leeys

The new version of LR (not LR Classic) REQUIRES you to save your photos to the cloud. There is no option to not use it. In fact there is an option available to turn off saving to the local drive.
It's also incredibly dumbed down at the moment; for example there's no curves tool.

There you go, that's the right decision then!
Once you become more established and have cash to spare you can always come back for a much nicer Nikon camera, like say, a D900.

I'm sure he's not going to stick around doing that one job forever, and he's already said for what he does the Sony does a better job for him. A theoretical D900 is when his cashflow is in a better state to afford a luxury like that, and when he can plan on expanding his business to a more profitable segment.

I was joking around in response that nothing can be shot unless it is 4K 10bit! :-P 

But seriously, to answer the question, here are two reasons why:

1) the 1st Panasonic GH1 was my first ever camera (which was video capable, I did already have a Nikon D50), thus holds a dear place in my heart, I'll probably never sell it?

2) the GH1 holds so little value now secondhand, it is worth more to me to keep them for when needed for multi camera shoots (as they do a decent enough image, are compact, good battery life, and have unlimited recording length! All great stuff for low budget multi camera shoots)

That's a good question, why?

That's a good question, why?

Sell both and for some time be happy with saved money and - more important - with peace in mind. Seriously.
Than look around. New tools principally and in most cases are - although we all try to neglect admitting - indeed more complete and better.
Maybe Panasonic G9 will be the best balanced answer - it seems that you'll have enough money for it and some sort of speedbooster.
Maybe Sony technician will experience technical illumination and provide marvel in form of undimming screen in a7000 incarnation.
Maybe Nikon mirrorless will knock in the door after New Year and show you how to magically make 4k without 2.3x crop in APS and full frame.
 

I'd buy a GH5 regardless. I haven't seen much that suggests this will be so much better than the GH5 I'd rather pay the extra US$200 and get the GH5's extra video features. Of course if reviews suggest so I might be more inclined to it.
Not at US$3k though, that is an insane price for a 200/2.8.

That's a nice video, makes me want to visit Chicago! 

Atleast consider what you need to do the work into the equation. Your camera wasn't free when you bought it, and it would probably cost you to rent if you didn't have one. Storage and an editing pc isn't free either. Neither is travel, royalty free music, lunch, software, etc... You'd also want to charge some for future investments too. How are you going to afford, say, a new lens through work if you spend all your money working? You'll quickly find these things really add up... This they should atleast cover!
If you're doing it for free you're practically throwing away your hard earned money & devaluing video work in your area, which in my opinion is totally unacceptable.

The G85 is a year old now, the GX85 about 1.5yrs. I'm not sure it's fair to compare them to the 6mo-old GH5, rather than the GH4, which they outclassed in some ways. The G90 and GX90 (or whatever the next generation are called) will certainly get some trickle-down features from the GH5.
Personally, all I feel I can reasonably ask to be improved on my G85 would be higher-bitrate 1080p. 25mbps is a bit too skimpy when things start moving. Outside of that, it's been a great upgrade/sidegrade from the GH4 for me. Better color, better lowlight, and most importantly, IBIS.
I paid $550 for the camera, I don't expect it to share everything with the quadruply-expensive GH5- even if it technically could (i.e. "artificial" marketing segmentation) share some things. Panasonic has every right to do this, both legally, and I even feel, "morally"- Panasonic is by far the most responsive to our segment of the market, and even if their cameras are "artificially" limited, they're still by far the best value on the DSLR/DSLM market for shooting video. If I was going to expend energy bitching at/about a camera company, Panasonic certainly wouldn't be my first choice.
The way I see it, get busy switching, or get busy hacking, because I don't see much coming of the angst otherwise.
Will it, though, actually? The last Panasonic to be hacked was the GH2. Vitaliy hasn't had any luck with the GH3 onwards, and Magic Lantern's work is all Canon-based, I don't see them starting from square one when they have their hands full with the Canons. I think holding out hope for a hack is a complete pipe dream at this point.

I really think it's more like a hardware limit.
You need hardware acceleration for 10bit H.264 and H.265.
It's silicon, not software.
If you don't feel like you got what you paid for on the G85 and GX85, then I'm amazedballs.
They really do go beyond the specs you'd expect for the price.
Any closer to the GH5 and what would be the point of ponying up $2000 for it?
Making the G85 any better would kill the GH5 stone dead and nobody wants that to happen.
Sensor readout speed isn't fast enough.
It's not just the processor.
Again it's not just software. The sensor has to be fast enough to scan for CDAF at over 240fps.
If they gave users the option to buy V-LOG for an extra $100 on a $500 camera, they would lose $1500 not gain $100.
I'm all for generosity, and Panasonic are much more generous than Canon.
You could argue that Sony having S-LOG on their consumers cameras gives them a bad reputation because a lot of consumers don't know how to grade it properly and it ends up all over the internet making people think Sony cameras shoot weird looking video.
You don't expect 1st class service when you buy an economy ticket on a flight though do you?
So why expect it with cameras?
 

So... you're upset that Panasonic's flagship is better than their lower end cameras?

It's actually the former, Nikon has had an in-house design team for a very long time; the D1x's oddball configuration was from them, and it's not always a hit either: the disaster that was the D2x's LBCAST sensor was from them too.

It's a great stills camera though, if I were looking at a FX camera, this would be it. Not a Sony, but this.
12 bit raw in video? Nope. 12 bit raw in stills? Definitely. In fact there should be a 14 bit option.

Ah right, you were talking about the 30 FPS output in live view. I have a suspicion that will be JPEG, since sRAW goes down all the way to 11mp, not 8.6mp.
Funnily, I'm still primarily a stills shooter, but I've migrated to Panasonic's GH cameras; the stills are good enough and when I do video I get great video, no matter how little I do of it.

It's a great stills camera though, if I were looking at a FX camera, this would be it. Not a Sony, but this.
12 bit raw in video? Nope. 12 bit raw in stills? Definitely. In fact there should be a 14 bit option.

I remember almost 20 years ago when Foveon announced their new technology. I was excited and sure they would take over the world. Since then they have made little progress in threatening the CMOS dominance of "mass and momentum." If there is a sensor revolution many companies will have to abandon a lot of infrastructure and we'll all have to start thinking differently about how we define "resolution."  

Yeah! People who do these kinds of videos are SO DUMB I would NEVER do that.
.
.
**Goes to personal youtube channel to hide a dozen anamorphic-flower videos**
 

I've had mine since day one and use it for video and photo. Aside from the remarkable video features, this thing is a wonderful stills camera. I shot a wedding this past weekend with it. Had to boost the ISO to 4000 for the reception and it looks fantastic. The AF-C with 225 point AF worked amazingly. Normally I use my Nikon D3s for receptions due to the low light IQ and focussing ability, but the GH5 blew it out of the water focussing-wise. 

http://www.eoshd.com/2017/01/opinion-dxomarks-camera-scoring-makes-zero-sense/

To add to the mystery, there is the possibility that someone within Canon leaked the possibility of 10 and 12-bit RAW video the ML forum.  That effort had been dead-as-a-door-nail for a long time.  If it wasn't for that anonymous tip, which is VERY technical in nature, we'd never know that Canon cameras can essentially record a kind of compressed RAW video; that is, much less than the current 4 gig a minute.  Even without 12-bit RAW, I don't understand why Canon doesn't  allow 4-minute RAW recording on their 5Ds.  The only real worry is temperature and they can easily fix that with a limit.  Bottom line, Canon could put 12-bit RAW on their cameras today.  The ML devs have recently proven that.
As for the C100/300/200 line, I no longer see a threat from their consumer cameras even if they had 4K.  The cinema sensors are built for cinema, that is, video resolution with large pixels, so you wouldn't get the same low-light video with your 80D 4K, say, that you would from the C100.  Then, of course, all the buttons, XLR, etc.  I've never bought the argument that Canon would hurt their cinema business no matter how powerful they made their consumer cameras.  Of course, that might not be the case in Canon.
In fairness to Canon, Sony can't seem to do 4K in-camera downscaling to 1080 well (at least in my 6300).  However, I can't see how they can't output 4K in teh 6D II and let those who are inclined, downscale on their PC.  So I see some merit in the argument that Canon is very dismissive of enthusiast video users.  They seem to take the position that unless it can be done in camera, they're not interested in what happens to video downstream.  
The 4K coming out of the A6300 and A6500 is incredible, to me.  And they're great cameras, period.  Sony keeps releasing more lenses.  Once you look at 4K out of those cameras next to Canon video it's hard not to see the difference. 
 

@Andrew Reid Just wanna say I am enjoying your current editorial output...on a roll man.

It's not a thesis, and these are real people's votes you're so glibly dismissive of.

Let's see how many people he defrauds out of their money on DPReview before they do something about it.