mercer

This is the sort of thinking that logically should end up in the "fuck it I'll get a Z8" category.
I'm with you on transcoding but indeed increasingly the faff of any kind of NLE.
I'm quite interested in whether people felt they were more productive when they had hardware devices, as in camcorders and tape decks.
The immediacy of coming home, getting the tape out of the camera and then putting it in your playback deck and assembling it onto the recording deck had a lot going for it in terms of productivity.
Maybe if we had equivalent hardware devices now instead of everything going into the multi purpose computer it might be more enjoyable to actually edit things.
And would stop the fall down the rabbit hole of tweaking the bollocks off every single shot. 

I've been saying that for the past 40 years and I almost mean it now.

Looks like the Blackmagic Micro Studio Camera 4k G2 (or M4K as @mercer has coined) has started shipping - I saw a quick video from someone earlier this week, but now Will von Tagen has received his, and promises to rig it up and take it out into the world, so we'll be able to see how it fares.
Here's a video showing the menu system and giving some initial comments towards the end of the video, which are very positive.
 

Classic BTM... haha!
I must admit, I'd really like a ZF but I'll have to wait a couple years for that one.
You're right, though about Panasonic... they used to be punk rock, now they're Rick Roll. He really is making a lot of videos. Camera Conspiracy can be a bit much, but I appreciate the shorter videos compared to others that force a 20 minute video out of a 10 minute subject.
With that said, I'm probably going to buy another GH6. I didn't love it the first time around m, but I think I was being too picky and I have a different... use-case for it now.
Honestly, I'm kinda tired of all cameras right now. 

Without a doubt. Now I don't mind a bigger camera...
But...
I don't care how many features you add, m4/3 is still m4/3, and the point of the system was small and economical... wasn't it? I feel like Panasonic hit its apex with GH3 as far as ergonomics and proper price goes. Starting with the GH4, they started chasing the wrong things.
Both of those cameras fell completely off my radar. The a6700 is pretty impressive. As is the Z30, if we are to believe that Camera Conspiracies goofball.
The real problem I have is that there is no camera under $3000 that is an upgrade for me, but I live an under $1500 kinda world.

I've quoted this before during the G9ii saga but, yes, its right there on the front page of the Micro Four Thirds association official website.

That was the point at which they changed from being "Alternative Music" to "An Alternative To Similar Types Of Music".
They went from being The Smiths to being Coldplay basically.
He is absolutely churning the content out at the moment for some reason.
If you went for this version of the Zfc you could live in both an under $1500 world and a Barbie world simultaneously.

Without a doubt. Now I don't mind a bigger camera...
But...
I don't care how many features you add, m4/3 is still m4/3, and the point of the system was small and economical... wasn't it? I feel like Panasonic hit its apex with GH3 as far as ergonomics and proper price goes. Starting with the GH4, they started chasing the wrong things.
Both of those cameras fell completely off my radar. The a6700 is pretty impressive. As is the Z30, if we are to believe that Camera Conspiracies goofball.
The real problem I have is that there is no camera under $3000 that is an upgrade for me, but I live an under $1500 kinda world.

Panasonic showed their hand with the G9ii about how they view the new generation of MFT cameras really.
Depending on your point of view its either an S5ii with a tiny sensor or a G7 in a massive overcoat but the net result is the same in that its just not size appropriate to where everyone wants to see MFT.
So the "new" GX85 will not be coming from Panasonic.
But it is there in cameras like the a6700 or even the Nikon Z30 both of which have excellent fast primes from Sigma to balance the body size with the lens size but more importantly can shrink that further by deploying the secret weapon of the TechArt adapters to open up the M mount lenses.
Even on the Fp, using M mounts like the 35mm f2 7Artisans I have here produce very comparable total package sizes than if you were using MFT lenses with similar speed.

The huge difference with using E or Z mount cameras is that with the TechArt you get full AF of these MF M mount lenses as well as being able to do the same trick with an intermediate adapter for other compact lenses such as the Nikon Series E stuff.
With the e mount you can also use the wafer thin MFT to E mount adapter to mount any existing MF MFT lenses on to it like Meike cine primes etc.
If I was looking for an upgrade to a GX85 then I'd be giving the a6700 with M mount a serious look.
 

Thanks. I'm very happy with them. I see them as little slices of life. The pink sky thing started as a way to tie that footage with the later shots where the sky really was pink. Kind of spooky and science fictiony.
The Digital Bolex is great. When I first got it I wondered if I would regret the purchase and that some other camera would be better for me (I was also looking at the BM Ursa Mini 4K) but now every time I see the results I'm so glad I got the D16.  (Look at the gold leaf on the harp when the sun hits it in Practise in the Park.) A few years ago when I got it Digital Bolexes were coming up on eBay (and even craigslist) every few months but now nobody seems to be selling theirs anymore.
After trying all the settings I now leave it set at 200 ISO with 180 shutter angle. I use Bolex Gamma profile so in post I really just need to conform the highs and lows to REC709 and the shot looks great.  (It took some experimenting to figure this out.) I use Color Finale Encoder to import into Final Cut. It's 2K but scales up to 4K really nicely. I wish they had made their proposed c-mount lens turret. It came with some very high quality prime lenses but it's time consuming to switch them. After using a bag I had I realized how awkward it was to work with it and didn't find any case I liked so ended up learning how to make a case and designing one. It works very well. I can be up and rolling in less than a minute. I have a 16-75mm zoom on the camera, with pockets that hold a 10mm and a 135mm. That's enough for most things.
It's a depressing time in the world and it can seem like there's no reason to bother making art but then one only has to look at history and see what world conditions much worse than now that people lived in and yet they still made art. I would say for me it gives me hope and feels good to be creating a bit of beauty in a world that keeps throwing more things at us to deal with.
There's much more competition at festivals now so it's harder to get your film selected than it was before. I used to have several screenings a year but now very few. (I started to wonder if I was becoming irrelevant then realized I always was irrelevant.) Just last night I got word that my new film has another screening coming up, so yay!

If you can find one for a good price, I recommend it. I paid less than $100 for mine with the box and less than 1000 shots on it.
The colors are amazing. 

My first real camera was a Pentax K1000. My first digital camera was the Olympus E-420 DSLR (at the time, it was the world's smallest DSLR). I especially like DSLR's for the ability to compose without turning on the camera. With mirrorless, I always seem to have a battery counter in the back of my mind. Sure, I could bring more batteries, but I still cannot get rid of the counter.
That is the whole point for why I started this thread- a small phone and a small camera is better than a big phone that is also a camera.

I don't really have a camera with me at all times. I have my phone, but I only use it to take photos for work or if I need to make sure I'm buying the right thing.
If I could go back to a flip phone, I would in a heartbeat. 

That's a nice selection. I've thought about getting the K10D before.
My question was more about what camera you have with you at all times, not for everyday shooting. The reason I ask is that I personally find smart phones way too big for one-handed operation now and I'd rather have a small, cheap smart phone with a camera in the pocket than just a large smart phone.

I have 3 that I enjoy for everyday shooting... a Minolta X-7a, a Pentax P3, and a Yashica FX3 Super 2000. If I'm going digital, I have a Pentax K10D with a 12mp CCD sensor and ibis that suits my needs.
Although I prefer video, I don't get out enough to shoot anything worthwhile for day trips. One day soon, I am hoping to shoot a short film or something and I'll probably use my 5D3.
I will say that I do miss shooting video with a small camera but even the GX85 I found to be fairly uncomfortable to shoot with and prefer a bigger camera. My dream camera would be a Nikon D5500 with DPAF, ibis and internal raw video (or ProRes)

It's close, but the Sigma with one of the smallest lenses is 637g! Yes, you get FF, but the GX850 with the 20mm is only 356g and much smaller. Also, the Sigma can't even do flash photography.
I can sell all my M43 gear and have sold most of it. I'm only left with the small (and less expensive) stuff. The fact is that I enjoy shooting my GX850 and I want a more modern replacement.
Concerning Canon, I just don't trust them (R5) and I'd certainly never buy anything RF- too expensive, too closed. It's a company that will only change if there's a scandal by pushing the cripple hammer too far (R5).
I wouldn't not buy the G100D. I had the G100 and shot a ton with it for a year. If the G100D actually has a significantly better EVF, I might buy it. Unfortunately, I think that was a seriously lazy update to a camera that has really sold well.
What camera do you take with you everywhere?

Without looking at the actual specs, but having owned both cameras, I am pretty sure the FP is around the same size or smaller than the GX85. With lens options, you may have a point although the Sigma primes are fairly small.
To be honest, this move to mirrorless seems kinda pointless... you're trading body size for lens size. It's kinda mind boggling really.
I guess I've been out of the loop... I know the R5 had overheating issues... but it was my understanding they fixed it? Did I miss something?
I'm also pretty sure that the RF mount has plenty of smaller primes. With that said, I understand you're already invested in m4/3 but it may be time to start thinking about a different company because Panasonic isn't going back to smaller cameras unless you want a G100. Which I may be in the minority but I actually think it looks like a cool camera. 

To be fair, it seems like you specifically want Panasonic to continue making these cameras? Sony has the RX0 and ZV line that are pretty impressive. Although, recently discontinued, the Canon M200 is as tiny of an ILC that you can get. Then you have the Osmo Pocket, Insta360, GoPro, etc... there are tons of options.
For some reason, every other company, except for Panasonic and BM, get a ton of crap on this forum with comments like Cripple Hammer, or whatever, but Panasonic gets a pass because they offer waveforms or something... but I feel like Panasonic is the worst of them all. In the past 3 years Canon has been the biggest innovator and are still making small DSLM cameras... look at the R50 or R100... they're pretty small. An R8 full frame camera with 10bit and cLog3 costs $1299. You can get a Sigma FP for $1000 used and not much more new...
There are options... just not from Panasonic because they only care about full frame now, or they think any worthwhile m4/3 camera should be priced at $2000.

To be fair, it seems like you specifically want Panasonic to continue making these cameras? Sony has the RX0 and ZV line that are pretty impressive. Although, recently discontinued, the Canon M200 is as tiny of an ILC that you can get. Then you have the Osmo Pocket, Insta360, GoPro, etc... there are tons of options.
For some reason, every other company, except for Panasonic and BM, get a ton of crap on this forum with comments like Cripple Hammer, or whatever, but Panasonic gets a pass because they offer waveforms or something... but I feel like Panasonic is the worst of them all. In the past 3 years Canon has been the biggest innovator and are still making small DSLM cameras... look at the R50 or R100... they're pretty small. An R8 full frame camera with 10bit and cLog3 costs $1299. You can get a Sigma FP for $1000 used and not much more new...
There are options... just not from Panasonic because they only care about full frame now, or they think any worthwhile m4/3 camera should be priced at $2000.

To be fair, it seems like you specifically want Panasonic to continue making these cameras? Sony has the RX0 and ZV line that are pretty impressive. Although, recently discontinued, the Canon M200 is as tiny of an ILC that you can get. Then you have the Osmo Pocket, Insta360, GoPro, etc... there are tons of options.
For some reason, every other company, except for Panasonic and BM, get a ton of crap on this forum with comments like Cripple Hammer, or whatever, but Panasonic gets a pass because they offer waveforms or something... but I feel like Panasonic is the worst of them all. In the past 3 years Canon has been the biggest innovator and are still making small DSLM cameras... look at the R50 or R100... they're pretty small. An R8 full frame camera with 10bit and cLog3 costs $1299. You can get a Sigma FP for $1000 used and not much more new...
There are options... just not from Panasonic because they only care about full frame now, or they think any worthwhile m4/3 camera should be priced at $2000.

I must admit that I have been very tempted to try out the ZV-1. I guess if you want to go real cheap, the F version is a possibility as well. I've had a couple RX10ii and I really like Sony's 1" sensor cameras.

I must admit that I have been very tempted to try out the ZV-1. I guess if you want to go real cheap, the F version is a possibility as well. I've had a couple RX10ii and I really like Sony's 1" sensor cameras.

I must admit that I have been very tempted to try out the ZV-1. I guess if you want to go real cheap, the F version is a possibility as well. I've had a couple RX10ii and I really like Sony's 1" sensor cameras.

I must admit that I have been very tempted to try out the ZV-1. I guess if you want to go real cheap, the F version is a possibility as well. I've had a couple RX10ii and I really like Sony's 1" sensor cameras.

This also happened to me on here by the way.
Someone was asking about the Contax Zeiss 35-70mm f3.4 and I was lamenting the fact that I'd gone for the wrong option short zoom and should have bought that one and saying that I didn't think anyone on here had one.
.
Meanwhile over in the lens thread a good 15 months earlier, there I am posting samples from my, erm, Contax Zeiss 35-70mm f3.4. 
Its a disease.
 

2/3" crop/sensor estate is not too shabby at 2.8. If you watch Harisson Krafts videos you might possibly not feel so sure about the RX100 3 to V being the winner in the image quality department. @John Matthews The lens looks magical at this aperature on the LX15 throughout all focal lengths. It sports the same sensor as the RX10 1,2,3 afaik. Crop in 4K mode did not hinder me to film some of my best personal footage ever with it. The cake is in the pudding of the lens. Processing in 4K is just as good as on the GX85.
I still need to experiment with profile settings a bit more, but I would leave saturation untouched, noise reduction and sharpness all the way down though. I have started to treat it like a S16 F4 camera. I got two of them but only with one battery for around 120 Euro from a youtuber. Heck of a two camera deal. 🙂 At 200 Euro used price I would still consider it a good purchase for image tinkerers. One needs to massage the image in Davinci a bit and save some presets and secret sauce for best effect. But that´s half the fun of it.