John Matthews

From the video's description:
 

Does this still look like a "GoPro"?
 

I agree, the Sony looked super digital in that comparison.
I don't think it's a sensor size thing, as there are other videos from the GoPro that look more digital than the Sony did in that video, and if it was a sensor size thing then the GoPro would never look that digital.
No, but my impression if I'd seen it blind and had to guess would be a modern mirrorless of some kind.  It didn't have the magic of some of the older classic cameras, and the older non-classic cameras never get used anymore, so that only leaves modern cameras!  Still there are some shots where it looked sharp and the colours rec709-ish enough to look modern (like the slow-moving deep DOF wides from the drone).
In my mind the GoPro is now solidly in the territory where you can get almost any look you want from it, provided that you know what you're doing enough.  This is great news as the tools available have never been more accessible or easier to use.
It really does look like a great option if its particular quirks don't clash with your particular needs.

The 4k 100fps is just crazy detailed and lots of latitude IMO (given it's an action cam). I've been experimenting by taking short bursts of 5s and finding just the right moment, focus, FOV. I wonder if others shoot like this. It works fairly well as a substitute for having to take actual photos. I know it's not a real photo camera, but it works great in a pinch and with some interesting features.

Does this still look like a "GoPro"?
 

I think a lot of people don't understand what this revolution is :- )

Does this still look like a "GoPro"?
 

Does this still look like a "GoPro"?
 

GH2 hack project could be coming back soon without a dirty russian... stay tuned.

I have also been looking at the Panasonic cameras for Canon style Claude opportunities.
My S9 is very bolted down and not getting very far. My G9 II takes the ROM dump service mode key combo (AF-ON + PLAY + POWER ON) but the ROM dump options are like your G81 - they dump meta data and camera settings not a firmware dump from RAM so Claude can't take a look at the unencrypted ROM binary. The S9 doesn't even take the key combo which is odd as G9 II and S9 are same gen.
The other avenue in USB PTP commands to trigger a deeper service mode of some sort, but one of these commands crashed my G9 II so I backed off after that. Might be worth probing on a throwaway camera though.
After the GH1 and GH2 hack I think Panasonic bolted down the hatches! Still hopeful it can be figured out though.

I suspected as much... 
I have been attempting to use the gopro ils in a unconventional way, after my dad passed away we had a bit of a clean up. A box or two  of slides turned up, so i did some research and it seems the jjc slide copier does the job, so one of them was ordered. 

It seems to work ok once its assembled i have had the olympus 60mm macro lens attached to the e-m10 ii and i get ok images i think. There's a strong colour cast and a bit soft but for the nostalgia factor alone it wins, i guess. Oddly enough inside photos with flash come up decently sharp. I should add i suspect these slides are probably older than me. 🙂

The 60mm olympus doesn't work on the ils as the olympus is electronic and ils has no contacts and it came as no surprise that it didnt work lol. With the mission1 ils the only macro lens i have is a pentax m42 100mm f4. The issue i have is i think i'm let down by the minimum focal length on the lens is longer than what the jjc allows for. Wondering if some extension tubes attached on the front of the lens would help at all?.  Its that or i buy a shorter focal length macro lens, which i'm not keen to do at the moment seeing its mostly just an expiriment. 

Well, I guess it's too late to get the ILS- sold out everywhere it seems! Who saw that coming?
Some interesting comparisons with WAY bigger and more expensive cameras are out there now.
Obviously YouTube footage. I wish he'd don it in 4k 24fps or 8k 24fps. To my eye, the GoPro is heavily dependent on lens. The Sony looks super digital to me, but maybe it's the fact it's at 60fps. Is it possible that the GoPro takes off some of that ultra digital look but leaves the detail? Maybe it's simply a sensor size thing?

5 sec bursts might be an interesting alternative to live photos like on the iphone. I actually hate that feature and turn it off although it seems to turn itself back on every now and then . But for creative types a five second burst could be useful. 
btw nice sunstar at the end there 🙂

The 4k 100fps is just crazy detailed and lots of latitude IMO (given it's an action cam). I've been experimenting by taking short bursts of 5s and finding just the right moment, focus, FOV. I wonder if others shoot like this. It works fairly well as a substitute for having to take actual photos. I know it's not a real photo camera, but it works great in a pinch and with some interesting features.

Well, I guess it's too late to get the ILS- sold out everywhere it seems! Who saw that coming?
Some interesting comparisons with WAY bigger and more expensive cameras are out there now.
Obviously YouTube footage. I wish he'd don it in 4k 24fps or 8k 24fps. To my eye, the GoPro is heavily dependent on lens. The Sony looks super digital to me, but maybe it's the fact it's at 60fps. Is it possible that the GoPro takes off some of that ultra digital look but leaves the detail? Maybe it's simply a sensor size thing?

The 4k 100fps is just crazy detailed and lots of latitude IMO (given it's an action cam). I've been experimenting by taking short bursts of 5s and finding just the right moment, focus, FOV. I wonder if others shoot like this. It works fairly well as a substitute for having to take actual photos. I know it's not a real photo camera, but it works great in a pinch and with some interesting features.

You look great : ) It’s perfectly in keeping with the tone of your posts as always, and we’ve gotten used to it BTW ;- )

The 4k 100fps is just crazy detailed and lots of latitude IMO (given it's an action cam). I've been experimenting by taking short bursts of 5s and finding just the right moment, focus, FOV. I wonder if others shoot like this. It works fairly well as a substitute for having to take actual photos. I know it's not a real photo camera, but it works great in a pinch and with some interesting features.

The 4k 100fps is just crazy detailed and lots of latitude IMO (given it's an action cam). I've been experimenting by taking short bursts of 5s and finding just the right moment, focus, FOV. I wonder if others shoot like this. It works fairly well as a substitute for having to take actual photos. I know it's not a real photo camera, but it works great in a pinch and with some interesting features.

The 1/200 rule feels more like a starting point than a real answer, especially once the shot has any movement in it. Plenty of people will take nicer motion over clinical sharpness every time, which is basically why 16mm refuses to die.

ALL ABOUT IT:
https://www.eoshd.com/news/eoshd-backrom-hack-mario-64-on-the-canon-eos-r8/

I think it looks like a good deal to me.
The articulated screen is a big plus over the original cameras. L-LOG too (interesting that they took Leica's rather than make their own Sigma LOG or use Panasonic's).
ProRes RAW is to SSD. Internal 8bit Cinema DNG seems to have gone away.
All cameras need an HDMI port - far better it be full sized than micro.
Autofocus is a big improvement too, as is the open gate sensor, much less rolling shutter, higher resolution recording, bigger battery (the original used the same battery as the GH2!!)
I'd rather have one of these over the Z6 III, it only lacks IBIS and internal raw.
But as any GH2 owner will tell you... You don't really need either 🙂

There are so many trade-offs here it's impossible to actually discuss all of them in any sensible way, that's why I suggest simply trying them yourself, as the proof is in the pudding.
The recommendation of 1/200s is 4 times shorter than 1/50, so the recommendation for 13mm and 11mm lenses are vastly different despite the focal lengths being quite similar.  I understand this is a generic recommendation, but that only works for generic people, and I have never met any of those before!
I'm assuming your statement about the ILS producing more detail in RAW is about still images?  That's a whole other thing than video and these tradeoffs all go completely different since the modern standard for getting sharp images seems to require a shutter of 1/5000 or faster, if I go by the fact that people are photographing action sports and seem to want sub-pixel sharpness instead of their images representing the fact that there is any motion involved at all in the scene.
Anyway, I'll leave you to your assessments, but I can tell you that if you shoot video on a potato and upload it to YT at 480p with a 180 shutter and compare that to video shot on the BM 17K URSA with a 45 shutter and uploaded at 8K, there will be people who prefer the 180 shutter just because the motion is so important to them.  This is perhaps a drastic example, but a more practical one would be why anyone at all still shoots on 16mm.  It is completely technically inferior in literally every regard, and yet, people still pay a huge amount of money for the pleasure.

Interesting.  I'd imagine that a shoulder mounted rig would be quite stable in most circumstances, especially from the micro-jitters of smaller camera rigs.  
I've also found that shutter angle is a bit of a strange thing, where in some scenarios you want a larger angle and other scenarios it doesn't matter that much.  Often this was related to how large the motion was in frame and how visible it was (e.g. if it was a hard high-contrast edge or softer).
The output quality matters too - when I was testing my GF3, which does (IIRC) 1080p at 12Mbps (or similar) the shutter angle on many shots didn't really matter because the motion on a 180 shutter was comparable to the resolving power of the final image (it looks like quite compressed 720p footage) so for lots of stuff it didn't matter at all!  

I guess it's a tradeoff:
The more your hands shake during filming the blurrier each frame will be (motion blur) and the more stabilisation that happens after that the more that there will be motion blur in the footage without the associated camera shake and it will just look like random blurring (like the lens AF was pulsing, etc) The longer the shutter the more motion blur there will be in each frame The higher the resolution of the final result the more visible the intermittent blurring will be (ie, it will be more visible if you sharpen the footage on a 4K timeline and it will be less visible if you apply lots of image softening and grain) The higher your standards the more sensitive you will be to random blurring and to shorter shutter speeds For some people they're super sensitive to shutter angle, so are very intolerant to that.  If they are also sensitive to blur and are going to sharpen the footage and publish in 4K then they will have to hold the camera a lot steadier to meet their requirements.  
For people that don't care about shutter angle then just have super-short shutters and you'll have great results.
For people that want longer shutters but are going to soften the image a lot in post, or will be using much softer lenses, then they can afford to have shakier shooting because the random blurring will be far less visible.
For people that don't care about the motion in the image then they can be happy despite the fact that other people would be very unhappy.
In this sense it's impossible to know how you'll find something by just listening to other people.  Tonnes of people think that some of the modern Sony and Zeiss lenses are "soft" and I think they're completely insane, but that's just different taste.  In this case you probably have no idea how shaky your hands are compared to the next person, and there are no metrics that we can use to compare.
From my experience of OIS and how I shoot, I'd get FAR FAR sharper images from the GX800 than the ILS, because the amount of camera shake I would have is easily enough to make the frames blurry but less than most OIS lenses can compensate for.  In this sense it's not about the camera specs, it's about OIS vs not.