IronFilm

For the lazy (like me), to save people a link click:
 
 

Can you:
1) Post a short clip on youtube, and / or
2) Post a short clip to dropbox and share it so we can download and take a look at it?
What program are you looking at it?
To me, it looks like whatever program you are using is sharpening it very much.
@webrunner5
The rolling shutter on the a6300 / a6500 that if it were a whip pan - even in slow motion - the trees would be horizontal instead of vertical. Hey, wait a minute, maybe that's the answer to the rolling shutter problem; shoot in portrait mode and pan...

Nah, it has at least 5.5 stops! Look in the shadows, there is another half stop hiding there that you didn't count. 

"Bra Fumbler"

I'm gonna call both/and here. There are no two types; we are snowflakes. We are all limited in different ways: some in our ability to master technical details, others in composition, in content, others still in understanding what makes a good image on an emotional level. There are simply an incredible number of levers to pull to create a stunning image: lens and camera choice, f/stop, filtration, lighting, subject, location, subject distance and on and on. The process is inherently imperfect and complicated by the huge number of decisions there are to make. What I like about Geoff's talk is that he doesn't choose one or the other. Yes, the talk is called "fuck the numbers," but then he goes on about an 8K scan of a classic film negative and the resolution in the chainmail of a costume in a terrible movie. Understanding the process of image-making is messy. It is a journey. Over time our attempts to master as many of these levers as possible will show on the screen but we will all have strengths and weaknesses.

I think Art Adams tackled a similar topic in a more thorough, methodical way. 
https://www.provideocoalition.com/defining-the-cinematic-look/

For the lazy (like me), to save people a link click:
 
 

I agree with Geoff Boyle, and this discussion is so timely for me as I am looking to buy a new camera, primarily for stills.
I've been looking at many of the portfolios from the Magnum Photographers and what strikes me is the poor technical quality of many of their images. Many are slightly out of focus, have blown highlights, low resolution or been shot on low quality cameras.
I haven't found a single mention of a camera on the Magnum Photographers web site. To them, the camera is just a tool. What counts is getting the image, capturing the moment. Creating awesome content.
I've spent hours comparing tech specs, reading reviews and comments, watching YouTube videos, trying to find the best camera and the best deal. Sure, that is important, but my time would be better spent studying great photographers and their images, and learning from them. Then grabbing almost any camera and shoot as many photos as possible to improve my technique and learn to see better.

Honestly really makes me want to rebuy a D750 and shoot in 1080p. 

Again, there's no doubt Sony is at the forefront of sensor tech, but the D850 sensor combines all the good stuff across the A7R3 and the A9, so I wouldn't say that Sony is the only game in town. 
I do shoot RAW, and I am talking about RAW. There is a subtle but noticeable difference in the way Fuji RAWs handle colour that is different from other manufacturers, this is true for LR and Capture One. 

I'm Jewish, does that count? And my grandparents met while living in Scotland! So maybe. 
Anyway, monitors last for years but also tech advances pretty quick. Would suck to buy a SmallHD 502 only for a Samauri V to be announced the next day. 
Additionally, why spend money I don't have to? When I can put it instead towards something more important: sound gear. 
Finally, if I'm working on the camera side of things I'd often be working on very low budget shoots so I'd rather not bring expensive gear to the set anyway!
Having cheap gear is nice sometimes, I could for instance do a long term loan of my Feelworld FW759 to a DoP for a feature film and not have any worries over it because it is so cheap anyway if the worst was to happen. (It didn't, I got it returned just the other week at the wrap party)

Personally I'm against anything which encourages a decline in the standards of sound. 

Maaaaybe maybe 10bit in 2K? Give more resolution options for matching with features shot on a Venice in 2K. 

Wonder how well the a7Smk2 itself sold. 
I know of filmmakers who picked the a7Rmk2 over the a7Smk2
But none of them ever picked the a7Rmk1 over the a7Smk1!

However the a7Rmk2 caught up with the a7S series for video (give or take a bit, in some ways it was a bit better, in a few ways a bit worse), and of course for stills the a7R line up is way way ahead.