PannySVHS

🤣 Unlikely. 
 
Not likely either. Which is sad, cause Samsung and Sony both presented papers on Triple Gain sensors (for smaller sensors, I guess), and if Panasonic wanted they could have made the most of the tech, for a M43 sensors. 
 
I thought it was established that the resolution advantage is mostly blurred after a certain point, and better noise, lenses etc mostly blur the lines. Steve Yedlin's and hundreds of other presentation on resolution go into the exaggerated claims and why after a point why it doesn't matter.
Arri's discussion on it seems quite interesting. 
https://www.newsshooter.com/2015/08/14/arri-managing-director-franz-kraus-talks-about-resolution-hdr-and-the-arri-65/
 
Mist interesting of all, Sony presented its stacked CMOS image sensor technology with 2-Layer Transistor Pixel, widening Dynamic Range and Reduces Noise by approximately Doubling Saturation Signal Level (since surface area isn't being wasted, because the photo diode pixel transistor are in the same level (so only 50% area is used for the photo diode). Theoretically this should sensor at the same pixel seem much better in detail and dynamic range. The question would be, by how much. 
https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/e/news/2021/2021121601.html
 
More than anything else I am curious why nobody feels the Blackmagic 12k Camera No Crop Resolutions is a big deal. Especially for its price point, shooting 12k at 60p  8k and 4k at 120fps, Without Cropping or Changing Your Field of View.
 
Wonder why nobody seems to have gone that path. 

Oh, hope they fixed the external HDMI lag also...

I think there are really two paths forward, the addition of mind-bending specs or just doing a solid upgrade and rounding out the whole package.  The A7S3 did the latter - it didn't up the resolution or any major features but just became a better all-around package.  I'd be happy with a GH6 that was a GH5 with the weaknesses remedied.  The GH5 was a workhorse with some weaknesses so I guess we'll see.

The thing is, they don't looks the same.  The testers even acknowledge that fact on the video (but they dismiss it).
Furthermore, they didn't actually set the cameras to look the same -- they set the cameras mathematically, according to the DOF formula, but they disregarded any inaccuracies in the aperture markings, and they apparently didn't match the effective location of the apertures.
 
Well, there actually seems to be general differences in the DOF from optics designed for different formats.  The difference is not in the location of the front/back DOF -- the difference is in how the focus generally "falls off" within and without the DOF range.
Unfortunately, like 99.99% of all such equivalency tests, we can't see how the focus falls off nor can we see the location of the front and back limits of the DOF range.  Here is what we see in the videos main test :
SOFT FG OBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SHARP SUBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SOFT INTERMEDIATE BG OBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SOFT OPAQUE BG WALL
Most such tests don't include the foreground object nor the intermediate background object, so I will give them credit for adding those items.  However, to properly conduct any DOF or equivalency test there must be a continuous ruled surface (or continuous line of closely-spaced, uniform objects) that runs from the near foreground to the distant background.  Such a proper set up will reveal the locations of the front/back DOF extremes and how the focus falls-off at those points and elsewhere.
 

It's not the case with digital where it is about how much light the sensor absorbs, not just how much light the lens is projecting.
You can still have a noisy image at F1.2
It is up to the sensor to gather the light projected onto it.
Some sensors like the Blackmagic Production Camera 4K with global shutter have a lot of front-side mounted circuitry that get in the way of using more of the available surface area for the diodes and microlenses.
Of course in video we also need to take into account exposure times, frame rates, etc. because higher ISOs to compensate for higher frame rates, shorter exposures, result in less signal to noise ratio, thus less light in the end result.
Nothing boring about the any camera let alone one as capable as the GH5 if you have good subject material to shoot and the right light.
The full frame look is popular because like slow-mo it adds a special sauce to mundane scenes... that is the look of the lenses at fast apertures on a large sensor can be very beautiful.
So to increase sensor size again with medium format does the same but more.
Alas it still will depend on the talent behind the camera and what you're shooting, as any camera no matter how capable can be used in unappealing ways! I've seen enough puke HDR landscape shots from a GFX 100 to know that the camera's usually not to blame!!

Oh I don't deliver nor expect to deliver anything in 8K soon but I can certainly notice the increase in resolution of 6K/8K footage or 6K/8K oversampled 4K footage vs 1:1 4K even on a laptop screen. Of course on my 5K iMac Pro the difference becomes crystal clear.
Also keep in mind R5C also shoots 5.9K which sounds like a good middle ground resolution option.
Sharpness isn't the main allure of 6K/8K for me though but rather the cropping possibilities. Even on a simple talking head interview. But also on product shots where you can zoom, pan etc from a static shot. Basically the same type of tricks 4K allows when you're delivering HD but twice the crop amount and/or for 4K delivery. So I definitely could see where I take advantage of those +4K resolutions.
I do hear what you mean about 8K footage looking too sharp/video but the key to alleviate that is using older/softer glass. All the R5 YT demos are using the super sharp/clinical RF glass. But pop even a EF 50 1.2L or older vintage FD lenses and you're probably in for a treat. 
For 8K stills, of course you might have to adapt shutter speed to avoid blur but the results can be quite nice:
https://www.lauschsicht.ch/2022/01/19/canon-eos-r5c-erster-eindruck-review-und-film/
Still  just on a IQ level, C70's DR & the low shadow noise and overall cinematic IQ of the C300II DGO sensor is definitely something to consider over 6K/8K resolution. The low DR on my R6 definitely limits certain types of shots, how you expose etc.

All good points, I've not had much luck taking stills from video unless there's little movement in the shot - slow shutter speed always creates blur, I guess shooting in 50p and 1/100 or even 100p 1/200 and bringing back to 25p in post could work but may compromise quality.
In my world I don't see 8k being asked for any time soon and by then there will likely be better and cheaper camera available. To be honest most of what I shoot still gets delivered in HD, your requirements may well be different of course. I would personally take better DR and usability over higher resolution and possible future proofing
Haven't noticed softness in C70 footage but maybe subconsciously that's what I've liked about it, some of the R5 8k footage I've seen looks almost too sharp and video like. Admittedly I've only seen it on 4k screen so maybe it comes into its own viewed at native resolution. Not experienced an 8k screen yet
Anyway nice to have choices I think you'd probably be happy with either, both camera produce a lovely image

The crazy thing is that a couple years ago everybody was complaining that Canon wasn't giving its customers enough resolution. Now they give 8K and people still hate them.

@leslie
You might wanna consider an additional IR cut filter when using stronger NDs. All BM cameras suffer rather strongly from IR polution. They also prefer 5600k over pure tungsten. Great idea with lego lighting.:) cheers

Sdi, timecode, internal nds,  a Super35 sensor with full VLog and Varicam color, an Oplf filter plus the announced specs, all that in a robust body with the outstanding battery life of the Lumix GH series! Percect dream (camera:).
The Gh4 could be coupled with a sdi and xlr extension. Why not offer something like that for the Gh6, just (much) smaller with a much more elegant power solution.

Correction: 16 bit is a number from CVP's claim on the C70's DGO. But I don't see how they came up with that number . . .
Technically: 2 x 14bit (16,384 gradients) = 15 bit or 32,768 gradients.
Still, it is much more than the 12 bit (4,096) in the R5's video mode.

Sdi, timecode, internal nds,  a Super35 sensor with full VLog and Varicam color, an Oplf filter plus the announced specs, all that in a robust body with the outstanding battery life of the Lumix GH series! Percect dream (camera:).
The Gh4 could be coupled with a sdi and xlr extension. Why not offer something like that for the Gh6, just (much) smaller with a much more elegant power solution.

Sdi, timecode, internal nds,  a Super35 sensor with full VLog and Varicam color, an Oplf filter plus the announced specs, all that in a robust body with the outstanding battery life of the Lumix GH series! Percect dream (camera:).
The Gh4 could be coupled with a sdi and xlr extension. Why not offer something like that for the Gh6, just (much) smaller with a much more elegant power solution.

@projectwoofer
Well, it does give you that but only out of the micro hdmi.😊 That's sick, all that huge data through that tiny micro hdmi port. 
But seriously, a 4999 EUR camera without a professional monitoring solution. I mean, i really expected a sdi port. The BSH1 has it , though no FF 4k50p and no internal raw.

this is the elephant in the room.
wheres my 5d3 raw color? "clay" is right, skintones seem flat with no depth or translucency

Personally, its too much camera for me, but if someone gifted this to me.... I wouldn't say no....

If you check out Kai's video where he tests O.I.S + E.I.S... it isn't half bad.... in my opinion.

The only thing is that Video. Off. Picture. switch.... what were they thinking.... again Kai shows that there is a lag too.... this is that thing where if you want to shoot candid moments that 8 second lag between that switch over.... you're just going to miss everything.🤦‍♂️

@leslie
You might wanna consider an additional IR cut filter when using stronger NDs. All BM cameras suffer rather strongly from IR polution. They also prefer 5600k over pure tungsten. Great idea with lego lighting.:) cheers

The notable updates.
- The ability to record 10 bit XF-AVC HD + Raw at the same time. Very cool. 
- Added Time-Lapse recording.
- Added EOS Standard and EOS Neutral. Also very cool. I've been bummed since the beginning that they removed these.

Now is a good time to watch a few lighting videos and try the various techniques on your little test setup.
First thing that comes to mind is putting up a bounce as fill.

All work and no play, makes for a very dull day. There's also the fact, its been raining  To remedy that i bought a cheap $13 led light and and lego kit and have been experimenting. 

A couple of hours of construction later, i had me a fast car again, albeit a miniature one. Must be near 40 years since i played with lego and i'm gonna call it therapeutic and quite adsorbing. 
Anyway they say to start small. Fairly confident you cant get much smaller than lego and its a convenient size. Learned i need either a brighter main light and or some additional fill lights. I'm thinking a small set like this could teach one a lot about lighting, without a lot of expense well thats my theory. Did i also mention its fun, there's also the possibility, i'm regressing.  
I don't remember lego having so many fiddly bits. Another thing to note is once i'd finished there were spare parts. Really i hope they included some extras as there was 1 of each of the really small pieces extra.  I wasted some time re reading the manual and i'm confident its all assembled is per the instructions.
 

I've bought the super-cheap eBay variable NDs and they're generally ok up until a certain point and beyond that they have the dreaded X in them.  I'd imagine that yours would be usable.  Even the name brand expensive ones have colour shifts, so just WB through it whenever you adjust it and you'll probably be fine!

Well, it's not my challenge, so I'm not the official adjudicator, but pretty sure that fame and glory is the reward...

Yes but some M43 lenses are actually wider than marked and it is AFTER the distortion correction is applied that they become that focal length.
I do not know if the 12 f2 is one of those (maybe not since it is a bit older).     There is a chance it MIGHT be something like 11mm or 11.5 (You can not out pedant a pedant!).
 

Wouldn't the Oly 12mm f2 qualify IF you shoot RAW and turn off corrections?
It has been many years since I had it.

This is a great camera someone like me that operates quickly and with a small agile crew.  I can fit a R5C, R5, and EOSR all battery grips into one bag plus lenses and audio gear….break them out and attach to a lens and tripod super fast for multi camera/angle shoots.  R5C will be my new A camera.
R5,EOSR, and C100MK2