Mozim

It would conform fine to a 25p timeline

It will work fine! 1 frame of 96fps will still equal 1 frame in your 25fps project giving you a speed thats 3.86x slower than the original.. (if thats what youre trying to do) The clip just needs to be conformed to your sequence framerate..

@jonpais: I recently made the switch from an APSC Canon DSLR to a MFT camera (GH3). The video results are much better than with my Canon but I'm not sure if I'm ready to invest a ton of money for MFT lenses yet. I can adapt my APSC lenses to the GH3 but not the other way around and as you mentioned, most MFT lenses are very small and plasticky. This is great if you're looking for a small and lightweight system but obviously has some drawbacks, too. I also feel like many people who shoot both stills and videos aren't quite convinced of MFT sensors yet... so that might be another reason why people are hesistant dropping a lot of cash on dedicated MFT lenses. 
 
If money was no object I'd go the same route as Olly P. I haven't decided yet whether I will make a full switch to MFT for both video and stills or not so for now I'll try to purchase prime lenses that I can use both on the GH3 and on my Canon DSLR. I've had some time to play around with the Samyang lenses and the build quality is fantastic, so to me that seems like to best option if you're looking for affordable, future-proof lenses that offer charcater, too. They're built like a tank as well so you should check them out. 
 
If you're looking for an example showcasing the differences between a digital-looking lens and a vintage lens with character, check out this comparison: 
- one lens is the MFT Olympus 12mm f/2.0 and the other one is the MFT SLR Magic 12mm f/1.6. Now both these lenses are native MFT lenses (you can't use them on any larger-sized sensor) but the SLR magic show some of the imperfections that vintage lenses also show. The Olympus delivers a better image (sharper, more detailed, no corner softness etc) but overall the SLR Magic looks better. This is desirable for videos but for stills I'd rather buy the Olympus and add the character digitally if neccessary. 

This is a very interesting topic and I agree that it would be nice to see more discussions about this kind of stuff rather than (or in addition to!) the tech side of things on here. 
 
I recently made the switch from a Canon 600D to a Panasonic GH3. I really like the results so far but I haven't had any chance to play around with different camera settings, grading etc. 
 
I often shoot out in the nature as I'm focussing on Mountainbiking right now. So I often shoot in dark forests yet the sky is very bright, so dynamic range is a big issue and the sky is almost always blown out if I want to keep details on the ground/trail. 
 
So here's my workflow (FCPX) so far... any tips to improve the workflow would be greatly appreciated!
 
- I try to avoid blown out skies and too contrasty scenes altogether and I tend to expose to the right
- I also use a very flat picture style, although I don't dial sharpness down quite as much as I used to
- after importing the files, I make minor exposure adjustments to sort of balance the footage
- then I add the Teal and Orange-filter that is integrated in FCPX 
- the filter is usually too strong for my taste, so I dial down the intensity a bit
- then I take another look at exposure, saturation and colour and make some more minor adjustments until I get a pleasing result
- I usually tend to bring up the exposure in the highlights a bit (this boosts the brightness of the entire image) and also boost the saturation in the midtones a bit (so that the rider pops out a bit more)
- last step is to add a little bit of sharpness (usually around +3 in FCPX)
 
Recently I also tried to emulate the Teal and Orange-filter by pushing the shadows into cyan and highlights into yellow/orange. This resulted in a slightly nicer image because this doesn't crush the midtones as much as the built-in filter. 
 
Now my problem is that when adding the filter, the blacks and dark colours get crushed so there's not a lot of detail left in these areas (which in my case tend to be the trail and the trees). When I bring up the dark areas by adjusting the exposure, there's a ton of noise in these areas. 
 
Also, I'm not too happy with the sharpening tool of FCPX. Would it be better to dial up the sharpness in camera a tiny bit (from -5 to -2 for example) as long as the footage isn't moiré-plagued? 
 
I don't have experience with LUTs at all, never used them before. How does the workflow change when using LUTs? As far as I understand, the camera needs to have a specific profile to properly work with LUTs (cinegamma for example, which is only found in more expensive cameras) but having a flat picture profile in a cheaper camera (GH3, T3i etc) will work the same? Do I apply the LUT after doing the colour adjustments INSTEAD of using a colour correction filter such as Teal and Orange? Or do I apply the LUT IN ADDITION to the colour correction filter? 
 
Looking forward to hearing your feedback... thanks a ton in advance!
-Moritz