.
The whole business now - and this direction is driven entirely by the manufacturers - is all about direct marketing through YouTube and other "influencers" and it is a complete disgrace that people are getting so short changed by shallow first look "reviews" and such obviously dubious relationships.
Its difficult enough for bricks and mortar camera shops to keep going without wasting the experience and knowledge of the staff and reducing the experience of dealing with customers to just handing over a pre-ordered box that has been bought on the say so of some bearded dick in a baseball cap who is in the pocket of the manufacturer.
I don't know who was more depressed about the conversation we had about the situation, the two of them behind the counter or the two of us on the other side of it.
 

You cannot Unsee his Insanely White Teeth, once you notice them. 
 
So Basically this camera is an Unreliable FX30 with massive overheating issued in Real Shooting Conditions (not under controlled environments). With No IBIS and a few other strange issues. 
 

DPReview have changed/corrected their comment about crop levels in different modes:
 

IIRC GU started to give importance to overheating just recently.

Not particularly to be honest.
There is no comparison to the overheating performance of the Mark 1 and in his actual review of the Mark 1 he writes off any overheating concerns in literally a single second.


 
And yet in this review of the Mark II he devotes around 30% of the whole video to it.
Curious, no ?
The thing is that the original Mk I actually had a widely reported (and click baited) furore around overheating which his review singularly failed to mention let alone highlight.
Interestingly, it was actually one of the few reviews where he actually went outside with a camera and used it like someone would, so that may be related.
The furore around the Mark 1 (fuelled in large part by people using it for two hour live streams) went away with the combination of the High setting, the screen flipped out and the use of dummy batteries.
So, the latter points the finger firmly at the issue being the battery/chamber.
Now the Mark II has a completely different battery and chamber so it is really relevant to understand whether the performance in terms of overheating is different and whether the same mitigation works.
Like all the cameras that I have ever seen labelled with an "oh my God this is fatal" overheating "issue", I'm always wondering how many camera shops are overwhelmed with returns of them and the manufacturers having to withdraw them from sale as that reality doesn't seem to chime with the pearl clutching.
In the case of the Mark I, it is extremely popular with its target audience, which strongly suggests that the real world usage of them by those people isn't unduly impacted by this, so if the Mark II is markedly worse or different then it is incumbent on "reviewers" to contrast and compare.
These tests tell us nothing about real world performance not least because they do not take into account recovery time, which is the biggest debilitating factor in evaluating overheating.
Once again, I find myself bewildered by how many people consider him as some sort of gold standard of reviewer.
At the very least, the disparity between less than one second of evaluation of the overheating of the Mark I and five whole minutes on the Mark II warrants some sort of evaluation.
Maybe overheating didn't drive the clicks in the same way when the Mark I was released.

I don't crave "authentic handmade clothing". I'm fine with that all my clothes are machine made in a massive factory overseas. 
Am also don't crave "authentic hand drawn portraits". I'm fine that a machine (cameras, be it a DSLR, or even our cellphone) puts most of the work into making them these days. (even when you consider a highly skilled pro photographer, the marginal effort/time it costs to create an additional picture is exceptionally low vs what a portrait artist of the past had to do) 
While I'm not sure about what the timeline is for it (not even fully confident if it will happen in my lifetime or not, just that it will be "one day"), but I expect once AI movies are "good enough" (i.e. not Will Smith eating spaghetti!) then the future audience of them will also not care at all that they're "not hand crafted" just like they don't care for that about their clothes / portraits / etc (of course there will always remain a very small minority that do care, but for most of us this will be such a small market it won't be economically viable to target). 
  
But the musicians are not freaking out as much as the writers are... !

I don’t know about ‘always’ because 5 years vs 50 years vs 5000 years…
But for the foreseeable future as in our lifespans, changes because there is always change, but probably not to the extent that some think.
I believe this to be the case because although ‘progress’ continues to accelerate, there is only so much we can take, ie, it cannot simply increase exponentially.
And then there is retro/analogue or whatever we wish to call it, but even that gets updated because to some, ‘retro’ is stuff from just a few years back which others of us, might think of as not far off being current.
So AI I think will continue to play a part and increasingly so, but at the same time, I don’t think the sky is falling in.
Well not completely.
Or at least for some time yet…
Please not if there is a god, until I’m done. Thanks. If you exist and are listening/read comments on this forum. And if you truly are omnipotent, you surely do? Or have someone do? Because you must because just reading that volume of shit on YouTube comments must take up a heck of an amount of time. Appreciate it.

"let’s have a look at the waveform shooting our standard XYLA21 chart with the GH1 – 8 usable stops are visible: 
  Waveform plot of the 2009 original LUMIX GH1 shooting the XYLA 21 chart – 8 stops are usable. Image credit: CineD
8 stops!? How was I ever able to shoot anything on the GH1 with that seemingly poor dynamic range? Well – interestingly enough, when I now look at some of my early GH1 films on Vimeo they look totally fine to me… it is glaringly obvious that camera technology hasn’t been limiting us anymore for a very very long time. "
 
Panasonic LUMIX GH6 Lab Test - Rolling Shutter, Dynamic Range, and Latitude | CineD
https://www.cined.com/panasonic-lumix-gh6-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-latitude/

I think so

Yes. And by which time no one will be watching films made by someone else anyway…
“AI, make me a Western/Romance/Horror… “
No camera needed.
(Goodness, I hope not!)

That will takes years and years to happen
There will already be proper cinema cameras with this by then. Such as Sony BURANO, and whatever the later generations of it are. 
 

It depends on what you want to do with them of course. For me personally, the GH5 was kind of the 5d mkii of the photography world. It was the marker when image quality hit the "good enough" metric. For most work, shooting with the GH4 will still be a frustrating experience image wise. Not to say it can't produce good images, it's just very limited compared to modern alternatives. The GH5 was where cameras really hit a "I can get 75% of what a 2024 camera can get most of the time" kind of reality. 
 
That being said, if your standard is low and you are just looking for a sharp image and some basically decent color, the GH4 will be fine. 

Like with your GH5 post the other day, almost all cameras made in the last 10 years are capable tools that can produce nice images. It doesn't mean though that you should go out and buy a GH4 in 2024. There are plenty of "quality of life" improvements that have occured since the GH4's release that make it a lot less desirable camera compared to something like the GH5 or S1. We're blessed to be at a point where we could use a 10 year old camera and still get good results if we HAD to, but let's not pretend that the cameras that have come out since aren't significantly better in every way. IBIS alone radically changed the way I film and work.

af, dr of gh7 is as good as fx30. kudos to gh7. 

serious question, what is your background zlfan? 
 
you keep making the same comparison threads and theyre all pointless. if you’re good at making moving images, all you need is a camera with at least a decent codec (10 bit 4:2:2, and ideally with a log profile). Once that threshold is met, you can start thinking about the actual important facets of the job. 
 
maybe documentary based dps will go towards newer hybrids for their assisting features, but other ones will probably never care. If you’re shooting in a context where you get to call yourself the dp, the implication is there already: you’re the head of a department. You already have an assistant delegated to getting the focus right. Ibis will never be as good as a dedicated means to have certain camera movements

Yes, it's a version of the 'no one gets fired for buying IBM' situation - it's all about minimizing the (large) financial risks in high-end production. A very different situation from a one/few person production company doing filming and post-production in-house with their own relatively low-cost workflow (e.g. using Blackmagic cameras and software).

Too true. Arri targets the feature film and commercial industry. Those industries have absolutely no incentive to use BM or anything cheaper. The rental cost of an Arri is one of the smallest line items in their budgets. Why would they experiment with something that saves a few bucks on the rental when they have years of experience, trust, rigging etc all geared around their usuals cameras of choice? You technically could shoot a movie with a BM camera or an FX30 or a bunch of other cameras, but why would you unless you need something small for a specific shot? It's like saying your such and such street car can go the same speed on a drag strip as an F1 car so they're going to dominate the F1 industry here pretty soon. Um, no. Why would they? 

He was an Olympics champion too if I remember correctly (irrc). People loved the steam engine like powerhouse, the beast from the east, Jan "Ulle" Ullrich. He was like a folk hero. It was the not so common people who exploited the man of the common people. Big middle finger to Telekom and German TV for their hideous conduct.

He was my favorite cycling superstar hero back when I was a kid! 
And yeah, he got so many second places at the Tour de France!!! (FIVE of them!!) 
But he least he still got a couple of Grand Tour wins of his own (the Tour de France itself, and the Vuelta).