hyalinejim

I think it's 800 but I don't know if the difference in highlight detail and/or shadow noise will be quite as noticeable in a Rec709 profile compared to log.

Both of the contributors state that they reckon the implementation of the GH6's sensor is designed to favour video rather than photography.
Interceptor121 compared VLog dynamic range of GH6 to GH5M2 and found it favourable:

And Bill Claff of Photons on Photos found that the dynamic range in RAW stills is pretty much bottom of the barrel
 
 

Bill Claff posted the sensor results from the GH6
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66095681
 

I found it! It's the "video stills comparison tool". However, they didn't test HD modes on the GH6 😞 Regardless, you can see how GH6 4k is indeed more detailed and less sharpened than GH5. But you can also see how ghastly 1080p is on the S series cameras (except for the S1H) so for me it's still unconfirmed about GH6 1080p video quality. And I like 1080p an awful lot because of the advantages of smaller file sizes and smoother editing.

Didn't try it out yet, but sharpening is gone entirely in the 4K modes on the GH6, which now look identical to the 5.7/5.8K recordings. So 1080p may be even better, less processed looking now.

4K and especially 1080p on the GH5 had way too much sharpening applied for my taste. Glad the overprocessing is a thing of the past. 🙂

It was V-Log. This person did another film with the GH6 which looks just as bad, oversharpened with a horrible highlight roll-off, colors etc. Don't know where to start even, but perfect to promote other manufacturer's cameras instead.

But "cinematic" since the title says so I guess...

Not the camera's fault either, I have a GH6 myself and it has a fantastic video image with a super smooth roll-off with DR Boost On and no sharpening and almost no NR in ProRes. 

This is an interesting video from the host of one of the more long running camera review websites.
I don't know whether he has recently found God or recently found himself off the favoured reviewers list but for whatever reason he has decided to spill some of the beans about his fourteen year history in the game.
I say some of the beans as, although he gives specific detail about one source of revenue (the affiliate deal with B&H), he leaves it up to the viewer to extrapolate an estimate of the overall total when including the other streams such as Amazon, advertising and sponsorship etc.
He also holds back much in terms of too many specifics amongst the war stories of complementary trips, free or heavily discounted gear, passive agressive editorial control and so on.
However, there is enough there to put the picture together about his own activities as well as more than enough hint of how his own discomfort with it have caused him to reign it in whereas a great number most definitely haven't.
Obviously, most of us will file this under "absolutely not shocked at all"
My own view of Steve Huff was that he seemed personable enough but that he seemingly never came across a product that he didn't like.
Which is an obvious red flag.
On the generous side, you could say that that was due to him being so enthusiastic about gear.
Or, on the less generous side, you could say that he lacked sufficient judgement to differentiate between good and great.
Or, most cynically, you could say he was just simply "at it" and every new wow equalled more affiliate clicks.
Clearly, the money that he has declared from B&H shows that he was obviously "at it" to a certain degree and I don't think anyone would do a public confessional video if they too didn't accept that they were "at it" either.
But the majority of his income was based around the website rather than YouTube so the degree to which he was nakedly "at it" compared to some of his latter day peers was likely a bit more of a side effect than the whole raison d'etre of the new wave of teleshopping hosts.
I was quite interested in footage he had in there of earlier promotional trips and how wide eyed giddy many of the invitees seemed to be. I bet the marketing arms of these companies absolutely wet themselves when they realised how easy and cheap it was to drive sales without so much as a half page ad buy in a magazine.
It seems if you didn't feel generous enough to give a free camera away to an attendee then just massaging their ego with the invite and a discount on retail was enough.
I hope that the what I would politely describe as "whining cunts" who trail our very own host of this ad-free and affiliate link free website around social media posting shitty replies to his posts watch this video.
They want everyone to be polite nice guys who keep their criticisms of manufacturers to themselves while they show them slow motion B roll and make them feel better about their purchases.
Well, here's one of your politest nice guys and guess what?
He was at it.
For years.
 

Magic Lantern is hard enough on a camera that has been able to use it for years. The M50 is a long way from done. It may never be done. I would go with an EOS-M to start with.  
But maybe it is further along than I am aware of?? ML will make you cuss like a sailor I can tell you that.

they have opened up travel here in aus. Dunno about nz ? but it would probably be worthwhile ducking home for a visit, getting a camera  and avoiding the import duty. If its anything like aus 🙄

<<
The LUMIX GH6 offers the renowned colorimetry of the VariCam line of cinema cameras and uses their V-LOG picture profile and wider V-Gamut. For monitoring your work and to see an image that is no longer in LOG, the GH6 includes the V709 LUT (Look Up Table) with Rec.709 standard in the camera by default, this LUT can be output over HDMI or to the cameras monitors or both. It is possible to install your own LUT’s into the GH6 and access them from the V-Log View Assist menu. For users of the Varicam and EVA1 the GH6 can support LUT’s in their .vlt format, and for users of other camera systems we also support the .cube format.
>>
From Panasonic's GH6 Press Release here...
The LUMIX GH6, a Compact Next-generation Mirrorless Camera Featuring Unlimited C4K/60p in 4:2:2 10-bit, 5.7K/60p in 10-bit and 4K 120p HFR / FHD Maximum 300fps VFR Video Recording | Panasonic North America - United States
https://info.panasonic.com/news/lumix-gh6-compact-next-generation-mirrorless-camera-featuring-unlimited-c4k60p-422-10-bit-57k60p-10
 
And these were the Panasonic VariCam LUTS to which I was referring...
VARICAM LUT LIBRARY | Support | Cinema Camera Global | Panasonic
https://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/cinema_camera_varicam_eva/support/lut/index.html

The GH6 is in stock at my local camera shop in Dublin, Ireland, where I bought my GH5 when it was first released. If I wasn't living on the other side of the world, literally, I think I would pop in and pick one up to see what all the fuss is about.

The GH6 is in stock at my local camera shop in Dublin, Ireland, where I bought my GH5 when it was first released. If I wasn't living on the other side of the world, literally, I think I would pop in and pick one up to see what all the fuss is about.

The GH6 is in stock at my local camera shop in Dublin, Ireland, where I bought my GH5 when it was first released. If I wasn't living on the other side of the world, literally, I think I would pop in and pick one up to see what all the fuss is about.

I seem to remember that the CineD tests showed cleaner shadow noise in Boost.

It's worth pointing out that there's no guarantee that the skintones and reds are accurate to what they are in reality, although they may be. I've long been a believer in colour that is better than, rather than faithful to, reality. However, the LUT gives colours that are faithful to a particular film stock, exposed and digitised in a specific way. And it may well be the case that skin and reds are quite close in hue to how they are in reality. But blues, to give another example, are considerably "off", such that skies will be rendered as very slightly but noticeably more towards green rather than purple. So perhaps the blue of the bottle or your father's clothing look a bit different to reality.
 
In the LUT the hue, saturation and lightness of various colours will vary with respect to their colorimetric values in reality. And the relationship is not constant through the tonal range. Shadows, for example, are relatively saturated and highlights much less so. A lot of the skintones in this image are in the lower midtones and that gives the skin its robust colouration in this instance.
I suppose part of the reason for this variance between realistic colour and filmic colour is simply because of the way negative film inherently works as a recording material. But another part of it is by design: conscious decisions that the engineers at Kodak made to design a film with specific responses. 
I think most people agree that, broadly speaking, the colour of film is beautiful. I certainly do, and that's why I'm going for it!
It certainly is and, as @kye suggests, one way is to create a HLG to VLog transform. But as well as the curve, I'd assume the colour is different too. Another way is to create a LUT from scratch using a HLG chart shot. That would probably be more accurate. I don't have any plans to do that at the moment, though. I would have thought the vast majority shoot in VLog with only a handful of HLG crew? But I guess on the GH5 HLG gave many of the benefits of VLog without the added expense of the paid firmware update. 

It's worth pointing out that there's no guarantee that the skintones and reds are accurate to what they are in reality, although they may be. I've long been a believer in colour that is better than, rather than faithful to, reality. However, the LUT gives colours that are faithful to a particular film stock, exposed and digitised in a specific way. And it may well be the case that skin and reds are quite close in hue to how they are in reality. But blues, to give another example, are considerably "off", such that skies will be rendered as very slightly but noticeably more towards green rather than purple. So perhaps the blue of the bottle or your father's clothing look a bit different to reality.
 
In the LUT the hue, saturation and lightness of various colours will vary with respect to their colorimetric values in reality. And the relationship is not constant through the tonal range. Shadows, for example, are relatively saturated and highlights much less so. A lot of the skintones in this image are in the lower midtones and that gives the skin its robust colouration in this instance.
I suppose part of the reason for this variance between realistic colour and filmic colour is simply because of the way negative film inherently works as a recording material. But another part of it is by design: conscious decisions that the engineers at Kodak made to design a film with specific responses. 
I think most people agree that, broadly speaking, the colour of film is beautiful. I certainly do, and that's why I'm going for it!
It certainly is and, as @kye suggests, one way is to create a HLG to VLog transform. But as well as the curve, I'd assume the colour is different too. Another way is to create a LUT from scratch using a HLG chart shot. That would probably be more accurate. I don't have any plans to do that at the moment, though. I would have thought the vast majority shoot in VLog with only a handful of HLG crew? But I guess on the GH5 HLG gave many of the benefits of VLog without the added expense of the paid firmware update. 

From official specs it looks like 100 is base ISO for regular profiles:
[Normal]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 100): Auto / 50 (Extended ISO) / 100-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 800): Auto / 800-12800

[V-Log]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 250): Auto / 125 (Extended ISO) / 250-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 2000): Auto / 2000-12800

[Hybrid Log Gamma]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 250): Auto / 250-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 2000): Auto / 2000-12800
 

Yeah, send me a few frames - happy to have a play.

Skin looks good! What do you think about the level of contrast?
 
Thanks for that @webrunner5 If you still have your GH5 or some old VLog files lying around maybe you could give it a whirl on your own footage and check it out in more detail. 
 
Also, I meant to ask @kye if you have access to any downloadable VLog would you mind having a look? Your opinion on the contrast level would be really valuable. Or I could send you some frames to mess around with.

Skin looks good! What do you think about the level of contrast?
 
Thanks for that @webrunner5 If you still have your GH5 or some old VLog files lying around maybe you could give it a whirl on your own footage and check it out in more detail. 
 
Also, I meant to ask @kye if you have access to any downloadable VLog would you mind having a look? Your opinion on the contrast level would be really valuable. Or I could send you some frames to mess around with.

From official specs it looks like 100 is base ISO for regular profiles:
[Normal]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 100): Auto / 50 (Extended ISO) / 100-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 800): Auto / 800-12800

[V-Log]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 250): Auto / 125 (Extended ISO) / 250-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 2000): Auto / 2000-12800

[Hybrid Log Gamma]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 250): Auto / 250-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 2000): Auto / 2000-12800
 

WoW is all I can say. I guess I will take back my original criticisms since I have seen more evidence. Well done.

Here are some 100% scale details from this frame.

Anyone found any good Vari NDs that can handle 10+ stops? I use an SLR Magic on GH5. It maxes out at 6 but doesn't introduce any significant colour shifts that I've noticed. 
I'm also wondering about 1080p land, as that's where I'm very happy.
1. Will 1080p be as artifact free (moire, aliasing, softness) as GH5 is?
2. Will we be able to do some sweet EX Tele in 1080p? This is a godsend for run and gun or events. No need to change lens (and ND filter!). Hypothetically we should be able to get to 2x downsampled centre crop of 4k. This means I could live with one speedboosted 24-70 f2.8 lens on the camera for 95% of the time (effective equivalent range of 30 to 180mm with a 0.64x booster)

From official specs it looks like 100 is base ISO for regular profiles:
[Normal]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 100): Auto / 50 (Extended ISO) / 100-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 800): Auto / 800-12800

[V-Log]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 250): Auto / 125 (Extended ISO) / 250-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 2000): Auto / 2000-12800

[Hybrid Log Gamma]
Dynamic Range Boost OFF (Base ISO 250): Auto / 250-12800
Dynamic Range Boost ON (Creative Video Mode) (Base ISO 2000): Auto / 2000-12800