DevonChris

I have a GX8 with 12-35 F2.8 and I love it for the documentary style photography that I do. The combination of sensor stabilisation and optical OIS is fantastic, definitely making this a keeper. I sold my D810 and bought this combo instead, when I realised that my customers did not want 2 metre prints.
MattH is correct about the crop problems for video though. I line the shot up in the view finder and then hate the fact that the image in the viewfinder (and being recorded)  suddenly crops in 4K mode when recording starts. I very often have to reframe.
Like Matt, I use 4K for enhanced 1080 output, but I have a range of manual Nikon glass and a MFT metabones speed booster so I am seriously considering buying a dedicated video cam such as a BMC in the near future.
I am becoming more convinced that hybrid cameras are too compromised - they are either great for photography, and good'ish for video (GX8) or vice versa (GH4). For a beginner, though - they are fine .
There are fantastic deals for the GH7 in the UK at the moment so this would be a great place to start, but try and buy used lenses in good condition.
Investing in manual glass such as manual Nikors is also a great way of building an investment that can move from camera to camera.

The XPS 9570 still suffers from CPU and GPU throttling when run hard (like my 9560) but as it has Thunderbolt it can use an external GPU. These slim laptops are just not designed to deal with the thermal stress of sustained high CPU and GPU rates but if you can offload this work to an external box it may solve it. I have a 4 disk RAID0 on my 9560 via Thunderbolt which gives me 500 mbps data rates but the Thunderbolt chip side of the laptop gets very hot. If you have a big raid storage box and eGPU + laptop you have to ask yourself why are you not using a small desktop ( micro ATX form factor) PC and a Screen......

Anything with a Intel Core i7-8750H and NVIDIA 1060 works fine.
If Resolve is important get a laptop with a 1070 or even 1080 instead, 8GB of GPU memory are necessary.
16GB of system RAM is the bare minimum. If compositing is done in 4K, 32GB is the minimum RAM capacity.
Many laptops nowadays have at least 1080p IPS screens with almost or even full sRGB coverage. Perfectly fine, even for grading after calibration.

The standard XP’s 9570 is a better spec - do you really need the 2 in1 feature. Laptops are pretty poor choices for 4K video editing as they just don’t have the cooling capacity so for real-time playback and rendering and they will shudder to a stuttering mess very quickly. Good for reviewing footage but for editing I’d stick to a good desktop machine.

Mine is a late 2015 and had an intermittent keyboard fault a few weeks ago.
Credit to it though, it recognised that intermittent problems are really frustrating so it has now made itself permanent.
I'm not sure if its dust thats caused it as it has not exactly led an easy life and routinely has overnight stays in boxes of rice after getting rained on on jobs.
I'm pretty sure its a detached ribbon and will be an easy fix but the reports of £700 for a repair means that the repair won't be happening at an official Apple outlet.

I think this might become even more of a discussion point in the next couple of months as the Pocket 4K starts to be delivered and people are looking to edit RAW in Resolve.
My MacBook Pro is probably due an upgrade but I actually think I might go the route of getting an external GPU as it looks like its going to be cheaper and more effective for Resolve than upgrading the computer.
After seeing some of the performance increases on offer in Resolve with external GPU and them now being officially supported in macOS 10.13.4, I think it might be time to take the plunge.

Neither of those are good choices due to massive throttling of their GPUs. Get a portable gaming laptop. Reddit is a good non-biased source to use to find the right one.

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 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.

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.

I've used the 18-135 which also has OIS and I was pleasantly surprised by how well it stabilised my shots. I didn't use it for that long, but I generally don't like the weird movement that OIS generates especially at long focal lengths, but this seems to be a little bit better than some of the others I've seen. If the 18-55 is as good as the 18-135 then it should be more than workable. 

I shoot exclusively hand-held and rely on OIS to help me stabilise shots.
The way I think about it is that OIS and IBIS 'absorb' a small amount of movement, with good OIS and IBIS absorbing a greater range of movement, but if you move more than they can handle then the movement shows in the footage.
The way to improve this is to use some kind of camera stabiliser or mount.  You can start at the small end by using a camera strap, adding a handle to your camera, all the way up through using something like a Gorillapod (a small bendy tripod used as a kind of handle) to full rigs like shoulder-mounts or steadicams.  
I mention the Gorillapod as it's what I use and I find it to be quite effective up to about 100mm or so in combination with OIS.  Happy to give you more detail about how I use it if you're interested.

Yeh it's good enough. Not as good as GH5 ibis but good enough

@DevonChris Yes, I thought about Nikon bodies. But with a camera like a D500, I would need to buy more AF lenses from Nikon, as with such a camera manual focusing will be quite hard, especially on long lenses and without a proper focusing screen for manual lenses.
 
@Kisaha I think you are right about color rendition of GH5/GH5s. I have seen some reviews like this one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo_YQgBgtL8
which I found really interesting
 
@Luke Mason Thanks for the clarification. I think I will have motion to record, but nothing too fast.
 
@Mokara Thanks for the explanations. I was thinking the main processor was the “brain” behind everything. If you say the hdmi can pull more than what the main processor could record internally, then probably the XH1 will be a good choice as, from specs, it records colors in the wider space rec2020 than the 709.
 
@Django Thanks for the link. I think you are right, considering body construction, Fuji and Panasonic would be better. I remember some old blogs/forum discussions from people using the GH4 in some tough places without issues. The GH5 would be the same I think. And XH1 vs XT2, I think the bigger grip and the top lcd are some nice features to have for fieldwork.
I was just taking for granted the intervallometer in the A7III. I know (now) about the latest firmware for the XT2. When I was writing this tread, I was not aware yet of the new firmware.

It may seem an odd suggestion at first, but have you thought about a Nikon D500?
1) Excellent dynamic range and image quality for your photos
2) Proven ruggedness, build quality and durability
3) Full compatibility with most of your lenses with no adaptor required
4) Great Nikon colours for video, but only 8 bit 4:2:0 internal with 8 bit 4:2:2 via external recorder
5) Cheapest solution for body only pricing
Only downsides:
1) No IBIS
2) 4K video crop factor

In the US, we have verifly, which is $10 for one hour of liability coverage up to a million US. In theory, this will cover those who fly as a "hobby" or those who fly professionally. Maybe there is some sort of similar service in the UK???

It may sound like I’m a newbie to stock footage/photos, but actually I still have a portfolio of footage which I put up onto a few agencies about ten years ago. I just want to get back into it again now as I have a bit more spare time.
You are absolutely correct in not being able to predict what sells. My best selling footage is a of a hand (mine) putting coins into a piggy bank, I shot that on a Canon 550D (T2i) 8 years ago with the lighting setup, shoot and editing taking not much more than 20 minutes in total.
It’s an appealing business model whereby you can have a long earnings tail from your portfolio, but I am the first to admit that it is really competitive and very hit and miss. You also need a huge number of clips to get over its randomness,
I’m not considering this as a main earnings stream, but more of an add on to my client work and other earnings streams.  

it’s a bit off topic, but I could not believe how good the photos are from the Pixel 2. In good light I was getting photos that were really close to the XT-2. Computational photography is amazing. Video quality is excellent from the Pixel 2 also.

Some good discussion, here. Thanks everybody!
For future proofing, if nothing else, I would definitely want to deliver 4K stock footage.
This will be supplemental income (hopefully!) and I like the idea of building up a portfolio that brings in passive income.
I also want to document some of the amazing places around here, so although a niche market, there is not much competition for footage which is why I want to create broadcast ready video, as long as the gear cost is reasonable.
I haven’t got a problem with buying a GH5 and delving back into the Panny world. A used GH4 and 4K Atomos would cost about the same as a refurbed GH5. I like the internal 10 bit recording of the GH5 and the IBIS would be really useful.

Yep - long waiting list. I want to crack on with this before Christmas, but that is a great suggestion

Thanks for your comment. I'm doing a lot of research into this and it seems that new footage really needs to be 4K now.
I think a competitive advantage can be gained by supplying 10 bit 4:2:2 content which is broadcast safe so that it does meet broadcast standards (BBC) as well as being used for the web.
There is also the thought about whether to supply just log files, slightly graded or finished graded clips, but that is another matter!
 

Interesting question. I’ve thought about the same thing a few times. And I would go with as big of a sensor I could afford. I would think for static shots something like the a7iii would be a good camera, or a D850... 4K does make sense though, so I’m sure the GH5 would work great for it as well. 
I imagine anything would be fine though. I think someone recently said, maybe @Damphousse that he  still sells some stock shots from his t3i, so maybe test the waters with something you already own?

Yeah I think with stock footage you want to get the best possible quality since it will allow for much wider compatibility with other systems. 
If you go through the trouble of shooting stock footage then 10bit 4K 4:2:2 is a good start. GH4 is fine, but GH5 or even GH5s should give much better colors. Another possibility is the BM micro studio with an external recorder. 

Hey,
I visited Japan for a week, and tested out the 5D III and to see what it can do with Magic Lantern. 
 

I once went to Stockholm in person to pick up the Panasonic G7 and saved me 230 or so bucks (had to be there anyways, but still, http://www.prisjakt.nu proved helpful). I ordered the G80 from UK and for EU body prices got included the 12-60mm, a Panasonic 64GB card and a battery grip. It does help to look around. Usually I check http://geizhals.eu . I find it very helpful to get some oversight.
That said... 1999 for either E-M1 Mark II or GH5 is a matter of perspective. So here's mine...
No DSLR for me. I don't like mirrors and I don't like optical viewfinder. I'd rather just have an EVF and excellent liveview; what you see is what you get. Plus, mirrorless cameras just about standard give you peaking, zebras and all that good stuff No fullframe camera for me. What fullframe cameras would there be? Let's see... eh... Sony. Well have you seen what those bodies retail for? And then you need big bulky 35mm covering glass that ain't cheap either. Don't know. Just not for me S35/APS-C. Now we're talking. Excellent. Yes, I'll have one, thank you! What can I choose from again? Ah, more Sony. Well... they sound good on paper, but in practice... between the overheating, rolling shutter, color issues, poor design and its price... there's not really that much that makes it an attractive choice. I think I'll pass until they come up with something a little more reliable and enjoyable. Fujifilm XT-2. Ooh, me likey. Too bad there's no sensor stabilization, vari-angle touchscreen and headphone-jack on the camera body. Tough. Canon? The new EOS-M5... overpriced stripped down 80D much? Maybe cool as a gimbal AF tool, otherwise nope. Nikon? Not making anything. Samsung? Dead; although the NX1 is pretty sweet. But you know... the XT-2 would pull ahead of it. Well... that's kinda that. Unless you want to go proper cinema style camera and throw a couple of thousand bucks at it, but at the cost of losing a innocent looking versatile hybrid system that packs a punch That leaves... drumroll please! Micro Four Thirds, MFT, M43, M4/3. Now... I kinda made my peace with the 4/3" sensor a long time ago. Hell, some even accepted the limited conditions the BMPCC would shine in. S16. And as such I don't need ISO12800. I mean, ISO1600-6400 would be kinda nice. Don't really like to go beyond ISO1250 right now due to the decrease in peformance. But somehow, you just make it work. You work around the sensitivity by lighting, by using more sensitive lenses. You work around the crop. The shallow depth of field. With a smaller sensor you kinda lose some color accuracy, dynamic range... I mean, it's not like you're not paying for it somehow, but you manage. In return you get to have one of the most versatile systems out there. With small bodies and small pancake primes. But you can also rig things up and use speedboosters. And especially with the features in the new E-M1 Mark II (which I feel they should've just called a E-M1 Pro/E-M Pro to avoid the negative backslash it being so much more expensive than its predecessor), you now have one of the most complete cameras on the market out there. Compared to a mirrorless APS-C Sony... it has a far better choice concerning lenses native to the system and sensor format, it has that vari-angle screen, dual cardslot, superior sensor stabilization, neglectable rolling shutter... and most importantly... it's reliable. Compared to either XT-2 or NX1 it has the vari-angle touchscreen (frontfacing option) and 5-axis sensor stabilization. You just can't really fault the E-M1 Mark II on hardware level. The GH5... we don't know much yet, but it looks like we're going to keep that GH4-styling. That's good and bad, because I was actually hoping that with the GH5 they would really re-think what they wanted the top of the line GH-camera to be for general video production, as well as more advanced cinematic application. So I was thinking a different style body, more room, better interface, more ports, bigger ports and all that good stuff. Still though, even with a GH4-style body and souped up internals, this could be something very different. We already kinda know that its sensor and processing allows for internal 4K at 60/50p and 4:2:2 10-bit at 30/25/24p. There's 6K Photo. If the E-M1 Mark II's processing and speed is any indication of what the GH5 might be like, we're really getting some performance. And people who've been using the GH4 as a production tool, will gladly embrace the improvements in noise control and overal image quality that has already gotten a boost with the arrival of the G7, GX80 and G80. Not to mention the probable inclusion of sensor stabilization. Rolling shutter could be neglegible as well. Super slowmo. Who knows? Ultimately though, this is a tool not to be underestimated and of great value to independent and indie filmmakers, production houses and the sorts. Would I say 1999 is pricey? Yes, most definitely is. But I think the E-M1 Mark II makes sense. There's all this Olympus PRO glass and these people need a camera to go with it. It's not some incremental upgrade, it's a new game altogether and offers things in a complete package we haven't seen yet before. To those who think it's not worth it, they have a great selection of alternatives... the E-M1 with firmware upgrade is pretty solid, E-M5 Mark II, E-M10 Mark II... Panasonic G80. Talking about that last one, that is a fine camera for people looking for a serious hybrid camera that don't neccessarily be using the more pro applications such as V-LOG L. Pay less, only use what you need. The GH5 on the other hand is the ultimate video production tool, by the looks of it. Either used stand alone or rigged up, if it sells for 1999 it will provide shooters with a the most complete video package under 2000 bucks yet. If they would tell me 'we have a promo going on, one time offer... we see you have the GH5 in your basket, we'll change that to a URSA Mini 4K (that you're not allowed to sell) but leave the 1999 price. Which camera should we ship to you?'. I'd probably go with the GH5. I just really like the idea of a camera that I could use with a 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens and at the same time could rig up to be a set-up too legit to quit. But that's just me. You also got to consider that because of the pro features, less people will have use for it... and in turn therefor they sell less units and need to increase prices. As has been said before, we're just a marginal piece of the pie... the people that care a lot about shooting video with stills cameras, so when they cater to us, I'm really excited. And currently I see the E-M1 Mark II and the GH5 as the most complete packages out there for hybrid shooting with a video edge. There's always things that can be improved, but that's going to remain to be the case.