Julian Bueller

And the useless metadata entry, the clock time not staying set after a week, and general lack of reliability. The raw footage does look great and the dynamic range is great, but it's a scary camera to have on set for a paid interview shoot. Just too unreliable. 

When the Pocket camera went on sale for $500 I bought that and then I bought the Voigtlander 17.5mm and 42.5mm f0.95 lenses and stopped using my GH2 for a few months. When I needed to shoot a concert I pulled out my GH2 (with flomotion hack) and threw on a Voigtlander lens and I was blown away. The GH2 looked amazing with those lenses and made me fall in love with the camera all over. While the Pocket is great for a lot of situations like exterior shots and RAW landscape B-Roll, the usability of that camera is garbage and now the Pocket camera just shuts off randomly. I'll put in a battery fresh off the charger and in minutes it goes to 25%, then back up to 50%. I mean I guess the issue could be the batteries, but my GH2 batteries are older and don't have these issues. 
 
At this point I'm considering buying a second GH2 since they are only a few hundred bucks. This way I could use both of those for interviews and the Pocket for B-Roll. 

​Sorry dude, but that makes no sense and quite honestly shows how little you know about the very basics of FCP X.
Because IF you in fact "threw in a song" as the first thing, then it would be in the primary. Therefore the subsequent clips you are editing to the music would be connected clips. THAT in turn would mean that there would not be any "gap filling" or even anything "magnetic" going on with your clips. That would only apply to the music. Unless of course you put all the connected clips into a secondary storyline. In which case... don't and all's good!
In fact the way you describe you're doing it is exactly the way you want to be doing it, if in fact the music is your primary (there's that word again... get it??) focus.
Huh? Then DELETE it?? Or simply pull the clip UNDER the primary if you still want the audio?? Ironically, as far as that's concerned, it's the exact same as with Premiere or whatever. Actually, no. It would actually be a BIGGER pain to do in Premiere, since you obviously have to make room for the clip you're moving first! Therefore it would take far more clicking and dragging to do the same thing than it does with X! Not knowing how doesn't mean you can't. Therefore your niggles make no sense in the context of how things are actually done.
I'd say you're so enamoured with your way of thinking, that you can't think of the most obvious? My tip: actually learn the basics before you sit down in front of it? Something any reasonable person would do with any software? The whole "I've been doing it one way forever, so anything that does it any differently can't possibly be good or better"-approach isn't going to get you anywhere. With any software, let alone FCP X. To actually be the judge of good/bad, better/worse you actually have to know what you're doing and understand the most basic concepts first, no?
 
Again: because you don't know what you're doing, sorry. Not because it actually does take longer... because it doesn't. It's faster, as I described.
 
Oh the irony... EXACTLY! And that is exactly the point where FCP X shines above all else, believe it or not. Therefore X is made just for you. Simple: if that of all things isn't in fact exponentially faster for you, you're doing it wrong. Anyone that's experienced in working with X will easily be able to prove that to you.
If you don't want to learn it and understand the concept/idea behind it first, you're best off simply not using it. Especially if you're so convinced that track-based editing is da ultimate shizz, I don't even get why you're bothering with X to begin with. Stick with what you've got and be happy and save yourself all the frustration and misconceptions! Seems logical.

​
This is the case for me. I was going to school for broadcast communications and about a week after my first semester, I decided I wanted to focus on editing. A few weeks after that I got a part time job at an Apple store, and a few weeks later they released FCPX which I got for free. I've been editing with it since day one and over the past two years I've worked at a recording studio cranking out tons of videos with FCPX. A lot of these videos are multi-cam and FCPX just makes that insanely easy to use. 
One of the biggest struggles I face with my editing career is that everyone has hated FCPX for so long, but when I even think about editing with Premiere, Avid, or even Resolve, I just can't do it. I've watched people edit in those programs and it just looks like such a pain in the ass to not have a magnetic timeline. It's so easy to move entire sections of your story around and re-arrange things. Just select everything you want to move, then move it to where you want. 
There are still a lot of things about it that really do suck for serious work though. Auditions are a really awesome feature, but not being able to just "finalize all auditions" sucks. If you have 100 auditions in your project, you have to manually go through all those clips and finalize them one by one. You can't just remove all effects from all clips, or reset all color grading. I like to screw around with different plugins while I edit, but when I lock picture, I'd really like to be able to just clean everything up and start over. 
But I'm all in with FCPX and there are a lot more places using it and I think it's probably a lot harder to find a good FCPX editor than a traditional NLE editor. 

​A new product was literally just released that does this. "PrimariesExporter" will allow you to export individual clips from the timeline from ProRes Proxy to ProRes 4444XD. 
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/1591-output-batches-of-clips-from-final-cut-pro-x-storylines-with-primariesexporter
This is the great thing about FCPX, it's also the great thing about the iPhone. Apple created a solid foundation that developers can build off of and create useful add-ons for the people who need them. 

Andrew. You have to throw out the 1990's mindset of what an editor should be to understand FCPX. Once I did that I could not go back editing the old way. FCPX is the fastest editor out bar none. It is the best for story telling as well.

​Here is why: 
Tell me one reason for using independent tracks to arrange clips in the timeline. I asked this a couple of times in other forums. No one had an answer. Finally comes the killer phrase 'it has always been done that way'. There could as well have been a splice tool in all historic NLEs to connect two adjacent clips. Well, at least a splice reminds the old folks of what needed to be done with physical film. Tracks then could origin in classic A/B-editing, where, in order to make crossfades possible, the clips had to overlap on two parallel reels. Who the heck came up with this concept for non-linear editing?
An NLEs GUI doesn't and needn't represent what's actually happening under the hood. It's there for our convenience. Tracks are nothing but inconvenient. They have no equivalent in the real world. If you start arguing with music scores: Are the 'tracks' independent of each other? Do you shove notes haphazardly back and forth?  
Imagine the timeline of NLEs had always had one track, as with film. That you could simply add isolated clips to the integer sequence, vertically as many as you like, either to temporarily change the flow of the narration ('B-roll'), make a composition of two or more images or simply try an alternative. Obvious idea, no? 
Imagine then, some two decades later, someone developed a new kind of NLE: The track based timeline!
Would editors say, why, this is indeed an improvement. Or would they scratch their heads and put that software trial to the trash immediately?