PannySVHS

Good question, the right one for our friend and sound master @IronFilm

Kye, I'm sure you've figured it out, but just-in-case you haven't, those gf3 batteries will work in the gx85. Quite a revelation for me, as I had three genuine batteries going to waste.
I love this camera and have recently thought about buying another one just to mount to another lens. I use primes and these cameras are too inexpensive not to consider that a reasonable move.
I often refer to this thread:
when in need of some inspiration to shoot with my gx85/ g85. The WB notes from Andy Lee are particularly of use. I played with those suggestions and have been much happier with the colors I get out of these cameras since.
 
 
 

Looks great, but looks just like Magic Lantern on the 5D, only with a higher resolution / less cinematic image.  You could downscale, but it's a small bump for a large price increase.
IIRC my new GX85 gives you zebras, focus peaking and waveform at the same time.  For $600, which includes two lenses. and it's not a dedicated video camera either.
LOL.  Canon.

@kye yes it covers it in 4K mode and in 4K photo mode. 16to9 with slighty dark corners. Love this lens, colour rendition is fantastic and threedimensionalty is terrific. Little lens was recommended to me by our friend mercer.

@mercer S35 has a faster sensor readout, 15ms vs 22ms. 4K 50/60p is 10bit 420. S35 is still even using a bit more than a 1to1 readout I think. It´s a powerful image taker but takes some effort in grading. I have a S1, same sensor and all, just no swivel screen and full Hdmi. S35 gives me the opportunity to use some s16 lenses covering S35 sensor size.

@mercer S35 has a faster sensor readout, 15ms vs 22ms. 4K 50/60p is 10bit 420. S35 is still even using a bit more than a 1to1 readout I think. It´s a powerful image taker but takes some effort in grading. I have a S1, same sensor and all, just no swivel screen and full Hdmi. S35 gives me the opportunity to use some s16 lenses covering S35 sensor size.

@kye yes it covers it in 4K mode and in 4K photo mode. 16to9 with slighty dark corners. Love this lens, colour rendition is fantastic and threedimensionalty is terrific. Little lens was recommended to me by our friend mercer.

I think I’ve seen aliasing on a brick wall shooting 60p to an external recorder. Real world use, not sure I’ve ever seen it.

I assume this has been discussed, but I don't have time to read the entire thread...
Are there any advantages/disadvantages to the S5's S35 mode? Is 4K 60p relegated to the S35 crop? Is it 10bit?
Thanks!

Music video of old familiar track shot on S5 4K V-Log 10-Bit 4:2:2 shot with 20-60 kit lens. AF didn't wander. Camera is small & light and powerful. Great shooting experience.
 
 

@PannySVHS I heard that you have the GX85 and Fujinon 12.5mm f1.4 lens.  Is this right?  Does the fuji cover the GX85 in 4K mode?  I'm eying off an eBay auction, but want to confirm it's a good option before buying one.

One tasty read! Thank you very much. Quality and fun stuff. Very grateful, puts a warm feeling in my heart n mind!
I think Lumix cams have a great colour palette as a start for grading, that´s G6, G7, GX85 and GH5 from my experience. S1 is a bit trickier to grade, with superiour possiblities and wiggle room but also more chance of hitting the wrong note so to say. GX85 is a beauty. Too bad is starts producing mudd under lower light conditions. But lighting for 800iso and F2.8 still gives perfect results, 1600 is limit under sufficient light.

That's interesting: I had this same model but the 128 gb version, and it wouldn't record anything above 30fps without dropped frames after a few minutes of shooting. The card also died completely a little more than a year after I bought it. I wonder if these 256gb ones have different specs and are better made?
I ended up buying a couple of the Angelbird ones that were tested for BMPCC and BMMCC and those have been flawless, but they are much more expensive than the Kingstons.

In which case I would certainly defer to that longer term usage report and say buyer beware then.

For anyone buying a Pocket or Micro for the first time - as well as those who already own them - there has been a challenge for a while now around buying new memory cards that actually work with them.
I've been using a specific Sony one that is reliable but very pricey and not always readily available but I had some Kingston ones recommended to me that apparently fit the bill so I ordered one to try it out.

EDIT >>
Happy to report that it worked in ProRes and RAW without any dropped frames on both cameras, including the 3:1 RAW at 60fps on the Micro.
Happy to report that it worked in ProRes and RAW without any dropped frames on both cameras in standard frame rates, but begins dropping frames at the 3:1 RAW at 60fps on the Micro but is OK at 50fps.
<< EDIT 
They are reasonably priced (sub €40 for the 256GB) and readily available from Amazon in different sizes up to 512GB.
https://www.amazon.es/Kingston-Canvas-Select-Plus-SD/dp/B07YGYCR3V
IMPORTANT > Please see @bjohn post following this one regarding long term reliability.

In my experience, there are two kinds of (serious) codec tests that people do.
The first is for when you have controlled shoots and you are trying to understand the absolute sweet spot of the camera.  For this, you shoot a controlled scene using a model (or two), test charts, and anything else you might think is usable, and you shoot it at 0, and then under and over by 1 stop, 2 stops, 3 stops, 4 stops.  Then you bring everything back to proper exposure in post and look at the skin tones and noise and other image attributes.
This is used in seriousness by professional cinematographers who do the tests and then work out that perhaps the sweet spot is +0.5 stops, and they'll shoot the camera there for every shot on 8 and 9-figure productions because that's the best place for skin tones, or whatever.  "You expose camera X at X stops under/over" is common knowledge once a camera comes out and is tested and everyone will do that - why wouldn't you?
The second is for when you're not shooting in controlled shoots and you want to know how far you can push the camera.  For this, you shoot a range of situations and deliberately push the camera in all sorts of ways, under and over exposing in a range of circumstances, doing things like in low-light under exposing with native ISO and raising in post vs rising ISO in-camera etc, filming in mixed lighting and fixing in post, filming in radically contrasty lighting, filming highly saturated things like neon signs and car tail-lights to see how it handles extreme saturation, etc.  These tests are designed to work out how far you can push the camera.
Taking one shot is suitable for neither scenario and tells you very little.  It's.....lazy.
I'd suggest that the people who use 5D with ML are actually out shooting rather than talking about cameras.  It's one of the closest matches there is for an Alexa (the others being OG BMPCC / BMMCC, and maybe Sigma FP, etc) so once you get that setup it's camera choice = solved so move onto next choices like lenses and lighting and composition and story and then navigating the entire process to make and publish something.
Here's a test I did with the GH5 10-bit 150Mbps mode, which isn't even the GH5s best mode BTW, in trying to break the codec.  


I chose a flat looking scene and tried to break the flattest looking part of it (the clouds) to see what was there.  This is informal but is an example of a test to see where the limits of the 10-bit are.
I'm not in the R3 target market (or Canon Cripple Hammer target market for that matter) but if I was spending $6K on a camera then I'd want to know:
where the sweet spot of the camera is how far I can push the darn thing and still get a "nice" image (ie, acceptable for a main shot - according to my standards) how far I can push it and get a shot that is still usable in an edit (ie, for 1 second) ..and you want to see some work that puts things in context?  Sure.  I am an amateur who shoots travel and events for family and friends in available lighting (which is absolutely awful lighting BTW).
Here's a couple of videos where the camera was pushed beyond its/my capabilities.
and 
and lest you think I don't know WTF I'm doing, here's a test video I shot where the camera was within its capabilities.
Of course, all of this is hypothetical anyway, because if I was spending that much on a camera (the R6 costs about as much as all the cameras I have ever purchased put together BTW) I'd pretty much be asking Tarot Card readers for their opinion on it before listening to Jordan! 

Thanks, that's a great idea and might have even added to the summer feeling of the song - even though i was happy that i got some nice summer colours out of the fX3 - that would not have been possible with the a7iii i used before.

I have the S1Alex Alexa conversion which I’m using with the S5 with great success. It’s for V-Log footage but includes conversions for HLG and CineD which I’m also using. So as much as I understand that it’s not the same camera, I’m currently experimenting with using the conversion on CineD footage from the GX85. I have not made many tests yet (let alone scientific ones!) but to my eyes the GX85 footage behaves in a similar way so the end result is pretty close. 

If you want to drill down into the different permutations of the elements within the profiles then I'd humbly suggest that you have a look at my profile stepper application which will automate the process for you.
Here are examples of it being used on an FZ2500 (but obviously works on the GX85 and all other Panasonic cameras) to run through the contrast and saturation permutations of the profiles.
CINE LIKE D
 
SCENERY
 
VIVID
You can choose as many or as few parameters to change as you wish and the range of them so in these examples I'm only looking at Contrast from -5 to +2 and Saturation from -5 to +3 but you can go the whole hog if you wish to and do +5/-5 on every parameter if you are looking for a total in-camera look for example. I'd be tempted to include the NR one as it will have an impact on colour.
The interval for the parameter changes in those videos are set to 3 seconds but you can adjust it obviously in the app.
Its easy to generate the subtitle file to embed into the video like I've done here if you wish but it has a display mode whilst running so you can just use the screen of the phone/tablet to show the changes like below.

Unfortunately, the shadows and highlight controls are not accessible externally so can't be included in the automation so especially if you are looking for a total in-camera look (or just for completeness) then once you are in the ball park of the profile that you want then I would be inclined to re-run the stepper with smaller permutation changes of contrast and colour only with manually set shadows and highlights permutations. 

Now for reference, and thanks to the beauty of standard colour checkers, let's review what the P2K and Alexa look like.
From this rather handy video:
I pulled various scopes.
It's likely to be relatively pointless (and depressing) to compare the GX85 Dynamic Range with these, so I'll skip that and focus on the hues.
P2K Primaries:

Alexa primaries:

Things to note here are:
Both these cameras have strong looks Orange and Teal directions are much more saturated than the Green / Magenta directions Hues in the Orange and Teal quadrants are rotated closer to the mid-point, with the Teal quadrant more compressed Both the P2K and Alexa pull the Magenta towards Red and leave the Green mostly untouched The P2K is stronger than the Alexa even, with its Magenta being almost on top of the Red, and with lowered Yellow saturation it's really skewing the colours to the Red / Cyan line, rather than the Orange / Teal line Personally, I think the P2K profile is a little too strong a look for me (you might disagree which is fine) but it's useful to see that the P2K and Alexa are both in the same direction from a "correct" look (with the colours in the reference boxes).
As such, I'll proceed to compare the GX85 with the Alexa colours.
GX85 Natural:

Alexa:

GX85 CineD

We can't compare absolute levels of saturation because I didn't perform the P2K test, which has also been put through YouTube compression, but we can look at the relative hue and sat of the hues.
What I'm seeing:
Alexa has similar saturation between Red and Yellow, Natural has Red>Yellow and CineD has Red<Yellow, but these are always adjustable Natural has similar Magenta to Alexa, with CineD giving it more saturation and it being less rotated towards Red Green in CineD seems to match better with Alexa CineD representation of Blue and Cyan is too saturated (comparing to Red as reference) but Natural is also too saturated and with a less accurate match In terms of which one to choose when grading to match the Alexa, I think you could use either profile.
The challenge is that you're capturing in 8-bit so you want to match in-camera as much as possible.  For this:
Both CineD and Natural have the highest shadows of any of the GX85 profiles I tested, so are more likely to contain the whole DR from the camera Levels of saturation are a balancing act, too much sat in camera and you'll clip strong colours, but too little in-camera and you'll be amplifying noise when you boost saturation in post Now to match the CineD to the Alexa.
Unmodified CineD

Alexa - with colour balance and sat

GX85 - "Alexa conversion" (ha ha ha)

Just for fun I used the new spiderweb tool thingy in Resolve to match them:

Next is to test it on real footage.

Now I've "made friends" with the GX85, I'm now looking at its colour profiles.  I've installed the CineD / CineV hack from @BTM_Pix so are including these in my testing.
In these tests, I'll be:
Looking at what the colour profiles actually do, with a colour checker and scopes Comparing these profiles to the colour profiles of the P2K and Alexa Grading selected GX85 colour profiles to match resemble the P2K and Alexa Working out what the best combinations might be and just generally working out what setup I will implement First, what do the colour profiles actually do?
I took the GX85, 12-35mm f2.8 lens (at 35mm) in the 100Mbps 4K mode, and shot my colour checker in direct sunlight.  I then brought those into Resolve, cropped, and blurred a little for cleaner traces in the scopes.  
I actually clipped the white square on the checker a little, oops!, but no test is perfect and neither am I, however I think the results should still be useful.  Here goes.....
Natural - let's use this as the baseline.
For those unfamiliar with these kinds of tests, it is worth noting a few things though:
Firstly, this profile is NOT NEUTRAL.
Anyone who's seen a colour checker in real life can tell you that the colours in the two middle rows (the two below the greyscale) are all about equally saturated - ie, very saturated.  These are the colours that are meant to go in the little reference boxes on the scope.  Notice how the red trace almost reaches the R box?  Notice how the pink and purple boxes look really pastel? Overall the profile is much more saturated in the upper-left (orange) and lower-right (teal) directions.  This is a relatively typical colour palette that looks pleasing. Also notice how the colours are rotated towards those two directions?  it's especially noticeable in the teal direction where the blue is rotated clockwise towards the Cyan reference box, and the cyan is rotated anti-clockwise towards the Blue reference box. These characteristics give a nice starting point, and are very commonly seen in colour profiles in general, although as the name says, this is a relatively Neutral implementation of that look.

Scenery - it's basically the Natural profile with more saturation, except notice the green is pushed slightly towards blue to give a but more hue separation in the greens.  Oddly enough, that might help give visual interest with scenery shots!

Portrait: Similar to Natural but more saturation (less than scenery) but this one slightly compresses the skin-tone ranges, pulling the yellows towards orange and the reds slightly towards orange too.  This helps to mask blemishes and uneven skin.  Nice. 

Vivid is..... vivid.  Panasonic really deliver huh!  Like natural but with heaps of saturation.

CineD.  The legend.  Lots going on here!  Here's what I see:
Slight compression of skin-tones and desaturating right on that hue Higher saturation of all colours except yellow-greens (a hue I know I dislike) and mauve (a hue named after an old lady) Also slightly compressing tones in the teal direction
CineV which is obviously more contrasty with a much lower black level, and consequently is also more saturated than CineD, but is also slightly more "correct" with some hues being closer to their theoretically correct locations, for example, the Red is now almost perfect.

If you take CineD and pull the shadows down then you get something very similar to CineV, only with more saturation (contrast creates saturation).  If you then drop the saturation a touch to match, you notice that CineD creates more even saturation between the warm tones and cooler tones, whereas CineV has more saturation on the warmer tones and less on the cooler tones.  Note, this isn't a WB difference - this is with the WB set correctly on both profiles.
TLDR;  
Natural profile isn't natural, but is a moderate amount of a relatively common colour profile pushing things towards orange and teal, and compressing skintones for more flattering skin rendering.  Other profiles kind of build on this foundation and kind of do what they imply with their names.  
CineD and CineV are a bit more complex again, with the main difference being the amount of contrast.

love it. wondering if dv cam look or at least 480p from a ccd would have worked as well. Content is queen n king in your video. Of course with DV or any old school camcorder format the highlights would have been really ugly but some HD scanlines in Post would work.:) Anyway, nicely shot and edited. Sommer, Sonne, Kaktus! 🙂

Would love some more love for Canon 5d raw on this forum. Rather than topics about tech journalists. I used to enjoy Jordan and Chris. But my fascination for new cameras was the highest in the days of the gh2, gh3 and gh4, with some G6 magic inbetween. This cam tech youtube stuff is super videoish with dull images and astera lights of boredom most of the time. Kye discussed the phenomenon of microfilms and leisure time filming pleasures, personal vignettes with a personal and intimate approach. These tech channels do not inspire that. Jordan and Chris made many exiting videos for the camerastore but they were depending on the pioneering times of 5Ds, GH cameras and so on. Now its just a race for the lazy image with dynamic range overkill and pixel madness.

great write ups, kye. thanks! my dream lens is a zoom lens. just not sayin which one at the moment, just lemme check ebay again:) would love a 2x or 3x s16 lens for my bmmcc cuby. anyone?

The more I use the GX85, the more I like it.  I've taken it out with the 12-35/2.8 a couple of times now, including a street festival on the weekend where I got a bunch of shots of a friends kids running around non-stop, and the camera and lens kept up, even at F2.8 the whole time.
Some beach visit sample images from the 12-35mm F2.8 (probably wide open)..


and the festival outing, also 12-35mm f2.8 wide open, but this includes some shots using the 2X zoom mode too..




and a couple from an outing with the Cosmicar 12.5mm F1.9 wide open (and cropping into the image)...


The 12-35mm images are almost SOOC using the Natural profile (I hadn't put Cine-D on yet), just with some slight tweaks in post, but the Cosmicar ones above have been graded under a Kodak 250D / 2393 emulation process, which did surprisingly little to the colour actually.
The more I use the 12-35mm the more I appreciate a zoom lens for just getting shot after shot in fast situations, which is pretty much the key to having lots of options in the edit and keeping an edit fresh with lots of different types and compositions of shots.
I'd really like a longer lens as I got quite a few shots at 35mm with the 2X engaged, so I'm contemplating the 12-60mm F2.8-4 which seems to be a good match from the reviews I've seen.  Curious to hear others thoughts on this.
I found the Cosmicar a little challenging to work with as I composed for the screen and was then surprised in post with how much crop I needed to apply, so had a few shots where I was chopping peoples heads off etc.  I've ordered a cheap 28mm F2.8 m42 lens to go with my m42 speed booster, which will give a 43mm FOV, which is a little tighter than the 12.5mm Cosmicar which gives about a 35mm FOV once you crop into the image circle.  
I'll have to see how I go with it.  I'll need a 22mm lens on the SB to give a 35mm FOV and those aren't super common in m42 mount!  The alternative is my 17.5mm Voigtlander which is 38mm on the GX85 but isn't exactly vintage, so I'd have to look more seriously into filters to get similar flare characteristics (which is the part I love about vintage lenses).
The stabilisation is really good, and in combination with the 12-35 is just spectacular, and my regular camera is a GH5 so I'm guessing I'm not easily impressed.  It really makes me feel like shooting.  Great stuff!