Bob Goldberg

If you're referring to the Digidirect video, then we clearly disagree. The effects of rolling shutter look worse the faster the camera moves and the closer you are to an object. In that video, the camera was moving so fast that virtually everything was indistinguishable. Cameras aren't usually moved that rapidly in rolling shutter tests.
Usually, you like to see more controlled tests with two cameras side by side, because it's hard to judge it accurately without a comparison camera. But, the truth is, that actually looked pretty good to me. I'm not convinced the E-M1 II is any better than this.
Also, there are other things that affect the appearance of rolling shutter including the sensor area used for video. I know rolling shutter in stills is worse the higher the bit depth is. That's why some MFT cameras reduce the bit depth in stills from 12 to 10 bits when e-shutter is used, to reduce the jello appearance. I'm not sure in what way this applies to video though.

I just wanted to chime in with a more detailed explanation of the 6K photo mode, which can also be used for 5K video (with 1:1 pixels).
There is unequivocally no upscaling or downscaling in this mode. And if you shoot 5K video in this mode, you have extra pixels on the vertical to allow you to decide precisely where you want to crop out the 5K video. And you can also use the extra pixels to do some image stabilization in post, and still retain 5K video quality.
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58907335
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58907720
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58644769
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58646338
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58646032
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58650895
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58817553

I just wanted to chime in with a more detailed explanation of the 6K photo mode, which can also be used for 5K video (with 1:1 pixels).
There is unequivocally no upscaling or downscaling in this mode. And if you shoot 5K video in this mode, you have extra pixels on the vertical to allow you to decide precisely where you want to crop out the 5K video. And you can also use the extra pixels to do some image stabilization in post, and still retain 5K video quality.
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58907335
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58907720
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58644769
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58646338
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58646032
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58650895
https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58817553

I don't think the video released yet is an indication of all of the possible IQ advantages this camera will give.
If you need 4k/60p for fast action, you can't really do that with the GH4 or any other camera. Also, the IBIS may be a difference maker to some, and some would say this will make a difference in video quality.
The oversampled 4K (full sensor) will likely yield the sharpest video yet out of MFT. Not to mention the grading advantages of 4:2:2 video. It's tough to argue that wouldn't make a difference in IQ.
Also, as previously mentioned, you can do 5K video (using the 6K photo mode) with 1:1 pixels, which will likely yield sharper video than the GH4 can produce, with minimal moire or other artifacts. And it's also full sensor. This is entirely independent of the 6K anamorphic mode that's coming in the future. So, there are definitely two ways to shoot beyond 4k, and either of those modes would give you an additional capability to add further stabilization in post, and still output 4k video.
 

I don't think the video released yet is an indication of all of the possible IQ advantages this camera will give.
If you need 4k/60p for fast action, you can't really do that with the GH4 or any other camera. Also, the IBIS may be a difference maker to some, and some would say this will make a difference in video quality.
The oversampled 4K (full sensor) will likely yield the sharpest video yet out of MFT. Not to mention the grading advantages of 4:2:2 video. It's tough to argue that wouldn't make a difference in IQ.
Also, as previously mentioned, you can do 5K video (using the 6K photo mode) with 1:1 pixels, which will likely yield sharper video than the GH4 can produce, with minimal moire or other artifacts. And it's also full sensor. This is entirely independent of the 6K anamorphic mode that's coming in the future. So, there are definitely two ways to shoot beyond 4k, and either of those modes would give you an additional capability to add further stabilization in post, and still output 4k video.
 

Hmm OK let's be a bit clearer here.
Image quality is almost the same as the E-M5's video mode actually. Most of the time it looks identical.
What has changed is the codec. It has a higher bitrate now, so less mud and it will grade a tiny bit better with a bit less banding, but it's still WAY behind the GH4 and others.

​Yep, compare the stills of the same shots against those in the video here: https://www.storehouse.co/stories/r9xml-slomosf
I wouldn't expect video quality to equal still images, but when I compare the video from the EM-5II to my lowly LX100 (even 1080p, forget about 4k -> 1080p), it is in a completely different league than the EM-5II.  The LX-100 stabilisation isn't bad either, as long as you aren't moving around too much with the camera.
The one good thing is that the Olympus blocking seems to be gone in more detailed shots, even if the picture detail isn't there yet.
 

​Was the PixPro also marketed as a professional level video camera?
To tell you the truth, for my own good, I need to stop reading or watching any more YT comparisons from Inquisitive. I wasn't having any emotions before, but that hatchet job does piss me off.
When I saw how good that UNHACKED GH2 footage looked on my 50" plasma and how poor he made it look on YT....

? I have never said such a thing not here not in dpreview and to tell you the truth nobody else has either in this forum. You start imagining words. 
If anything I said that if IBIS is not as useful then there are plenty of better cameras and I agreed with Andrew that for landscape somebody should get a GH4. 
I reply to these forums because I am interested in getting the best out of this camera since IBIS is important to me. I have provided a test scene with the E-M1 and shared the settings that I used so we can all find out what this camera can do and what it cannot. So for example it will not be good to use for infinity type of shooting (I doubt if it is even better than E-M1 for that), but for close focus shots it provides adequate results (to me).
I am camera company agnostic, I just use them as tools and currently there is no other tool that can do what I need better. I wish there was and I wish that either the E-M1ii comes with GH4 quality or the A7sii gets a better stabilization than A7ii or Canon comes with a sensor stabilized compact GH4 killer. 
You on the other hand:
​It seems that you are here to do just that. 
So go on with your bashing and ranting but please leave me out of it. 

Here is a quick test I did indoors today hopefully out doors tomorrow.  Will give some insight to quality and focus performance will get outside to do more tomorrow.  The Panasonic GH2 is hacked with the Sanity settings and the camera is set to Smooth contrast -2, saturation -2, sharpness -2, noise reduction -2.  The settings for the Olympus were contrast -2, sharpness +1, saturation -2 noise reduction off.  They need to let you turn them down more.  The ISO was 800 on both cameras and exposure was set identically.  For my hand held test I used the Panasonic 14-140 set to 40 on the panasonic for image stabilization.  The olympus had the olympus 12-40 set to 40.  Once I put it on the slider I used the Olympus 12-40 on both.  If you like the slider check it out at salamanderslider.com !
My take aways so far
I sucked at hand holding 
The focus tracking issue was a unhappy surprise
moire shows up more than I like to cope with
Olympus settings are so saturated they need more than -2 reduction
I also discovered that you can use the front dial to adjust fstop after you pop out the touchscreen menu.  That being said if you try to switch to viewfinder it turns off so it can do it but it is incredibly stupid.
I thought Andrew was a bit harsh but maybe like me he had really high hopes and what they have presented is a huge disappointment so much so you want to go slap the guys at Olympus.
 

​Presumably this is a stills setup, as Fuji is pretty much bottom of the barrel (and then some) for video.
http://***URL removed***/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-ii/5
I'm sure they're good for stills, but they'll probably never be competitive for video.
And, in your comparison you're not taking the totality of the lenses and their sizes into consideration. For instance, what else compares size-wise to the GM5 + 20mm f/1.7? And what other system has the same collection of lenses as MFT?
 

What other system has a manufacturer delivering the kind of video quality Panasonic is routinely? For that matter, if IBIS is your thing, what other system is doing it anywhere near Olympus?
 
I simply don't see any other choice for myself. Samsung just isn't anywhere near as well developed as MFT for video, with only a couple cameras now and a pretty limited lens choice that I don't believe is as good as optically as MFT. Sony is in the same boat with a single very expensive 4K cam (that doesn't record internally) and a much more limited lens selection. Fuji isn't even on my radar, and I doubt they ever will be.
And finally, we haven't yet seen the end game wrt to sensor development. If MFT were to get a sensor like that on the RX100 III, scaled up to MFT size (i.e. double the size), you're going to see massively improved performance from the system. We have yet to get that type of quality sensor or, for that matter, BSI. At that point you'll be seeing stills performance that's pretty much good enough for any purpose.
FWIW, I'd like to see Olympus combine their IBIS with Panasonic video quality. But I'm not convinced it's possible.

​Those portrait shots are the best case scenario and they just about pass muster for YouTube.
You will notice a massive distance on wider shots with a focal point that isn't bang in front of the lens.

noa,
​There are a few major issues with Robin Wong's test. First and foremost is that when he's taking the video of the camera with the E-M5 II and the E-M1, there are different focal points for both videos. With the E-M5 II, more of the camera is in focus than with the E-M1. More specifically, the back of the camera on the video taken with the E-M1 is substantially more out of focus than on the E-M5 II shot, making the whole image appear less sharp. There may be some small parts of the E-M1 shot that are in perfect focus, but generally, when you're doing a sharpness and fine detail comparison, you don't want so much of your shot to be out of focus. And, if you're comparing two cameras and you want to shoot this way, you have to be meticulous to a fault and make sure the focus is identical between the two.
That's why you should generally be shooting further away (possibly at infinity focus).
Another thing that you want to do is make sure that the subject you're shooting has sufficient fine detail to properly differentiate between two cameras. I don't believe he achieved that either.
Regardless, I agree with Mr. Reid that the quality this camera produces is unacceptable by 2015 standards. And, to me, this would be true even if it were exactly on par with the E-M1. Olympus has played up the video quality so heavily, handed out free samples to numerous film makers so they could create their master works (and give them advertising in the process), and made numerous (superficial) spec upgrades to their cameras, all implying that this camera was a serious video tool. When you do that and you get peoples' hopes up that this is going to be competitive with Panasonic, you had better deliver the goods IMO. So, I don't think his response was unexpected. It was the exact same response I had, and I didn't even have reason to believe that it was worse than the E-M1 (or that the crop was increased), since I don't own any OM-D.
And, another thing, having 77MBps and all-I (and time code), etc. is all code for many of us that a certain kind of video quality is going to be delivered. There has simply never been a camera with this type of bitrate, all-I, and this much hype that has had such poor video quality. Panasonic, Sony, Samsung, etc. would never release a camera with this bitrate, with this type of low compression, and this much hype, and not deliver the goods. It's a complete blunder on their part IMO.
Finally, I believe Andrew has stated that he couldn't eliminate  the crop when turning off the stabilizer (and that the crop was substantially greater than the prior model). And, anyway, turning off the stabilizer would completely negate the major benefit of this camera (possibly the only benefit). I'm pretty sure in past Olympus cameras, turning off the stabilizer eliminated the crop. For reference, I believe this camera has two stabilization modes. Mode 1 is IBIS + digital, which needs to have a crop. Mode 2 is IBIS only (I believe), which doesn't need a crop. I don't know if it's cropped anyway because I haven't tried the camera. And then, obviously, you can turn off all stabilization, which also doesn't need a crop.
I would imagine that if the crop is on all the time, even without digital stabilization, this could probably be remedied by a firmware upgrade.