Mat Mayer

http://www.photozone.de/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/530-pana_714_4?start=1

Looks like there's a fair bit of distortion without software correction. I haven't used it, so I don't know if it's objectionable in actual use. Look up some clips and see if it bothers you.

Don't know about the Pany. Don't really know anyone with one, nor have I seen raving reviews. I guess if you need the range and the price fits... Just, it's an older lens, I got to bet it quite similar to the 14-140mm and while that lens is nice 'n flexible it renders rather modern. Contrasty, poppy colors, very sharp. Sounds great, but that tends to look very Panasonic videoy.
Perhaps the go-to zooms on the wide end are the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 with Nikon > M43 focal reducer or the Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO albeit coming in at quite the hefty price. Olympus 8-19mm would be a wildcard here. If you have a Metabones Canon EF(-S) > M43 you might even want to go for the Canon 10-18mm.

It's more about the codec actually.
H.265 effectively doubles your bitrate due to 2x greater efficiancy.
70 = 140Mbit/s
The NX1's codec is able to hold onto more detail, where H.264 on the a7R II goes a bit muddy due to compression.
The RX10 II's codec is muddier still, probably due to a cheaper processor.
So in short... definitely more 'real' detail on the NX1 compared to the A7R II and A7S II.

Cine V with sharpness and contrast all the way down and highlight curve at -5. 
You need mid tones for skin tone contrast so Cine D and V Log are no good. 
If you have a diffusion filter like Tiffen HDVFX or Ultra Contrast use it. Makes faces look much nicer in 4K.

A friendly reminder:  Keep that infected lens away from your other lenses/gear.  Don't put it in the same bag/case that you use to carry uninfected lenses/gear.

I bought a Ninja Assassin specifically for V-Log, and despite my initial reservations it's been absolutely worthwhile. Small and light is great, but having that 7in screen means I just got it right more often, and that alone was worth it. And V-log looks AMAZING in 10bit -- skin tones in particular just looks so good. I did go back and forth over whether spending double what I paid for the camera (once you factor in SSDs and batteries) is a worthwhile investment, but while I could have sold all the m43 gear and bought a Sony, I'd then have to spend a ton of time learning a new camera system, find the pitfalls and ways to get around it, develop new workflows... and that just isn't worth it to me. I know the GH4 well enough now that it won't surprise me when I'm under pressure, having a big screen means I can see what I'm doing, and importantly when we're working fast my client can see as well, so there's no surprises at the end of the day.
Did I mention how good V-Log looks in 10 bit? Because it's GLORIOUS!

Sony RX100, you have 4 versions to choose from. It's the only really pocketable!!! All others can go inside a pocket, but it's not the same. 

Just for the sake of debate. I have highlighted all the mirror less so they can be found. Strange that so many "grandpas" are buying camera that they push the statistics this way.
Most used cameras on Flickr 2014
Top Camera Brand: Canon 13.4% (+0.4% since the year before)
Runner ups: Apple (9.6%), Nikon (9.3%), Samsung (5.6%), Sony (4.2%)
Best selling cameras as of today on B&H
Nikon D750
Sony A7sii
Canon 5Dmkiii
Sony A7rii
Canon Rebel T5
Nikon D810
Canon 7Dii
Canon 6D
Nikon D7200
Samsung Galaxy

Best selling cameras as of today on Amazon
Canon EOS Rebel T5
Canon EOS Rebel T5 Kit
Canon EOS Rebel T3i Digital SLR
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Nikon D3200
Canon EOS 6D
Nikon D7200
Nikon D750
Canon EOS Rebel T5i
Fujifilm FinePix S8600
Most popular cameras as of today on a Swedish price comparison site.
Panasonic GM1 (on sale for $300 with lens)
Canon 70D
Canon 6D
Canon 70Dii
Nikon D7200
Canon 700D
Nikon D750
Sony A7rii
Nikon D610
Samsung NX500 (Price just dropped)

You realize Nick Driftwood posted a bunch of those months ago, right? 

And actually, those same magenta/green artifacts are present in the other GH4 picture profiles too. They're just much more pronounced in V-LOG L. DVX User had an interesting thread about it. 

As you theorized, the profile simply isn't meant for use in 8-bit. For best results, you need an external recorder. And if you're not used to shooting and grading non-Canon LOG, it's very easy to **** up your exposure/color correction. Research is your friend!

Although...I've actually seen some excellent examples of good-looking stuff shot on internal V-LOG. Check it out:https://vimeo.com/139600006
https://vimeo.com/139922620
 

(Not sure why only one link posted as a preview...)

Well, grading (not color correction) is a personal thing, so if you like high contrast, then you go for high contrast...what the rest of us think means squat. Having said that, you do need to watch the whole clip for the lows and highs. E.g., you say the lows are at 10 mark, but that is only at the beginning; if you scrub forward, you'll see the level touch 0, and that part is going to be too dark if you corrected for the beginning.
Anyway, if your goal is to increase contrast, once you set the lift/gain to adjust low/high levels, you might want to try reducing gamma for the lows and increasing it for highs. That will increase contrast, but in a much more subtle way. E.g., see below for for what happens to your clip if we do that (I also increased the saturation a bit). It is for illustrating the gamma adjustments only and may be nothing like what you want or meant to be pleasing in general.

Correct. Some (or all?) sites have an exclusive option which you can leave unselected. The standard is non exclusive so you can do what you like with the footage.

I liked the image but hated the body. I broke a brand new model within a few hours.

Chris Oh's post #2.
Sity University PLEASE READ BIG DISCOUNT SIGN UP NOW

I have a top spec MacBook with the GeForce 750 1Gb and I edit LX100 4K files on it with no problem at all in FCP X. Of course, not everything is real-time and I have the viewer set to best-performance, not best quality. Color correction and some effects work realtime or enough fps. Multicam 4K I haven't tried and probably won't work smoothly!
With Macs you must get the cheapest or the more expensive. Sell it with some warranty time left and you will probably loose less than 1000$!!!

Pretty much decided on the top spec version with 512gb SSD and upgrading RAM myself. Looked at loads of laptops today but none were right; either not as powerful or poor screen. The only ones with a decent screen are 17 inches and weigh a tonne, but had an issue like not upgradeable and poor hard drive. None ticked all the boxes. The more I read reviews, the more horror stories I see for brands like Asus and Lenovo. Its just not worth paying half price on a machine which might break when abroad. Customer service isnt UK standard out here in Thailand, laptops are bought from pretty dodgy stores.
The way I look at it is that it costs $3k for an iMac and in a year I will be able to get around $2k for it. So that's $20 a week for a beautiful machine, and I know from experience that I will be far more productive on it. The quality of my grading should be better too with the new screen color range; I have done some real crap on a laptop screen. My Premiere timelines are fairly simple, so I expect it will be smooth enough (RGB curves and some cross fades and dissolves). No idea when iMacs will be available here, but apparently the education discount is easy to blag here.

I took the same approach with a trashcan Mac Pro and a 40" 4k monitor, resale value is high and I'll get a lot out of it while I use it - I figure it'll cost about $20-25/wk if I keep it for 18 months. I can't stand the glare from iMac screens or I would have went with the retina. If they would just make a matte screen on the iMac...

It's not specific to Premiere. I edit lots of 4k from the GH4 and A7RII on FCP X on a top-spec 2013 iMac. A single H.264 4k stream is mostly OK but for multi-cam, transcoding to proxies is mandatory. Fortunately FCP X has a totally integrated seamless proxy workflow. 
Re the OP question about what Mac to "smoothly editing 4k", this is a challenge on nearly any computer, esp. if multicam. But even for a single stream, remember that almost everything you do -- every effect -- is manipulating 4x the data. Applying effects that were momentary and quick on HD become slow on 4k, sometimes agonizingly slow. Some of these effects can be done on the GPU but it's up to the software and how amenable the core algorithm is to GPU-style parallelization. 
The bottom line is you want the fastest iMac you can possibly afford, and even that won't be comfortably fast for certain 4k operations. This currently means the late 2015 5k iMac 27 with 4Ghz Skylake CPU, M395X GPU and 16GB or more RAM. I'm getting one of these next week. I personally prefer a SSD boot drive but I have several Mac with both SSD and Fusion Drive. FD is OK but with 4k you will almost certainly have your media on a fast external drive, probably a Thunderbolt array. Since most of your data is external, a 512GB or maybe even 256GB SSD might be sufficient.
At least the new Skylake CPU has an improved Quick Sync on-chip transcoder which supports H.265 and VP9. In the future that will be important, esp for 4k. For reasons I don't understand Premiere still doesn't support Quick Sync, which can make a 4x difference in export and encode/decode operations. It is supported by FCP X and Handbrake. OTOH most Xeons do not have Quick Sync so no Mac Pro has that, regardless of software.

I've edited 4K on my MBP and haven't really seen a problem with it. If anyone wants me to try like 12bit 4K shoot me a link and I'll do it right away. But like GH4 stuff is seamless on my machine.

Keep in mind that editing 4K smoothly on a quadcore machine means transcoding. So the higher the better. A problem might be thermal throttling : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJt3av99e8k
SSD will make a big difference for scratch storage. 
P70 you can keep. Also the Thinkpad line has a very very different build quality and customer service than the one for consumers. If you go with the thinkpad you really want their world wide warranty with accidental damage protection. So no matter what you do to that computer, it will get replaced/fixed for free no questions asked. 

Was just looking at them myself and for 250 extra, just go with the 4GHz, no question about it.

Sanveer, not sure you're listening to the answers given by others above   Sensor size issues are similar to the saying in automobiles, "there is no replacement for displacement".  Certainly a turbo-charged 4 cylinder car match a large engine at high speeds, but not at low ones.  Similarly, in good light and wide DOF cell phone cameras can hold their own.  In LOW light, or when shallow DOF is needed, nothing works as well as a full-frame sensor.  A lot of it is physics.  It is NOT because the companies aren't trying, or are purposely crippling the cameras (for example, why would Apple care if it hurts Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc?).  
Also, zoom lenses HAVE trade-offs.  Look at a RAW file BEFORE IN CAMERA ADJUSTMENTS and you will see this.  Even prime lenses have their issues with DxO makes software to deal with.  As you point out, most lenses don't resolve their sensors.  Think about that!  You're wondering why cell phones aren't as good as DSLR but recognize that DSLRs still aren't as good as they should be!  I agree!

Too cool white balance, too much blue in skin tones.
Something like that will be more natural :

Hi Manilo,
Why don't you just buy a nx1 with a long zoom and a macro lens?
It depends on what you plan to use it for, but the 18-200 is a versatile lens, especially for video, even if the aperture is not fixed, then you can use the macro samsung lens or get a sigma or nikon 105mm macro with an adapter...
I personnally use sigma 18-35, 35 and 105 macro for 90% of my work for both stills and video when I don't need autofocus. I also have the small 45mm (+-70mm eq.) wich is a fantastic gem for its price. !

I had LX100 before I bought NX1. It was hard to get colors look natural with the LX100 and I was forced to use different LUTs and other methods to cover up poor image quality. With NX1 colors are great straight from the camera and I actually don't even use LUTs anymore, becouse usually simple curves are enough to get material look amazing.
I don't know how much FZ1000 and LX100 are similar in image quality/colors, but I wouldn't mix LX100 material with NX1 material, becouse it would be really hard to get LX100's image look even close to how good NX1 image looks.
 

I recently checked one out at a Microsoft store; it is build very well and is super light in tablet mode. Microsoft claims the screen is color accurate as they are aiming this device at photographers and videographers. The models on display are still prototypes and there were a couple driver related hickups, but these issues should be sorted by the official release.