Don Kotlos

No thats not true. RAW just means non-debayered data. There are lossy compressed RAW formats from various manufacturers. The reason you can get more information from RAW than non-RAW even from compressed footage with the same bitrate is because there are less "pixels" to compress when you are dealing with RAW. 1/3rd to be exact. Then you can used the extra bitrate to increase your bitdepth, and in consequence get good tonal precision. 

No thats not true. RAW just means non-debayered data. There are lossy compressed RAW formats from various manufacturers. The reason you can get more information from RAW than non-RAW even from compressed footage with the same bitrate is because there are less "pixels" to compress when you are dealing with RAW. 1/3rd to be exact. Then you can used the extra bitrate to increase your bitdepth, and in consequence get good tonal precision. 

O Charlie Chicken, Where art thou? 
 

Ha no I doubt you did.
H1 still has better amps than an average phone so it should still be a bit better. Since the videomicro has a built in amplifier and requires only a tiny bit secondary amplification, the more amplification an external microphone needs, the larger the difference between the H1 and the phone will be. Would you notice it in a street audio recording? Probably not, but for a quiet interview you might.  Also it gives you other things like decent built in mics for stereo recording. Also it is easier to boom with the micro or leave at a remote spot without worrying damaging your phone. 
 

I agree with JB's "move on".
But just one - hopefully last - remark. Frank Glencairn never used the term "sissy", not even "whiner". I know him well from the german slashCAM forum. He never uses questionable language, but he likes to provoke others with what I'd call an old hand's attitude. His article starts with:
You don't need a grade in psychology (which I almost made) to very quickly find out that he is actually asking to be challenged and that his often slightly, but unmistakably condescending tone is meant to hurt.
Whom? The con- and prosumers that are not up to his professional ethics and complain about missing features (among others, but that'd take too long).
If you read between the lines, he says: A *real pro* needs no AF or IBIS. jonpais must have felt that JBs comments said something similar. 
Now how did he come from feeling insulted as an amateur to being dismissed as "sissy" (if we accept the sexist meaning)? I think that's a rather easy transition. Video gadgetry is "a man's toy" (please don't quote me for that, it's not my opinion, I just try to nail down the underlying emotions), and not being a "real pro" is equal to not being a "real man". Rather blatantly irrational, if you ask me, but it's the reason why so many hobbyists insist on using pro NLEs - to which Frank Glencairn often wrote, you can make the same edit decisions (that's your professional or creative part) in Windows Movie Maker or iMovie, I appreciate his views. 
Let's move on.

It's flown under the radar for video but the Sony 100 megapixel CMOS sensor is doing amazing things over in the Hasselblad camp - 4K RAW to be exact. You can see a great video of that below but first - I present to you the humble Fujifilm GFX 50S.
If I told you Fujifilm had a full frame mirrorless camera system to compete with the Sony A7R III, a lot of people would sit up and notice. However the GFX 50S is a medium format camera, and these don't really register on the same radar screen as others.
Read the full article

Two media slots? I can't even find one! But I agree an SSD slot or an extension that supports it would be nice. 
A mini XLR would be a great addition as well as a relatively uncompressed codec.
The price seems high only because the new pocket 4K is priced so low...
 

The number of down votes on the forums is going up big time. Maybe it's time to introduce an icon with 'the finger' ?
 
 

I don't disagree with the fact that smaller sensors require far better glass in order to get similar performance to larger sensors. 
But the differences that are visible in that test are mostly due to perspective and not distortion, which is really a problem when shooting architecture (both stills & video). 
In any case, I believe the m4/3 still has its place. Small cameras such as the E-M5ii or the PenF coupled with tiny lenses such as the 17/1.8 and 45/1.8 are a joy to carry around your neck and shoot all day long. Something that even the A7rIII & the 35/2.8 cannot really achieve. If on the other hand you are after image quality or shallow DoF, then instead of start buying expensive & large glass for m4/3, my opinion is that a FF camera will offer a much better solution for the same price/size/weight. 
Thats why I wish Olympus & Panasonic really put an effort to keep their systems small enough but pleasurable to shoot with. For example I would really love a PenF or a GX9 with a state of the art HUGE EVF that I would want to use instead of using subpar components like the GX9 did in order to save costs  ( I would also remove at least half the buttons from these cameras  ). 

I don't see the button to enable the ProRes RAW 

I don't see the button to enable the ProRes RAW 

I don't see the button to enable the ProRes RAW 

I don't see the button to enable the ProRes RAW 

A bit of a live update...
A ride on the bullet train has given me an opportunity to move the port along and...
It lives!
More functionality to come obviously over the coming weeks but the foundation is there now.
Apologies for the dodgy phone pic

Yeah a card with your Vimeo link would be better. 

Sony do, although it's not totally comprehensive.
I'm in the process of porting my Panasonic hardware controller to Sony so watch this space.
 

Yeah a card with your Vimeo link would be better. 

I think for 1080p vlogging the Canon M50 will be a much better choice. I consider the X-T100 a cheap Fuji camera for photography. I bet the X-T100 has the same 1080p quality as the X-A5 which is not great. Low detail full of aliasing artifacts:
 

Work in advertising and haven't really had much time for my own projects the past years. But I am releasing a music video in June that I directed, shot (handheld BMPCC), edited and colored. 
For now, this is my latest, for mother's day:
 

It's my 'around the house shot getter'. Wouldn't mind a successor with new sensor tech, articulated touchscreen & mic-in so it could become an actual 'daily driver' again.

The advantages of X-Trans are
1. Less aliasing without an AA filter
2. Better light collection efficiency. 
 
The disadvantages on the other hand are
1. Less color information
2. X-trans artifacts on certain patterns
3. Processing inefficient 
 
Having used a lot of Fuji cameras over the years, I would prefer if Fuji moved to Bayer. The AA is not that important with the >24MP resolution and the low light advantage of the X-Trans is maybe 1/2 a stop. For photography, I find the gain of color information far more important. For example I found the output from X100 to have much better colors and I know a lot of people the feel the same. I agree with Chris that the only reason that Fuji keeps on using the X-trans is for marketing purposes. There are a lot of people out there that believe that X-Trans is what makes Fuji colors nice, but in reality it is what holds the Fuji colors back. Not to mention how much it would improve their video performance in general. 

I think for 1080p vlogging the Canon M50 will be a much better choice. I consider the X-T100 a cheap Fuji camera for photography. I bet the X-T100 has the same 1080p quality as the X-A5 which is not great. Low detail full of aliasing artifacts:
 

I think for 1080p vlogging the Canon M50 will be a much better choice. I consider the X-T100 a cheap Fuji camera for photography. I bet the X-T100 has the same 1080p quality as the X-A5 which is not great. Low detail full of aliasing artifacts:
 

The advantages of X-Trans are
1. Less aliasing without an AA filter
2. Better light collection efficiency. 
 
The disadvantages on the other hand are
1. Less color information
2. X-trans artifacts on certain patterns
3. Processing inefficient 
 
Having used a lot of Fuji cameras over the years, I would prefer if Fuji moved to Bayer. The AA is not that important with the >24MP resolution and the low light advantage of the X-Trans is maybe 1/2 a stop. For photography, I find the gain of color information far more important. For example I found the output from X100 to have much better colors and I know a lot of people the feel the same. I agree with Chris that the only reason that Fuji keeps on using the X-trans is for marketing purposes. There are a lot of people out there that believe that X-Trans is what makes Fuji colors nice, but in reality it is what holds the Fuji colors back. Not to mention how much it would improve their video performance in general. 

Xtrans - IMO - is keeping Fuji a little behind the curve. It was great with 16mp images, but with the 24mp sensor its seems to be holding performance back, as Fuji themselves have stated Xtrans eats up a lot more processing power compared to a Bayer array. They said no zebras because the processor is maxed out downsampling 4k. And despite all that, its still a really fast camera. I've commented numerous times on Fujirumors that I'd like to see a Bayer version of the XT2 with the XProcessor Pro and I get roasted. Fuji has painted themselves into a corner as well, if a Bayer XT2 theoretically outperformed the Xtrans cams, it would make all their claims about Xtrans superiority nothing more than a big steaming pile of poo.
It seems they're sticking with Xtrans for the upcoming XT3 and Fuji has cultivated a fanboy user base of old-fart photo types that whine about any advancement - like IBIS, flappy LCD's and touchscreens. Though bumping the bitrate in the XH1 was a nice surprise, hopefully its foreshadowing a future GH5-esque, video centric body.
Cool beans about the XA5 getting a AF update. I've thought about getting the XA5/XT100 as a cheap backup stills body, and to do a Fuji Bayer vs. Fuji Xtrans comparison.
Cheers
Chris