John Matthews

http://www.duracelldirect.es/camara-digital/panasonic/oem-pno/dmw-blg10.html
The price has gone up. I was buying them for 11€ before. Bought a charger as well.

Re moire: 
 
This is 1080 50p. For most people this situation will arise infrequently. You're right that looking at the 4K version at 1:1 there was virtually none. 

OKAY, here is the quickie test, regarding e-stabilizer or no.
Agreed, this is insane to hand-hold 135mm with tele-converter ON (effective=270mm!), but I wanted to try to push the stabilizer to the max.
Result is really quite good, but the e-stabilizer caused "tremor-artifacts" as it freaked out in the 2nd take - I was holding the camera with elbow propped up on the window sill continuously and NO, this is not an earthquake region. So I will stick to advice previously given by Andrew and others; leave the e-stabiliser OFF!
 

To each their own really. But there are some technical benefits to adding grain, like how it can sometimes help prevent blockiness and banding from youtube/vimeo compression

Yeah, I guess rotational could mean roll, pitch and yaw. But with the e-stabilizer definition, they explicitly state, "Jitter during motion picture recording is corrected along the vertical, horizontal, roll, pitch, and yaw axes by making use of the In-Lens Image Stabilizer, In-Body Image Stabilizer, and Electronic Image Stabilizer. (5-Axis Hybrid Image Stabilizer)"
It's obviously a poorly written manual, and if "normal" IBIS worked as well as e-stabilizer, I would chalk it up to that. But since it does not, that is why I am questioning it. Do you have an ois lens? I don't have one, but that would be the way to test it. If Dual IS works better than Normal, but the same as normal with e-stabilizer, then I would suspect that the normal ibis is not true 5-Axis. 
That was going to be my next comment. In the end it doesn't matter. As long as everybody is happy with their settings, then who really cares, I just wish Panasonic was a little more clear with their instructional and marketing materials.

Well, in the end it doesnt really matter whether anyone says that there is a decrease in quality if you dont notice / care, right? I am using the e-stabilizer and I am very pleased with the results, so why should i turn it off?

Might be irrelevant, but:
1) You have to make sure your stabilizer is set for the proper focal length. 
and 
2) The stabilizer is actually working. I have 2 gx85's. On one of them the stabilizer has actually got "stuck" a few times. 
The description of your ibis performance does make it sound like it's not performing adequately; through user error or malfunction.
I'd also advise that your moire could well be a computer display issue rather than the actual footage. I just did a shoot with a lady in tight stripes. Morie looked pretty bad in the edit window, but when I watched the footage full-rez, it was fine.  

I'll give Hybrid 5-axis a go and report back. IMO the GX80's IBIS is pretty good, taking out almost all the micro-jitters, which is what you really want anyway. Does it replace a tripod? No, but I'm sure if you turn off IBIS altogether, you'll notice a huge difference.

I'll give Hybrid 5-axis a go and report back. IMO the GX80's IBIS is pretty good, taking out almost all the micro-jitters, which is what you really want anyway. Does it replace a tripod? No, but I'm sure if you turn off IBIS altogether, you'll notice a huge difference.

The manual is a mess. Panasonic probably gave it to some Japanese kid to translate it for $10, ans he used Google Translate. 
 
There is a video on Vimeo with the eStabilization (with and without), and there is a slight improvement in the already excellent stabilisation. Though it crops in further into the frame, and thus is a curious tradeoff. 

OK, I take a stab at an answer, since posting Panasonic's own table only caused additional confusion. Perhaps the key lies in Panasonic's use of the word "HYBRID" in their chart. I.E. that in the chart, where only "BODY" is listed for non-OIS lenses (not using E-stabilization), they really do mean 5-axis IBIS... just are not calling it that (for whatever marketing/translation reasons)?
 
 

No. E-stabilization never needs to be activated. Not sure why they've included that... just confuses people and reduces image quality.

I made a test comparing iso 400 - 6400 on skin tones if anyone is interested:
It looks pretty good up to 1600 and I think, but it's still usable in from 3200 all the way to 6400 in some situations. Might need some noise reduction though...

Although I haven't done this myself, I believe @Andrew Reid mentioned it in his preliminary review of the GX80. This is what he said:
"But there’s more… the camera’s new processor can record 4K to the SD card internally at 100Mbit/s AS WELL AS outputting the full 4K 422 feed to an external recorder for high bitrate ProRes at the same time. "
So yes it does.  
It looks as though you're getting some really good colors with Davinci indeed... the greens are fantastic! Unfortunately, I don't have enough experience (or time) with it to say what a GX80 signal would produce... my impression is that you're 16 and 960 refer to a luma range... I thought it would appear at 0-255 on the GX80, but I'm not sure.
I've seen this myself, but why would 8-bit Log files exist? All them have saturation and contrast increases after applying a LUT... videographers use them all the time for serious projects. Is it "o.k." with 8-bit Log, but not with non-log? I still find there's quite a bit of color in a sat = -5 GX80 file, sometimes I'd say it looks closer to what I saw.

Based on your guys highly valuable comments, here is another series. This time i compared STD -5/-5/-5/-5 with STD -5/-5/-5/0 to see how the image looks like with a "neutral" saturation.
Lets start with the OOC shots (4K 25p):
STD -5/-5/-5/-5

STD -5/-5/-5/0

And here is my grade:
STD -5/-5/-5/-5

STD -5/-5/-5/0

My conclusions: I had to lower the saturation by 25% for STD -5/-5/-5/0 to avoid turning my skin orange. After that, both shots look pretty similar. The -5/-5/-5/-5 is a tad darker and the -5/-5/-5/0 offers more detail in the shadows, yet has a bit more noise (although not unpleasing). If wanted i can supply the video files as well.

I made a test comparing ISO from 400 - 6400 with the GX85 and GH4, and GX85 is (as we already know) really good. Wonder if the GH5 will go all the way up to 12800, as seems it could be usable with a little noise reduction applied. 
 

Agreed.  -5 is the max desaturation, but there's still a good chunk of color info there.

Yup.  Those charts are how part of how Inazuma comes up with his LUT's, for example.

I think Sony, in their guide to Picture Profiles (including S log), explains it very well why getting it right *in the camera* is the best way to get high quality video that looks like what you want. This is especially true for 8-bit 4:2:0 video:
"Picture Profile adjusts colors and the vividness of the image during recording. You can make
similar adjustments by using nonlinear editing software after shooting. But there are the
following differences.
To fit massive amounts of image data in a limited memory capacity, this camera compresses
image data when recording. No matter how advanced a compression format is, any data
compression inevitably deteriorates image quality somewhat. Applying sharpness, gamma
curve correction and other video effects to recorded images by using nonlinear editing
software worsens the image condition further by processing already deteriorated images.
For example, if video compression leaves the image with poor contrast or block noise in
some areas, applying video effects often make the problems more noticeable.
Because Picture Profile processes video signals before compressing, it changes the gamma
curve and corrects colors before image quality is damaged by compression. This makes it
possible to carry out highly precise image adjustments while keeping the quality of the
subject intact. It should also be noted that recording images with proper contrast is crucial. If
image contrast in dark and bright areas is not recorded properly, this will result in
underexposed dark and overexposed white areas with no gradations. This means you
cannot change image contrast properly later on with nonlinear editing software no matter
how hard you try because there will be no gradations to work with.
If you intend to process your video with nonlinear editing software later, it is important that
you record your image in the right way.
Nonlinear editing software is a very powerful tool, but can’t fix everything. If you adjust
various settings to make sure your video is recorded in a way that matches your ideal as
much as possible, you will be able to create a video that will be closer to what you have in
mind with minimal processing via nonlinear editing software. It will also keep rendering time
short and make video editing work more efficient."
The italics are mine.
Color Profiles.pdf

Personally I think that if you have a tendency to increase saturation in post then you should avoid setting it to -5 in camera because when you increase it in post it introduces more artefacts. 

Hallo @PannySVHS (German?),
Truth be told... I'm not an expert filmmaker or colorist. I'm just an English teacher who really likes filmmaking. When I purchased the GX80, I was very attracted to its feature set and form-factor. Now, I'm trying to find the best way to get the most our of it, either as a  gradable image or straight from camera. The way I have been trying for a gradable image (with filmconvert because it's easy) was to look into the red, blue, and green channels separately to evaluate them.
My informal evaluation showed this: the GX80 has a tendency for a noisy blue channel and a red channel with almost a "halo" effect to it. I know this because I downloaded camera files from expensive cameras to compare.
So for the WB A3G3 (which was a recommendation from @Inazuma) I could see that the blue channel got increased just a tad, keeping it further away from the bottom 5% IRE values in FCPX; hence, it had less clipping. IMO, the closer you get to the bottom or top 5% IRE, the more chances of clipping. I also liked the greens I could get after grading.
This is interesting, Kamil. I think I've seen the "plastic" look you're talking about, but not so much on the GX80 (or Panasonic) files. I've been told this before: don't reduce the saturation too much on a 8bit file... but why? I thought it was more about banding. Can you explain more? Also, some say with 8bit: "get as close to the final image you want in-camera." So, what are people shooting S-log, V-log, C-log? They've all got 8-bit versions, supposedly "ready" for grading, all of which look really flat and unusable out of camera.
Personally, I'm just trying to get the best, consistent, gradable image from the GX80 using it as the only "tool" I have? Since, Mr. Reid isn't publishing a more detailed review on its IQ, matters must be taken into my own hands. Any other suggestions?  

Thank you very much! I have two layers, one with 7 nodes, another one on top duplicated and in Hardlight layermode- with two of the nodes altered.
I think one of the main things is one of the nodes of the lower of the two layers as seen on the Davinci screenshot below. Also attached a framegrab of a duck with colors I was really exited about to find in that 50p 28Mbit codec, with additional twixtor like slomo added!
cheers and regards

John Matthews: "I've been told this before: don't reduce the saturation too much on a 8bit file... but why?" Mainly to avoid usually incorect collor procesing. I'm adding an example to illustrate this. In the middle there is a +50 saturation added in 16 bit raw image during inport to ps. right is 8bit jpeg with 50 added sat in post. left is an extracted color layer overlayed over an image (which basicly mimics adding a isolated color data). Raw is obviously correct, right the most artificial. It might be even that setting higher sat in 8bit would be beneficial in post (lowering sat doesn't introduce artifacts), but it's a guess.

Hey John!
Thank you for your answer! So that means with A3G3 one gets closer to the yellows and greens and further way from the reds and blues? 5% IRE in FCPX would be
values 64 and 960 in Davinci?
I think colorwise the GX80 should be really nice when graded well and of course shot well with A3G3:) Also, on G6 I shoot Natural with color 0 and anything else in -2.
It´s not a look I adore out of cam but grades nicely to my eyes. Filmig with not too much saturation to avoid color clipping. Not too low contrast and saturation either to avoid "plactic" and false colors, as far as I would understand.
By the way, do you know if the GX80 can record internally when having a HDMI out to a small monitor solution?
best regards, Marty