DevonChris

I know this quote from Inazuma was a few weeks ago, but it is very good advice.
I have been extensively testing various profile settings for my GX8 using an x-rite passport and resolve.
In short I have made these findings :
1) Natural profile gives the best skin tones and overall accuracy of colours, but with too much saturation, particularly in the red channel
2) Standard just seems to add saturation to the base level natural profile -> Not so good
3) There is no point in Cinelike D as natural profile has more accurate colours and I could not detect any significantly increased DR
4) There is no need to de-saturate to -5 unless you want that for artistic reasons. -2 for saturation is optimal to reduce the Panny over saturated reds and give more accurate overall colour rendition.
5) I agree with Inazuma that Natural 0, -5, -5, -2 gives the best results so far, and that is what I will be using from now on, but testing will continue.....

I've often found my synch audio on Nikon bodies and the NX1 to be useable in the final edit. 
My chain is (insert really really nice hyper mic here - I use the AT4053) to a Tascam DR60d, which records the audio track and a safety track at minus-6 DB; camera-out to the camera's mic input. And then I really take care to dial in the gains staging - maximum safe gain on the Tascam, set the DSLR input at around 70-80%, and use the camera-out gain on the recorder to get a proper but strong level to the camera.
It's not just compression (and there are two kinds of compression, audio limiting and compression of the digital file, such as MP3), it's minimum-circuit to do the job as far as preamps go; and cramming a tiny preamp into a mess of other circuitry isn't optimal. And throw in so-so 1/8" connectors and cables and an unbalanced signal path. But most camera's audio compression (limiting or auto-gain) is horrendous (but can usually be turned off). Digital compression is generally very good.
As I said, if I'm very careful with my synch audio, I can sometimes use it in the edit, but this also depends on the camera. The NX1 can sound punchy and crisp with a good preamp and optimal levels (and a great mic). But once I'm rolling, I can't mess with anything but the input level on the recorder. As interview subjects get comfortable or you get to the meat of the story, they can get louder. So often it's the DR track, with sometimes bits of the safety track cut in.
Synching is a non-issue these days, with FCPX or PluralEyes. And I can manually synch even long multi-cut interviews in a couple minutes, it's not really an issue for many projects. But if you don't want to buy a pro recorder, at least get a pro preamp. And probably the most full-featured value/budget preamp is the one in the DR60D, so you might as well just get a recorder (mine shipped with PluralEyes for free, too). I'm not crazy about the zooms that I've seen, but there may be good ones out there. DR60D's can be found really cheap used, too.

Yeah, the audio out of the zoom goes into the external recorder..  I'm saying to go from a zoom/preamps to the camera rather than sync later, for camera's with an input that is.
It's not so quick if you're dealing with 100 clips or so:)
Yeah, this is what I meant - perhaps I wasn't clear enough

I use an Atomos Ninja Star with my GX8 and the sound quality from the internal mic is actually quite good (but I still only use it for synching purposes).
I think these cameras apply horrendous amounts of compresion to the audio, which is why the internally recorded audio is so bad.
You can connect a zoom straight into the Ninja Star which gives excellent synched audio and video quality, at least with the GX8. Maybe this is the dream setup for your GX85 that you mentioned

I use Movie Studio Platinum and rate it almost as highly as you do. However there is one big problem that has driven me away from it into the arms of Resolve, which I also rate highly.
The problem is that the UI is not compatible with 4K display resolutions so I struggle to see and use the interface on my Windows 10 laptop with a 4k display.
I hope the new owners of these excellent Sony products sort this issue out soon, but I am very happy with Resolve 12.5.

No, this is no longer true. You don't need to define a user etc. You can simply create a new project and drag clips into the media pool and start editing straight away.
If you are creating a very large project then smart bins help - they automatically store specific items like sound clips, stills etc

The free version allows export up to and including UHD. I took this quote from their website :
 

Whilst the eco system around Adobe products is far larger than for Resolve, there has been an explosion in the number of high quality tutorials since Resolve 11 started to become a viable alternative.
I think you would be surprised by how large the Resolve community has become.

The free version allows export up to and including UHD. I took this quote from their website :
 

I used and really liked FCPX but had to switch to Windows and therefore used Premiere, which I didn't like as much as FCPX.
I switched to Resolve 12 (now 12.5) which rocks. Black Magic are improving Resolve dramatically and I intend to stick with this now.

I use the Tiffen Ultra Contrast 3. keep in mind that those shors are out of camera, so no grading with filmconvert had be applied! I am in the middle of my trip, so i cant give you a graded example.
the filter doesnt really like direct sunlight, the contrast is then really really low, you have to keep that in mind. Personally, i however like the look occasionally. Check out the part with the ferry (1:09) for an example about this sunlight effect in this clip:
I agree with RWR, I learned with Sony cams the hard way that auto white balance does not really work. Now i also found AWB on the GX80 not that good so I dial in my kelvin values. Just use 5600k whenever daylight is available and dial in something in 3000-4000k whenever you have artifical light. Surely not the perfect approach, but for run&gun this works well.

Oh bloody hell. 
Now you've got me interested in ML 5D mk II. I've never used it for raw video. Kind of like the idea of using an "old dinosaur", adds to it in some emotional way. 
The manufacturers have skipped making 1080p near perfect in favour of brittle, highly compressed 4K images. What we are getting is insanely high resolution images with poor compression artefacts - when what we need is lovely 1080p with thick, chunky images.
Ive got other raw cameras on my radar, and maybe this 5D II for fun! 
 

If you want to make it easy, put whatever you got on f8, shoot wide, manual focus, and have fun.
Technical considerations are all well and good, but if you're having a blast just grabbing cool shots and the vibe on set (or when documenting stuff) is loose and fun, that's a heck of a lot more important than anything else.
Don't get in your own way when filming! 

Since I am a run & gun type of guy I can tell you about my experiences with The LX100, the RX100 IV and the GX80. In my opinion, the whole choice boils down to the following aspects:
- how important is a zoom for you?
- how important is size for you?
- how important is focus pulling / grading for you?
I first started with a GM1 in combination with a fully manual prime. Loved it, but due to GAS i thought i could even ante it up. Then I had a odysee of different cameras: A7s, which I liked for low light and hated for the price and the color (although one can achieve pretty good results out of the box with manual WB and a good profile). Went with an A6000. Liked the Zebras, the punch in zoom (in fact i liked the functionality), didnt like the colors that much. Then I went with the LX100. Perfect compromise for a small package with decent DoF and a good stabilized zoom. Didnt like focus pulling, started to hate fly by wire. However, although I did know better, GAS once again striked back after reading the awesome review of the RX100 IV by Andrew. Bought it, it has amazing features, but the image just dont feel right. In the end, i kept on tweaking and tweaking and did not take the camera for many shots with me because I just was not satisfied. And DoF just sucks. Really, if you want decent DoF control, dont go for it.
After using both the LX100 and the RX100, i kind of went back to the roots. Rebought my Voigtländer - back in prime land. Bought the GX80 and I love it. Awesome stabilisation and the image feels right.
Long story short: 
RX100 iV if:
you need 120fps you need the smalles package you dont need DoF you dont mind fly by wire you somehow are able to grade Sony cameras LX100 if:
you need a compact package with zoom and stabilisation you somewant need DoF but it is not on your primary list you dont care about shitty focus pulling due to fly by wire GX80 if:
you dont necessary need a compact package with a zoom that has a better f-Stop than a kit lens you like stabilisation you like manual lenses you like easy grading capabilities you like changing lenses in general In general I can sign all the people saying they dont "feel" the Sony image. I tricked myself by telling "i can surely do better". However I dont. In fact I like the Panasonic image.

I'm sure Andrew will do more comprehensive tests and show some artistic footage later. All I have time for right now is little tests.
To users of the G7, this may be kind of old news. But I'm finding with 4k and the improved processing compared to the GH4, you can raise shadows more cleanly than ever before on a Panasonic mirrorless camera. In this test, I shot at ISO 200 and exposed to just before the 105% zebras started showing. The first clip is the raw footage, the second is with raised shadows and the third is graded. With this method you can easily get a shot with the same tonality as what your eyes see and have absolutely minimal noise.
 

It's the 35-70, 24mm 2.8, and 500mm mirror lens that were licensed by Leica. The coatings do differ between the two, and some claim a build quality advantage for the Leicas. I can't speak to the veracity of that. 
I'd love to see a comparison between the best Leica and Minolta glass. My guess is that the Minoltas would hold up rather well, but lose out a bit in resolving power/microcontrast. They do match perfectly for color and contrast though, which matters more for video shooters.

Actually this is wrong!
A 42.5mm f/1.2 lens on MFT has the same depth of field as a 42.5mm f/2.4 on FF as well as a narrower field of view as you mentioned.
So if you want the depth of field that a FF f/1.2 lens gives you on MFT, you will need a f0.6 lens

1- For the same FOV and same lens aperture ( diferent lens on each sensor ) the crop sensor has more DOF than a full frame
2 -For the same focal lenght and same lens aperture (similar lens on each sensor ) the crop sensor has the same DOF but less FOV than a full frame. 

Actually this is wrong!
A 42.5mm f/1.2 lens on MFT has the same depth of field as a 42.5mm f/2.4 on FF as well as a narrower field of view as you mentioned.
So if you want the depth of field that a FF f/1.2 lens gives you on MFT, you will need a f0.6 lens

Read this, http://toothwalker.org/optics/dof.html, and understand it.
 
And btw, conversions make all the sense in the world. A 36x24 proyection with a 85 2.4 lens will give the same image as a 18x12 proyection of a 42.5 1.2. lens. The total amount of light will be the same, and both images when magnified to the same size, will look almost identical (except the smaller format will look proportionally shittier, blurrier, which you might like if you are going for the hipster look)

If you read again, you might understand why it does.
I think the touchy part of it is that there are some people who don't understand the concept but still want to have an opinion on it.

Full 4K max quality JPG: http://www.brightland.com/t/JacquiTree2b4K.jpg

I'm struggling with the decision to stay with my AiS set (and maybe add the 50 1.2), build up a Contax set or go all out for Leica R's. I foolishly sold my 35 and 90mm Summicrons about five years ago, and I'm missing them.
Contax glass does rock. I shot this still for a gig last week using a 50mm 1.7 AEJ on a GX8 (using an adaptor, not speedbooster). The lens is amazingly sharp and has great colours as kidzrevil said.

You can always buy it and resell it, it sells fast.

Thanks for your kind words, DevonChris! I too think that this is one of my best shots. So after constantly checking for something even better I finally reckon that I had something that was very good and that I wasted quite some money over the last two years finding something that might be even better, yet eventually not for me. Learned the hard way.