zetty

Unfortunately, they’re a crap shoot. The first 28mm 1.8 I had was in beautiful, new condition and the focus ring felt horrible. I eventually sold it and the next one I bought, was a little beat up but the focus ring was smooth as silk. That’s one of my favorite lenses of all time. 
The 50mm 1.4 I had was pretty good. 

On some Canons you can choose between the old and the new color in the menu for C-log.
With Raw stills they have been very consistent. Shooting for example the 5D classic side by side with the 6Dmkii it's close enough that most wouldn't be able to tell them apart. 
BTW, you don't even have to be +70 to have been shooting ancient Canons professionally. Could be interesting to have an age poll because it seems to me that many here are old enough to remember the time before the DSLR revolution.

The A7S-III is already here. It has;
Sony BSI Exmor full frame sensor (highly likely)
10bit color sampling, internal and HDMI.
4:2:2 150mbp/s 4k internal.
6k full pixel readout (6k to 4k oversampling)
4k 60p in "Hollywood cine" super35 sensor size.
Full size HDMI port.
No recording limit in 4k 30p
No overheating whatsoever.
14+ stops of VLog
Wave form scopes.
LUT support
Fantastic color science.
4k raw over HDMI is on the way.
See?...the A7S-III is here today! But its Panasonic that made it, not Sony. Its called S1.

I never realized how much @Andrew Reid hates Sony Cameras  ?

The GH5, with its 4k 60p and much better stabilization.
When did hyperbolic nonsense pass from camera manufacturers to the actual camera users? These are cameras, not sports teams. Give it a rest with the "x destroys x!" stuff. 

That has little to do with the camera. That is called SKILL what you are talking about. And all of it is subjective.

I'm hoping its an embedded video of Rick Astley that triggers when you select RAW in the video menu. There is certainly enough space for it in there ! 

Updated video
 

New firmware coming soon, improved IS and AF performance
 

Well maybe if you learned to hold the camera better and walk with it better you might save yourself a lot of money and aggravation. If you think gear is just magically going to make you tons better well good luck with that happening. There, no cuss words. You think IBIS and OIS has been around for 40 years for video? Oh, how did any one Ever make a movie or a short then.
If you want to buy some kind of Stabilization buy a Stedicam. EVERY electronic Gimbal looks like crap. That stupid floating look. And it has No clue what you want to do as compared to what You tell a Stedicam what to do.
Like I have said 100 times on here. Practice, Practice, Practice. You don't learn this stuff spending your life on YouTube, or even here. This place has turned into a gear forum. You want to make good stuff practice, if you have talent it will come out, if not find a different hobby or profession. You want to find out about the latest gear.. read on.
 

My goal was "Hollywood" in my 20s (did work there a bit) but ended up in financial software/data for the past 30+ years. My guess is DP work is similar. My experience.
1. Film/Photography/Video, has always been a near impossible field to make a living in.  My observation 30+ years.  Unless you specialize in a very complex area where a shortage of talent develops.  In photography and film, bad news, those areas DO NOT EXIST   There is always an excess supply of talent.
2. One's availability today is worth more to a prospective client than someone else's genius available tomorrow.  Don't kid yourself.  Whatever the client says, you're replaceable and a minor part of their world.  You can be a raving egomaniac in your domain, but get in the way of someone signing your check and no amount of genius will save you.  Make yourself available.  
3. A client only needs 10% of your skill.  When you try to give them more, it confuses them and can work against you when they want to hire again.  Understanding and matching a client's priorities, which will ALWAYS be slightly different than your expertise, is paramount.  Anticipating the client's needs, which may be some form of "cleaning the windows" is 90% of completing a success project.  Keep your head out of your head out of your ass.
Does all this mean you shouldn't become the most skillful DP possible?  No, but you learn for YOU, for your pride in your work.  Do not connect skill with ability to get work.  It will have very little to do with what work you get.  I know that sounds unbelievable.  I don't quite believe it myself.  Yet if I objectively look at all the work done out there, it seems random, the scale of stuff, from bad to great.  In other words, the quality should be better IF THERE was a meritocracy.  There is simply too much poorly done stuff, in my eyes, in all areas of tech, to indicate that quality is the prime factor to employment.  Good quality stuff is there by luck.
Human endeavors are complex, emotionally laden efforts to give meaning to our lives.  What gives you meaning, say great lighting, doesn't give the actor meaning, or the producer, etc.  Be compassionate to others.
Bottom line, if you're thrilled to have the opportunity to even get coffee on the set you'll find a place.  If you're thinking about "saturated markets" and "making money" clients will pick up on that and get someone they think will work for free, because yeah, we all just suck!  It's just a job.  Money is always an issue.  9 out 10 pats on the back you must give yourself.
 
 

I think its mis-named a bit. I get why they went with pocket, but it should be a Mini Cinema cam or something - unless someone has messenger bag sized pockets.
@Djangosaid RIP GH5 - but its more like RIP GH5s IMO.
 
 

I recently got the Fujian 25, F1.4 C mount lens which is similar to the above, you do get vignetting at f2.0 and above
$38 or so from Ebay with micro 4/3 adapter and 3 macro rings - from Mxcamera. he also sells Wesley, but he just sold out a batch.

Has swirly bokeh and is very bloom/flare prone - even light from a monitor will cause it to flare! :)
And specular highlights will flare - so it does get a dreamy look
Only the centre of the lens is sharp, but in a way it isolates subjects well because of this.
 
It's a true f1.4, a bit brighter than the Wesley f1.4, which is closer to a real f1.8
Wesley does not have the swirly bokeh effect though
 
It can get pretty clean wide open with manual ISO 500-640 for a normal lit room at night. Gets noisey with auto ISO for some reason, even during the day.
 
see my demo test of it here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B-ORWR_pio
 
night room lighting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQes0xG5oK0&feature=youtu.be

What I said about it
 
 

Interesting new product. Pretty nice idea.
https://***URL removed***/news/6978265344/this-is-the-world-s-first-variable-graduated-nd-filter

That works better if you're never taking off the filter, otherwise you have to re-mount the hood after removing the filter, and vice versa.
Collapsing the hood takes maybe a second, just put your hand across the front and push towards the camera. Pull forward when you're done.
Adjusting a vari-ND would be a bit fiddly, true. I use fixed NDs so I don't need that quick access I guess.
I do only bring/use one hood actually. The hood just stretches over the mounting ring and fits in a groove, I leave a ring on each lens and just transfer the hood when I swap lenses.

Go full M.

The Tiffen Variable ND is good. One of the drawbacks of the cheaper ones is the depth and placement of the rotating part of the filter. In my experience, they are usually too slim and awkwardly placed. The Tiffen one is relatively chunky and placed well. 
The "X" effect mentioned by others is inevitable of an 8-stop variable ND. Others that don't have the X effect only go up to 6 stops. 
Of course you can go a step higher to the SLR Magic VariND, which has hard stops, a nice handle and better optics. But you really don't need to unless you have the money or are being paid good money. 
You can also go to fixed stop filters like JonPais suggests, but they're a pain in the ass in the field. 

Work tools are boring. I've always found mirrorless cameras way more fun to actually shoot with.
In his day job John Brawley has an Alexa. Why on earth would he shoot 'for fun' creatively, with an Olympus E-M1 II? But he does.
There are a lot of talented DPs who shoot with DSLRs and mirrorless cameras once they down their RED and Arri cameras at the end of the day.
Yet I find in the mid-range market for video pros (wedding videographers for example) there's an aspirational value attached to the higher-end pro cameras, that is stupid and pointless. Aspirations should be creative.
Owning a Sony FS5 or Canon C500 doesn't make you more creative, it makes you more efficient at work by a slight bit, and you appear more professional because of the big nobs and bells & whistles. Sadly, it doesn't necessarily make for "better" work because I have yet to see a clear distinction between work shot on mirrorless cameras and on stuff like the C300.
In fact often the small camera stuff looks better and more inspired. The legendary Anthony Dod Mantle is known for his rough and ready work with digital, but when he went Canon C-series on Oliver Stone's recent series of Putin interviews, the look they achieved was slap dash and lazy to my eye... Could have been so much better. He used DSLRs as well on this shoot (between 2015-2017) and those shots actually came out more interesting!
Too many pro videographers seem to dream of cameras like an Alexa and RED, why shows to me how important the professional label and look is to people, but creatively, they are no better and actually worse than the small cameras.
I hated shooting with my Sony FS5. A fiddly pain in the ass, for my music video work in Berlin, it needed an OIS lens and rig for handheld - limiting the choice of looks from the lens. With a GH5 you can put any lens on there and it is instantly stable for handheld work, with a tiny form factor that gets out of the way.
The FS5's image was worse than an A7S II but double the price. Aside from high frame rates it didn't offer anything creatively over a DSLR or mirrorless camera and now I have 120fps full frame on two of my small cameras along with 240fps 1080p on the pocket RX100 IV - So why bother getting a more expensive camera if it doesn't power you along creatively as much as the cheaper stuff!?
These pro cameras aren't cheap... Sometimes I got lucky and I bought a Canon C500 for a very good price used, but do you know how many times I have felt compelled to take it out and use it for artistic work? Zero times.
Kendy Ty is another example of a pro who downs his workhorse RED and shoots with a DSLR... The camera gets out of the way to such an extent he can shoot short films in public and direct the actors at the same time as being the main cinematographer. His work sticks in the mind as some of the most creative and spontaneous I've seen and there's not a C200 in sight... zero need for one!
I think pros have by-and-large completely forgotten and lost the spirit of the DSLR movement back from 2010-2012 as they sought efficiency. XLRs, built in NDs, yadda yadda. Blackmagic as well, when they ditched the small cameras and went all-out URSA on us. Canon too... Oh wait, they never got it in the first place, and they invented it!
Cameras should not just be about making money. That's how an art-form gets boring. That's how it dies.
They are not just about doing a job.
They're about creatively enabling artists and they're about democratising the art form so that price doesn't act as a road block to new talent.
Of course Canon only care about profit, they are not interested in that.
The Olympus E-M1 II's stabilisation isn't seen on any of the pro cinema cameras. It's unique. It offers something creatively to the result that a bigger, more complex shooting rig simply does not.
On the audio side, so important creatively, small mirrorless cameras used to have limitations and some still do - but with XLR boxes with phantom power that fit in a hot-shoe, you can't really complain. Audio is not a big limiting factor on the Panasonic GH5.
I still know that pros have their professional reasons for going Cinema EOS or Sony FS or RED or even Arri... Workflows, codecs, ergonomics, power, performance, looking-the-part... I'm not denying their reasons for one second, it would be so naive to suggest they drop the workhorse cameras and use a mirrorless camera for paid work.
But the creative side of the small cameras is what matters to me and I think it is being overlooked as specs in the $6000-$10,000 pro market hot up.
Sure, you can shoot all day on a big battery to a small broadcast ready codec with the C200, very practical... But can you put a 1970's Super 16 lens on there? Can you increase the character of your images by a factor of 10? Does it have an anamorphic mode? Nope.
If I ever buy a C200... Shoot me. It's over.

Does it show exposure info (aperture, SS and iso) in all video modes? For example auto iso reading in manual mode?

It would be ironic if this new GH5 was a more 'stills' oriented camera with a higher MP count and reduced video capability.

Ummmm.... sorry to rain on your parade....
But... What if on December 15 they just put out a Firmware update???
Sure, there are patents and prototypes out there...
But, isn't it a bit stupid of any company to announce anything 10 days before christmas and/or boxing day?
I'm thinking of this particular scenario:
Our spouses and/or partner may be thinking of buying you a GH5 for christmas.... and then you say.... no no wait for the December 15 announcement....  then you say... I want a GH5S.... then your partner asks.... when is that going to come out? In February/March.... OH.... Spouse/partner buys you a tie or mug for Christmas.

Fuji is rumored to have a video dedicated new camera soon also, maybe Panasonic is rushing things because a 2000$ APS-C camera, with a lot of native lenses (+recently released cheap cine lenses) and IBIS will compete with their GH5 really soon, rather than a double price-full frame camera from Sony. Buy a GH5 and a couple of lenses, or three, for 3000$, that ain't even the body of the Sony, and then you have to spend two times more for a couple of Sony lenses. I do not believe that a new A7s, that will be close to 4000$, will be the main competitor of the GH5. I am not even sure that Sony can implement 10 bit internal on that camera, but we will see.
I do not believe that Casey, or Andrew, or me, have to tell Panasonic about their AF. Do you think they do not test other people's cameras? or do not really hear the market? They can't just do everything at once, it is an evolution progress, and Panasonic invested on other things, that their cameras excel (like heat dissipation, continuous video recording, advanced codecs and formats etc). It took almost half a dozen years for Sony to put a bigger battery on their cameras, which wasn't that groundbreaking to start with, that grip was mainly empty anyway.
Canon C100mkII is still my most beloved tool, and Samsung NX1 second, an ancient one and a forgotten one. They both do the job 9/10 for me.

This is why I now just wear a pancake on my head for a hat...

a7S mk3 will not have all the GH5 specs/features but with a FF sensor.
 
I'll eat my hat if it does.

... Not to mention that Panasonic could customize the external housing of the smart adapters to follow the form of the camera, employing a extra reinforcement flange that bolts the adapter to the camera body.
 
Clueless EF shooters would mount (and electronically control) their lenses with no wobble... and they would be none the wiser that they were actually using an adapter!