ac6000cw

For video, 'Continuous AF' Mode 2 with the default 'Set 1' AF settings (sensitivity 0, area switching 0, object prediction +1) and a slightly smaller custom version of the diamond-shaped 'central pattern' focus area for most situations. For wildlife I often use the animal subject detect with a smaller focus area. I rarely film people so I almost never use human/eye subject detection. I don't use tracking AF either - I'm normally a 'keep the subject in the centre of the frame' person.
From the manual:


 
 

7 weddings in and impressed with the S5ii.
Getting used to the flip out screen but would still rather have the multi angle tilt from the S1H.
Prefer the files coming out of the S5ii over the S1H. Those from the S1H are just a little too soft for my taste in comparison, probably due to the OLPF.
However, possibly due to the OLPF, I prefer the photo files from the S1H. The exact opposite of what is supposed to be…
Moiré, only seen one single mild instance in one single clip and not a single time in a still photo.
AF has been great but not perfect. No AF is and I still prefer to use AF to acquire initial focus and then flip to manual. Unless tracking where I have to rely on it.
Conclusion to date:
For me, S1H is the ‘better’ stills camera and the S5ii is the ‘better’ video unit.
I don’t miss my S1R’s at all. I thought I might, but do not. 24mp is more than enough for my needs.
What is still ‘missing’ for my needs?
I have come to the conclusion that as much as I’d like to go to a 2 camera set up, unless I can rely heavily on pulling stills from video…and for that I’d need 6k 50/60p 422 10 bit as a minimum, the 3 camera approach works best.
On that basis, I would like 3 things in the future:
1. 3x identical bodies rather than 2 + 1
2. 6k 50/60p 422 10 bit internal (min)
3. A smaller and lighter lens to replace the Lumix 70-200mm f4, even if it topped out at 150mm. I will continue to use it until either Lumix or more likely Sigma does, but it’s the one lens I ‘need’.
All things considered, the S5ii has to be the best overall camera I have ever owned and the only thing I’d change it for at this point in time is an X model purely for the aesthetics.

I had a play recently (inside a camera shop) with an S5ii, X-T5 and OM-1.
On the S5ii shooting FHD at 50p, in full-frame mode it does not use PDAF (it uses DFD instead) but it does use it in APS-C mode.
The difference in C-AF responsiveness and focus speed was very noticeable - it was pretty snappy in PDAF, much slower in DFD. I was pointing the camera alternately at something in the far end of the shop and at something quite close using a simple mid-size focus area (no subject detect). I would say the AF was pretty confident and smooth in both cases though.
The X-T5 AF was very 'snappy' (with the 16-80 lens on it), the OM-1 similar to the S5 ii in PDAF (with the 12-40 mk2 lens) - but both have adjustable AF speed and sensitivity (as does the S5ii) so that doesn't necessarily mean much.
At the current offer prices in the UK, an S5ii kit with 20-60mm plus 50mm lenses is quite tempting at £2099, but as I normally shoot in 50p it's basically an APS-C video plus full-frame stills camera for me. The X-T5 is smaller and lighter (the X-S20 even more so), but for video the Fuji lenses seem to be a mixed bag in terms of AF speed and smoothness (and the IBIS isn't yet at the Pana/Oly/OMDS level).
Personally I find the DFD on my G9 works perfectly well for the use cases I have - confident with smooth focus transitions and no/minimal 'pulsing'.

I had a play recently (inside a camera shop) with an S5ii, X-T5 and OM-1.
On the S5ii shooting FHD at 50p, in full-frame mode it does not use PDAF (it uses DFD instead) but it does use it in APS-C mode.
The difference in C-AF responsiveness and focus speed was very noticeable - it was pretty snappy in PDAF, much slower in DFD. I was pointing the camera alternately at something in the far end of the shop and at something quite close using a simple mid-size focus area (no subject detect). I would say the AF was pretty confident and smooth in both cases though.
The X-T5 AF was very 'snappy' (with the 16-80 lens on it), the OM-1 similar to the S5 ii in PDAF (with the 12-40 mk2 lens) - but both have adjustable AF speed and sensitivity (as does the S5ii) so that doesn't necessarily mean much.
At the current offer prices in the UK, an S5ii kit with 20-60mm plus 50mm lenses is quite tempting at £2099, but as I normally shoot in 50p it's basically an APS-C video plus full-frame stills camera for me. The X-T5 is smaller and lighter (the X-S20 even more so), but for video the Fuji lenses seem to be a mixed bag in terms of AF speed and smoothness (and the IBIS isn't yet at the Pana/Oly/OMDS level).
Personally I find the DFD on my G9 works perfectly well for the use cases I have - confident with smooth focus transitions and no/minimal 'pulsing'.

One major thing that the LX10/15 has over the RX100 series is the f1.4 minimum aperture on the wide end.
The RX100 series have the sLog profiles but this is mitigated on the LX10/15 if you install my Cinelike D hack.
I actually prefer just having Cinelike D as its easier to deal with in a casual camera than sLog having to be exposed at ISO1600. 
You can add ND to both of course using stick on filter adapters but having to reduce from ISO100 instead of ISO1600 it a lot less problematic in terms of not getting X pattern artefacts etc.
Everyone should just get an FZ2000/2500 though as it really is a powerhouse and, if we were brutally honest with ourselves, probably as much of a camera as many of us actually need 😉 
Its a bit chunky though so a combination of that and the LX10/15 would be great for travel where the LX could be used where discretion is required but at minimal additional weight with the bonus of the flexibility of two matched cameras (using Cinelike D) instead of one.

I guess if I look at it from the perspective of BM then perhaps it makes slightly more sense.  BM has made cameras with S16 and MFT sensors and they used the MFT mount, and they made cameras with S35 sensors and used the EF mount.  Assuming they then wanted to make a FF camera, what mount would they choose?
EF mount
They have used it before, and their users already have lenses that use it, but the crop factor would change between the S35 and FF sensors, and the EF mount has pretty much been abandoned by Canon, so maybe BM want something that's still in active support RF mount
Canon have been quite restrictive with third-party use of the mount, so maybe Canon is blocking BM from licensing it, or maybe it's prohibitively expensive, or maybe the flange distance is too little for things like internal NDs PL mount
Seems like a logical choice with lots of existing lenses and support from other manufacturers, but maybe it's a step too far for their existing customer base, or maybe they want AF support (does PL support AF?) Nikon mounts
Not a lot of cine lenses for Nikon I wouldn't have thought, focus direction is the other way to EF lenses, which might be troublesome to their existing customers Fujifilm X-mount
No AF lenses available that cover FF and only 5 third-party lenses that do (on B&H) MFT mount
Wouldn't cover FF sensor Sony
A logical choice, but like Canon RF, Sony might not want to help BM compete with their cine-cameras so might be charging a lot for the license or might be refusing outright From this perspective I think L-mount makes more sense, and sort-of aligns with their previous use of MFT and EF mounts, which were both "semi-open" systems with lots of existing glass from original and third-parties.

Olympus specifically made a feature for 20MP raw stills at 60fps with Pro Capture. Just press the shutter when you think you saw something and you'll get a bunch of RAW stills going back in time. This was available going back to the E-M1 ii (2016). However, it doesn't offer continuous AF.

Absolutely.  Once you've managed to go through all the effort of hiring a team of people and hiring a good amount of lighting equipment etc, you're not going to quibble about the cost if hiring a dedicated cinema camera, that would be silly.
Of course YT is dedicated to new shiny things, that's to be expected.
The reason I have some frustration here is that this attitude of OLD = CRAP is unfortunately very common on this forum, where (I would hope) no-one has a financial incentive to promote new cameras.
I'm talking both subtly as well as directly, not only are the older cameras given less attention, but I have been explicitly told by forum members to stop talking about the GH5, even though it was relevant to whatever brand new camera body we were discussing and I was presenting a balanced view of pros as well as cons.  It's one thing to criticise a camera, but to say that it's no longer relevant or even welcome in a discussion due to its age, that's a whole other level.
To tie this together, I absolutely agree that no-one is using a BGH1 or GH5S as an A/B/C camera on a major production, but the fact that they're used at all by anyone in that world should give pause to those who think that they're no longer fit for use in low budget / no budget / amateur settings.
I mean, I thought the entire premise of EOSHD was to use and make the most of affordable consumer cameras for video.

Just think…these cameras, the original S5, FX30, Fuji XT3/4/5/XS20, Nikon Z6 + Ninja, current gen bodies like the FX3, ZVE1, R6 II, these give us all of the image quality we need. We literally don’t need better until sometime comes out with Alexa-level DR and color. Nowadays I view upgrading cameras as just quality of life improvements. Because my setup can achieve as good of an image as I will ever need. 10-bit, full frame 4k in LOG…is all you need. You genuinely don’t need better.

Very interested in the camera, probably will upgrade, but...it was a VERY strange launch.

First, all the usual suspects that do reviews for video (the now Petapixel couple, Gerald Undone, Toneh, Kai, etc) did not got units, as they usually do. From the more traditional reviewers, only Gordon Laing and Cine-D got one. 

And...almost no one showed the new AF system in full action, or described it in detail. Most of them said (and could be true) that they got units with no final firmware. 

Other, like Chris from Pal2Tech (the great surprise in the review batch - he is a very good Fuji reviewer, but never got an unit) showed a little, said that was way better than all the Fuji that he used, even better than X-T5 post firmware update. He had a excuse - only got the unit for 2 days, and was sent by a Fuji representative, no Fuji itself. Another reviewers also mentioned very short time with the camera.

Also in this regard - most of the reviewers are european, specially british ones. But most of them, never heard before.

My two cents:
- There were not a lot of ready units available, hence people have to test it breifly and return the camera to be sent to another reviewer;
- About AF tests: or (the "I hope" answer) the firmware as not totally final and will got more tweaks before release, hence it was not allowed deep tests, or (the "damn..." answer) the AF still not good enough and Fuji hope to move some units in preorder before the not so good news becomes spread.

I am not the "one person" who does not understand the different uses of cameras and techniques.
What I do not understand is why anyone thinks this camera is suited for mounting on a tripod and shooting video for an hour. Nothing wrong with the use, what is wrong is thinking this camera is at all suited for this purpose. Get over it already. It is not. 
There is no point acquiring a camera whose most important feature is compactness for mounting on a tripod and shooting video for an hour. Obviously. Get an fx3 and be done with it, already.
The ZV E1 camera is for portability, handheld use. For relatively short takes; not 5 seconds, but not 10 minutes either. In any temperature. Would I prioritize the camera in non-pathetic 105 F temperature? No.
 

Yep, the main reason for me to keep the Sigma is the constant aperture - most for the hassle to readjust exposure / ND filter after changing the focal lenght.

About OIS, yes, is a necessity for non-IBIS bodies (and the OIS of the 18-55 Fuji is kinda good for video, for OIS standarts), but with OIS, it performed better than the Fuji - because Fuji tune their IBIS for photos, not for video. With the Fuji, small movements becomes "jumpy", because you start the move the camera, and suddenly IBIS realizes it and tries to catch up; with the 18-55 OIS, this behaviour is amplified. With the Sigma, it is less apparent.

To Fuji becomes perfect, they need to hire an AF guy from Sony and a IBIS guy from OM Digital or Panasonic...

As an X-S10 user, and since Fuji will never release my dream camera (an X-E4 with dual dials and more buttons, IBIS and 10-bit video, even with 30 min limit), this one looks like the one for an amateur like me.

In theory, solve all my biggest gripes with the X-S10:
- Battery life: with Boost mode enabled (the "full" boost mode, not the IBIS one), is the greatest battery eater camera that I had (never had a OG BMPCC). Other day, brought it to a birthday party to film my daugther, and the first battery was dead after around 100 frames and 10 minutes of 4k video. Is abysmal.
- Autofocus: Fuji still lags behind other brands, but the newest models looks better - and this one have revamped algos (which are now available to X-T5 and X-H2 as firmware updates); from the first impressions, looks like a lot better. I have troubles with X-S10 AF even with stills - and I hope that eye af in video with more than one person is frame becomes usable.
- IBIS: one more stop, which don't matter too much - for stills Fuji IBIS is good enough from a long time, but in video it keeps "fighting" with the beginning of a movement. Looks better now too - albeit still far from Olympus.

10-bit is very welcome, F-Log becomes usable now. 4k60 welcome too. Another great revamp is that the four C positions on mode dial now could store video and stills settings (in X-S10, only stills). 6,2k open gate 10-bit 4:2:2 is a surprise in a camera of this size, as the possibility of external raw recording. In fact, is really a baby X-H2S without a stacked sensor and shorter record times - already know people that were planning to buy a 2nd X-H2S and now will use X-S20 as B-cams.

The bad:
- No weather sealing;
- Since the body was slightly revamped for the bigger battery, and cabling for the fan and headphone jack, Fuji lost the opportunity make some more modifications: since there is no weather sealing, the front dial should be clickable. And the camera should have the front button of the X-H line to change focus modes (or other function). This would bring 2 more custom buttons without taking any other space.
- Would like a 3,6 mp EVF, but even the R7 have the same panel, is par for the course;
- STILL NO GENERAL OBJECT TRACKING in movie mode, Fuji? My god, even the Olympus, who had an atrocious one, now have it.

My decision will be determined by the final price here in Brazil. We have a 60% import tax for everything, and a lot of cameras are the double of the US price. Fujifilm here sometimes lauch with a "better" difference, when I got the X-S10, it was "only" 22% up to US price.
And...some reasoning. It solves a lot of my gripes, and is even overkill for an amateur like my me. In fact, with a revamped AF algorithm and a smoother IBIS, the X-S10 could be enough for me. The X-S20 could be my "final" camera (since it have all that I need and more), but with the added costs (camera, a new extra battery, new license for C1 or DxO, new UHS-II cards) will not be a cheap one.

About lenses - just got the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, beauty little thing. Compared to the 18-55 f/2.8-4, is not so much sharper in stills (don't know if it is my copy), but liked it a lot for video - better AF, MUCH less noisy, and, surprisingly, IBIS does a better job the the "Dual IS" of the older one.

...and I guess this is one of the Chinese knock-offs of it - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/UURIG-R-77-77mm-Rapid-Filter-System-Lens-Filter-Metal-I2Z8/285223741334

From the Fuji website:
6240 x 4160 = 26Mp, which is the full sensor area and the same size as the largest still image - "[L]〈3:2〉6240 x 4160".
So I can't confirm it for sure, but it looks like 'no crop' to me.
AFAIK the 50/60p DCI and UHD modes are cropped - 1.18 I think, same as on the X-T4 (which has the same sensor).

Panasonic GH2, 2023 edition
Very nice.

Popped into my local dealer (Wex), had a quick play with an X-S10 to remind myself of what it's like to hold etc. then pre-ordered an X-S20 - my first ever Fuji camera and the first time I've pre-ordered a camera...
Thanks - deciding on lenses is going to be the next thing. I've ordered the camera with the 15-45mm PZ lens - was only £100 more as a kit - just so I've got something to test it with.

If on the basis I could not afford to switch to a Nikon Z9 + Z8 pairing…which I cannot really justify, my ‘budget’ option would be an XH2 paired with an XH2s.
However, want an even smaller similar capability pairing, ie, one stills orientated and the other more video, but both hybrid, then the pairing of an XT5 with this new XS20 would be a great little set up, especially as the XS20 can take the add on cooling vent.
Lenses?
I’d have to go zoom for my needs and really only 2 contenders and I’d stick the Fuji 16-55 f2.8 on the XT5 and the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 on the XS20.
The Tamron has a longer reach, is slightly lighter, but is not as sharp as the Fuji which is why I’d pair them in this manner.
Real world 24-83mm FF equivalent stills and 27-105mm FF focal length video, both with no aperture changes.
F2.8 light gathering with an equivalent f4.2 DOF.
Would work for me.
The other thing about Fuji is the SOOC results and I’d shoot Colour Neg for stills and Eterna for video.
Personally though, I’d go for the XH2 and XH2s pairing and with battery grips just for the handling as I like the idea of dinky cameras, but for work purposes, nah, not very stable platforms or ergonomically good over long days.

OK @Andrew Reid or anyone else who may be interested, I have sussed it!
Spanner
Cog
Custom Mode Settings
How to reload custom mode
Change recording mode
OFF
Et voila, any/all custom modes that you have set, will always retain your most recent setting tweak.
I have all my Lumix cameras set up as:
C1 = outdoor stills with WB set at 5500
C2 = indoor stills (only difference is WB 4500 default over my outdoor settings) 
C3-1 = 6k 30p outdoor
C3-2 = 4k 60p outdoor
C3-3 = 4k 60p indoor
So if I say twiddle the WB in a certain scenario on one of my video settings and then flip to one of my stills modes and then flip back to video, it’s always whatever I was using last.
I’ve just tested to make sure and it works.
All my settings are not ‘final’ but more starting points or at least ‘safety nets’ so if I shot an entire sequence of video clips or stills at the wrong WB, at least there will be consistency for correction purposes.
The bottom line, is that familiarity of your kit in order that you can spend less time thinking about how to do something technically and focus more on the creative side.

I sometimes use time lapses or hyper lapses to help tell the story. I mainly only use hyperlapses with drone work and occasionally timelapses to show a setup, or for dramatic effect such as to show the sky rolling across the horizon.
I have a dedicated Canon Rebel T6s that I use just for timelapses, it has incredible battery life with the dual grip handle (over 2,000 images in one timelapse once and it still had over 50% battery life remaining), plus I don't want that high shutter count on one of my more expensive cameras, additionally I like to set up my timelapse camera somewhere and leave it while I go shoot other content so there's the theft concern as well. Lastly, it is blazing hot here in the summer and it has never once overheated during a timelapse so its a great little timelapse camera.
Many times I have lugged the timelapse camera with me planning on setting up a quick 15min timelapse to use as the opening or closing for the video and many times it's just a not a good fit, either there's no place I feel is safe enough to leave it while I do other things, or the sky is completely cloudless so it would be a wasted effort, etc. 
As far as where in the edit I tend to find them the most useful, for me its usually the very beginning opening sequence or the closing i.e. a timelapsed sunset is a nice closing shot especially in places where I cannot use the drone. But without the right conditions (cloudy skies, progressive changes, etc.) timelapses aren't worth the time or effort to me.
When editing 60FPS on a 30FPS timeline I do occasionally only slow down say the last few seconds of a longer 5 or 10s clip, just enough to stretch it to the jump point which keeps the rest of the clip real time while getting it to the logical jump point, also sometimes I combine 60FPS with optical flow to drop all the way down to 25% to simulate 120FPS without actually shooting 120FPS if I want truly slow motion; this effect followed by a speedramp can be quite dramatic.  I know purists may say optical flow isn't "pure" enough slow motion, but in DR with the right settings it does a really good job depending on the content being slowed down.
 
I decided years ago to stick to 30FPS and 60FPS for all of my work unless the client specified 24FPS, or PAL....for me it eliminates all of the conformance issues and reduces the problems with pans, eliminates the jittery look, etc. etc. I figured out long ago I will never be a Hollywood feature film videographer so the 30FPS delivery framerate looks the best with the least amount of work to me.

Greetings colleagues! This is my tests. I have been using the camera since December 2022. Until recently I used Canon R5 and R5C as my main ones. But I left the project and now I'm trying to decide whether to stay on Sony. Tests primarily shot for myself.

Sony Cinema Line FX30 (ILME-FX30) - Firmware Version 2.0
Tascam DR-44WL - Firmware 2.14.0132

Built-in stereo microphones are ideal for surround sound. In most cases, you can no longer put simple cannon mics to record your surroundings. The FX30 has a lot of good features)

Have you tried using https://camerasize.com/compact/ to compare the size and weight of various camera and lens combinations?
It's a great tool for quick visual size comparisons of the top, front and back views (and hovering the mouse pointer over a camera or lens picture will pop up dimensions and weight info).
For example, this is a comparison of A7c, FX30, A7 IV, R8 and X-T4 - https://camerasize.com/compact/#858,895,883,903,841,ha,b

Yes you are right, the same goes for here, certain churches don't allow flashes during weddings, many events/venues don't let you bring anything even resembling a professional camera on their property or in their venue unless you get approval first which of course is nearly impossible to get. For places that are that bad, I just tell my client that I refuse to film there. These days I don't really do the tourist thing anymore but if I did even the R7 would probably be too big for venues like that. 
I didn't even think about the smaller size of the venues there. I have been to Europe a few times and each time, the smaller size of everything was the first thing I had to get used to. By comparison most things in America seem large to the point of being wastefully excessive. Events are the same way, most events are in huge venues with large crowds and the zoom lenses really help close those gaps. I think with smaller venues I would be more likely to consider primes or something like the 24-70 F2.8. I guess that's why it was hard for me to even imagine some of the lens choices that people were making here when I was thinking about the amount of space I need to cover in my typical event. I have even used the 70-200 on occasion because things were just so far away or so high up that the 105 wasn't long enough for me to capture the level of detail that I wanted. BTW the 70-200 RF F2.8 is incredibly stable handheld even at 200mm way more so than the EF version ever was.
Its funny, I don't look at them as compromises at all as long as you deliver something the client is willing to pay for. At the end of the day it is just photos and video footage, to me it's only a compromise if you compare it to something else you could have done or some other equipment you could have used, but if the client is pleased with the final product then I consider that as having picked the right equipment for the job even if that client happens to be yourself.
Sure you could have picked a sharper lens, shot with a higher resolution camera, used a gimbal instead of handheld, etc. etc. but none of those things mattered in the end so I don't consider not using those things to be a compromise.

You're certainly not the only one - isn't that what makes it an interesting challenge? 🙂
But on the other side on the coin, it's everyone's different choice of compromises that gives their productions a personal 'look' - the world of the 'moving image' would be a very boring place if everyone used the same 'look' and style...