ac6000cw

There are a few camera-mount mics around like the AT8024, which combine a mono cardioid mic with a mid-side mic and are switchable between mono and stereo - https://www.audio-technica.com/en-us/at8024 (I've never used it so no idea what the sound quality is like). That will plug directly into the 3.5mm mic jack on the camera if you want to keep things as light/small/simple as possible. As an alternative, if you can take two mics, I'd be tempted to take maybe a stereo Rode Stereo VideoMic Pro for the 'ambient sound' situations, plus a mono Rode VideoMic NTG for when you need a more directional, more focused mic. Both will plug directly into the camera and are lightweight (about 100g each), not huge and not too expensive. Again, I've not used either mic so can't comment on the sound quality. If you're going to be recording outdoors a lot, make sure you have decent furry windshields/windsocks for the mics - you'll definitely need them at some point...

The equivalent of lens 'focal length' for microphones is their 'polar pattern, which their sensitivity to sound versus the angle relative to the direction the mic is pointed. Below is the polar pattern diagram for the stereo Rode VideoMic-X that you mentioned in the first post. The front of the mic is at the 0 degree position, the rear at 180 degrees. It will respond to sound (to some extent) over a range of +/- 120 degrees relative to the forward direction. It is most sensitive to sounds over around a +/- 60 degree range. Because of its polar pattern and because it's a stereo mic, IMHO it and other stereo mics are good choice if you want to record a general ambient stereo sound field. The recording if played back on a normal stereo loudspeaker setup should recreate the original sound field reasonably well, and you'll be able to locate the individual sound sources within the sound field. If you are trying to record (for example) one person speaking and need to exclude as much of the ambient sound from the sides and rear as possible, you would probably choose a mono mic with narrower polar pattern like a super-cardioid/hyper-cardioid/short shotgun mic e.g. the Rode NTG4 below: ...or a more extreme 'long shotgun' mic like the Rode NTG8, with a much narrower polar pattern:

...as was the new 20MP sensor, 4k 50p/60p video support and great oversampled FHD (which looked almost as good as 4k). And not forgetting internal 4:2:2 video recording. A well-rounded hybrid camera and reliable video workhorse, for me the GH5 is easily the most significant GH series camera since the GH2. Even 7 years after its launch they still fetch decent prices used - probably because they are good, get-the-job-done tools. The GH6 & GH7 are improved versions of the same basic idea, but it was the GH5 that pretty much defined the video-oriented hybrid with IBIS concept, not just for Panasonic but for the other manufacturers subsequent models targeted at the same market.

I own the E-M1 iii and OM-1. C4K (DCI 4k) on the E-M1 iii is the best quality video mode, 8-bit 237Mbs H.264, but it's 24.00p only. The UHD 4k modes are softer and lower bitrate (and are 25p and 29.97p only, no 24.00p). AFAIK the video quality on the E-M1X is the same. Video sensor-shift IBIS on E-M1 iii is excellent and is adjustable in strength ( -1/0/+1). The +1 setting is almost tripod-like if you hold the camera still, but can be panned slowly without noticeable jerkiness at wide to normal focal lengths. Adding digital IS improves stability quite a lot but adds an extra crop and degrades picture quality a little. OM-1 has better video quality all-round - FHD/UHD/C4K 10-bit H.265 4:2:0 in OMLog400 or HLG at 23.98/25/29.97/50/59.94p (plus 24.00p in C4K only). IMHO the video IBIS is pretty much the same/a bit better than on the E-M1 iii. Also has very low rolling shutter (< 10ms) due to fast stacked sensor and a lovely 5.76Mp EVF. Note that you can't adjust the sharpening in the Flat, Log or HLG picture profiles, and on the OM-1 you can't use the standard (photo) profiles in 10-bit mode, only in 8-bit mode. I can't compare the OM-1 to the GH6 or GH7, but compared to my (original) Pana G9 it's swings and roundabouts - G9 supports 10-bit 4:2:2 video, but OM-1 has better EVF, IBIS, ergonomics and battery life (and better audio from built-in mics). For my uses, that makes the OM-1 a better all-round video camera. (The best stabilisation I've ever used is the OM-1 with the 12-100mm F4 pro lens - that combo uses Sync-IS, combining lens OIS with IBIS).

Normally, on a 16:9 screen - thin black bars top & bottom, on 16:10 screen - thicker bars top & bottom, on 21:9 screen - bars on left & right sides.

If you using an 8mm lens on your GH5, it will be the equivalent of about an 11mm lens on the GH7 in DCI 4k RAW mode. Open Gate 5.7k RAW will have the same FOV as there is no extra crop in that mode (so an 8mm lens will still be 8mm).

Yes - the G9ii and GH7 are very close relatives.

If it's got a 'dynamic range compression' transfer curve like Vlog-L applied, how is it still raw sensor data?

DPreview initial review - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-gh7-initial-review

You seem to know better than Panasonic how long it takes to develop, produce prototypes, debug/refine/test/certify, then make pre-production units, then an initial production batch and then gear up for full production - so why don't you enlighten us? (I've worked as an electronics design engineer for 40+ years, so I have some idea of development timescales) Maybe - they'll likely do whatever they think will make them the most money overall/minimise any losses - it's a business with shareholders to keep happy and employees to pay... Nothing bad about that - it's what companies do all the time. Car makers are past-masters at 'parts bin' design, it spreads the base 'platform' development costs across more vehicles and means they have different models to target different parts of the market. How many variants of the same generation of iPhone do Apple sell? I suspect persuading Panasonic higher management to fund the considerable development costs of a new, higher performance, 4/3 sensor for m43 cameras like the GH6/G9 ii/GH7 was quite difficult (versus probably just abandoning any serious m43 camera development). We just have to hope it works out in the long run for the future of Panasonics camera division.

Would you prefer they spent a lot of time and money on a new body design and designing a new sensor, delaying the camera and having to charge a lot more money for it? Personally I think they've done exactly what they should have done - merge the best parts of the GH6 with the best parts of the G9 ii, to create what's hopefully going to be the best pro-video orientated micro43 hybrid camera ever.

Latest 'spec' update on 43rumors.com (apply usual skepticism etc.) - note 'Prores internal Raw recording' is listed:

There are some reasonably compact L-mount Sigma wide primes around e.g. 17mm f4, 20mm f2, 24mm f3.5 and 35mm f2. The 17mm f4 and 24mm f3.5 are about 49mm long (and have aperture control rings). The f2 lenses are around 70mm long. But realistically, for most people, the upcoming 18-40mm collapsible zoom is the lens the S9 needs (and should have had available at launch), with the existing (larger) 20-60mm zoom the next best alternative.

I think the the RED patents cover only compressed RAW in-camera recording, so using an external RAW recorder does not infringe them. Blackmagic RAW is partly de-mosaiced, color space converted and processed before compression, so is a bit 'grey area' as to whether it's really raw anyway in the file. But the point is that it's designed to provide what you might call 'raw equivalent' post-processing flexibility. From a YT video about BM RAW (the three processing blocks on the left are in-camera): A Blackmagic RAW patent - https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/71/7a/bb/ae23088049e011/US20180367775A1.pdf - and the abstract from it:

I think that too, but I suspect Panasonic decided that it was more important to launch the S9 now (to some extent to ride the X100VI wave and pick up some sales from people who can't wait for one of those). The 26mm pancake feels to me like a 'we gotta have a really small lens, in a hurry, to sell or give away with the S9' rushed product - otherwise why would it be manual focus, given the target market? If it had been maybe F4 with AF, even if that meant it was a bit longer, I suspect the S9 launch YT videos might have been generally much more positive.

Good news - something else I'd expect to be rolled out to the S5ii/iix in due course.

Compared to D-Lux 7/LX100 ii, it's got OLED EVF and higher res rear screen, plus USB-C charging. See https://m.dpreview.com/news/3471020867/leica-continues-compacts-with-d-lux-8-featuring-four-thirds-type-sensor

C70 rolling shutter numbers from: https://www.optyczne.pl/48.4-Inne_testy-Canon_EOS_C70_-_test_kamery_Jakość_obrazu.html . 'Matrix' = Sensor (Google translation confusion...) There's also some DR tests towards the bottom of this page - https://www.optyczne.pl/48.3-Inne_testy-Canon_EOS_C70_-_test_kamery_Użytkowanie.html

I'd put it 50/50 an updated LX100 (as the Leica equivalent has recently been announced) or a successor to the S1R (related to the recent 60MP/8k video capable Leica SL3). Unless of course Panasonic is intending to leave the upmarket-looking cameras to Leica as part of their collaboration agreements and concentrating the Panasonic brand on the 'value' and video-orientated end of the market? In which case maybe a GH7 or S2H? I think a GX9-size/type m43 camera is least likely - it would be very close both in target market and release date to the S9, so what would be the point?

I think if camera makers were to take simultaneous capture seriously, then maybe they could record a 4k/6k/8k video stream at a normal video frame rate to one card slot, plus simultaneously a stream of reduced rate stills - e.g. 1/2 or 1/4 of video fps - at full (or near full) sensor resolution as compressed raw or high quality JPEG/HEIC images to the other card slot. That might get close to the best of both worlds. We've already got cameras like the S5ii that can record a 4k video stream plus simultaneously a reduced resolution 'proxy' video stream, so it I suspect some cameras already have enough processing power to do something like that.

Chris and Jordan say basically the same thing in the latest PetaPixel podcast (it's a 30 minute discussion from 16:39 )

I think the S9 marketing has worked then 😉. Talking of remembering releases for the wrong reasons, something I remember from the original OM-1 launch was OMDS getting a professional filmmaker to use it for a promo video. Except it also included BTS footage showing the camera (as far as I could tell) rigged out with non-OMDS/Olympus lenses, matte box, cage etc. mounted on a tripod for some of the time, surrounded by a crew. It was the very opposite of the 'rugged outdoor adventure' usage the rest of the OM-1 marketing was pushing. They should have got someone much closer to the target market to make the video promo content, using OMDS lenses and showing off how good it can be hand-held. Content that potential customers can relate to and think 'yes, I could do that and the camera looks a good tool for it'.

Actually, I suspect the S9 has got more coverage online and on social media than they hoped, even if it hasn't happened as planned. A lot of the adverse comments fueling this seem to be coming from a photography enthusiast base it isn't really targeted at anyway, and from video enthusiasts who seem disappointed it's not the S2H or S2R they'd prefer to be discussing. (Not referring to people on this forum) I don't really understand why so many people seem to be upset/annoyed by the S9 - it's just a consumer camera at the end of the day.

It happens to me all the time with wildlife photography/video... 🙂

Me too (so far). The problem is nicely illustrated by the FF Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 versus the m43 Oly/OMDS 12-100mm F4 Pro. The Oly is a great lens, both optically and to use, but it's pretty much the same size and weight as the cheaper the FF Tamron (which covers basically the same FOV as the Oly). Almost certainly the Tamron is far more optically compromised though.