Towd

Agreed.  All the photos we look at online are 8bit and rarely is 8bit an issue. For normal rec709 video profiles 10bit is a tad overkill although there can be some extremely rare cases where it can help.
The bigger plague of 8bit is some h264 encoders that are too aggressive in how they assume color samples will not be noticed as different and merge them as a macro block. You can have a frame from a h264 video in 8bit and an uncompressed png of that image also in 8bit and get more banding from the h.264.
Encoders try to figure out what is safe to compress together. The stuff we can't see with the naked eye.  If we can't see it there is no point wasting bits on it. So a 8x8 pixel block with very subtle green values may decide to make that a 8x8 block of one green color. This can cause banding where one would normally not have any in 8bit. Panasonic suffered from this on the GH4 when they added log. The log was so flat that the encoder assumed it could compress areas of color into big macro blocks because the values would not be noticeable. If the shot stayed as log they were right but because the log was flatter than other log profiles it really struggled with areas of flat color like walls when graded. Sony's encoder did better at not grouping similar colors.  At least up to S-log2. S-log3 could suffer from the same issues as Panasonic V-log on the GH4 on older Sony cameras.  The GH5 had an improved encoder that wasn't as aggressive with 8bit and areas of similar colors.

Looks like they went full retard with the full frame aesthetic.

We don't really know enough about the GH6, but 5.7k 60p and 4K 120p are both great. I'd wait before calling it underwhelming. 

A lot of this is due to 32bit float color space in NLEs. As long as the 8bit has enough to not have posterization the 32bit float will likely be able to fill in any gaps as the image is pushed hard. Grading is much easier for math to fill in gaps than say upscaling an image.
In the case of upscaling new pixels can be averaged but averaging doesn't work for fine details like a hair. Grading however we are trying to prevent posterizing.  That is done through smooth gradients.  Sometimes averaging surrounding values does perfectly.
For example if you have a color of value 200 and another value of 250 its easy in grading to averaging an in between value of 225 which still creates a nice smooth gradient.
Where 10bit is important is making sure the shot is captured well the first time.  Once you have posterization it will always be there and no 32bit float processing can magically make it go away. Visually ion the shot has no posterizing than no matter how hard it is pushed it likely never will have any or pushing the 10bit would show just as much. Thats why 32bit float was created.
10bit is a lot like 32 bit audio or 16 stops of DR that are graded down to 10 stops.  We record more so we have it and can better manipulate it.  Most of the shots above likely would have still looked good with 6 bits. You need a very long and complex gradient to break 8bit.  It can and does happen.  The more noise the camera has the less it will happen because of dithering. I think this is partially why Sony always had such a high base ISO for log.
Finally 10bit never promised to have better color, more dynamic range or less compression artifacts. Thats not what bit depth does.  Its all just about how many different color samples can be used across the image. The single and only real side effect is posterizing. Many computer monitors at one point were only 6 bit panels even if they claimed 8bit.  Most never really noticed unless they did something like use the gradient tool in Photoshop to span a full 1920 wide image. In the case of the clear blue sky image in the article that wasn't even a difficult gradient. Most of the sky was a similar shade of blue. To break 8bit you need to create a gradient going from 0 blue to 255 blue across the full 3840 pixels for 4k video. That means there is a unique blue sample every 15 pixels if you create a gradient like that. So your sky needs to go from black on one end of the screen to bright blue on the other side. Not always realistic but you can shoot Skys around dusk and dawn that spread the values out a lot more than mid day. By comparison 10bit has a unique blue color sample every 3.75 pixels for UHD video.
It doesn't even have to be something that covers the full screen.  If you have a gradient over 100 pixels from 200 blue to 205 blue that still means a new blue sample every 20 pixels.  Even though the screen area is very small. I develop mobile apps and when I add a gradient I run into the same problem trying to do a subtle gradient across something like a button. The gradient needs enough range to cover the area of pixels or it will look steppy. 10bit and higher is a safety net or guarantee to likely never have any kind of posterizing. In the professional world thats important and nobody wants surprises after the shoot is done.

Via Panasonic Instagram.  It looks like multiple GH bodies could be announced.
"We are pleased to announce that they will
present an expanded lineup of the popular LUMIX GH series at an online
launch event. The event will be held at
https://www.panasonic.com/global/consumer/lumix/ on Tuesday, May 25, 2021, at
14:00 UTC.
.
We are committed to addressing further to enhance the
G Series lineup and performance of conventional Micro Four Thirds
mirrorless cameras and lenses to meet the continuous demands of creators
who value the strong advantage that only MFT can offer.
.
More information will be updated in the future posts on the official Instagram account @lumix until May 25, 2021."

The more I learn about each aspect of the image pipeline, the more I realise that everything matters.
If you have a camera like the A7S3 where it's a good sensor, good image processor, and good codec, then the fact that it's 8-bit isn't too bad because the other things are fine.  
I've run into issues shooting 8-bit C-Log with the Canon XC10.  This should be a reasonable example of 8-bit done well as it's a Canon cine/video camera with 4K 300Mbps 8-bit codec, but alas....
Here's this shot, which I will admit is underexposed:

which gives us this when we convert the colour space:

but unfortunately, if we zoom into the seat in the bottom left:

Is this an 8-bit issue?  Is this a poor codec issue?  I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
Let's take another example:

Which after a transform gives this:

and look at the noise!

Now, is that ISO noise?  8-bit quantisation?  a "poor" 300Mbps codec on a Canon cine camera?
This is the vector scope, which clearly shows the 8-bit quantisation:

Yes, this is an extreme example with a low-contrast scene, a flat log profile, and 8-bit codec, but this was a $2K Canon cine camera with a 300Mbps codec.
So, I replaced it with a GH5, with the decisive factor being the internal 10-bit.  
Let's take this image here, a 10-bit HLG frame with almost zero contrast:

and actually try to break it by applying more contrast than you would ever use in real life:

and it holds together.  
Is that the 10-bit?  Is that the 150Mbps 422 codec?  Is that the fact it's a downsampled 5K image?  Who knows, but it's a night and day difference where with an 8-bit example I struggle to get a good image from a real world shot and a 10-bit image where I can't break it even if I tried.
I like to think about it like this - 8-bit can be good enough if you have a good enough implementation of it (unlike the XC10) but a good 10-bit implementation will give you security that you're not going to run into bit depth issues, so for me it's a safety thing.

it seems to vary camera to camera, the whole 8-bit vs 10-bit thing,

Like Panasonic S1H the 8-bit in vlog has the weird banded magenta thing and can render it unusable, Sometimes even in non-vlog profiles, but the 10-bit is great.

But the 12-bit BRAW for the Video Assist is just excellent! Such a huge jump up if you're going to do keying and heavy grading and so on.

It's so self sabotaging, because by doing this to your customers pretty much ensures that they're never going to buy your products again. 
I love my GH5. I love the XLR adapter. It is such a compact set up. I use it for everything from filming pro wrestling to interviews. I don't have to build up a rig unless I want to... just throw a lens on, connect the XLR adapter and you can get excellent results. No fuss. 
I WANT to stay. Give me a reason to! Can't lead the pack with specs now that full frame has caught up? Fine! Innovate in other ways! What's stopping you from putting a GH5 into a GX85 body? I'd buy two, along with a GH6! Nothing would delight me more than even smaller, lighter cameras! I'd carry one with me pretty much at all times! 
And I don't believe this notion that you can't sell a kick ass GH6 for less than a S5 because the truth is there's a segment of the full frame market that won't consider a M43 camera no matter what the specs are. Go for broke, fuck it! Or just give people what they want: I mean just adding phase detect AF alone to decent bumps in specs would sell a bunch of new M43 cameras! 

Yeah, I agree. They should have developed a new mount with a flange distance that could accept MFT lenses and played around with crop modes on FF that were perhaps larger than standard MFT to make it exciting. Perhaps a MFT standard crop and then a non-standard (or variable!) crop closer to APSC.
And what has Leica done for L-mount other than name it? Kinda lopsided relationship this alliance is.
Just much more excitement in the RF and E-mount spaces in my opinion.
I do like Sigma's L-mount cameras. I would just like to see mark 2 versions of them with a bit more ecosystem.
I suspect Nikon will release more compelling FF Z mount glass and probably killer Z DX telephotos....if they get around to it. They theoretically have a great mount to design smaller and faster lenses on.
It's pretty dumb if a GH6 is coming. They risk pissing off people who buy the Mark 2 and they are signaling (with the flaccid specs) to the diehard fans waiting for a GH6 to just move on.

I'd advised Panasonic to go full frame, but I was asking for this about 5 years ago and they moved too late. Sony had the chance to mature - expand the lens line ups and get prices down, they even got round to reorganising their menus. Shocking I know. The Panasonic S1 was great but now people are too heavily invested in Sony E mount lenses or even Fuji. The autofocus situation didn't help. The S5 is fantastic bang for buck but the body feels like a G100. Too consumer, evem compared to the A7 III. And it has to compete with the X-T4 and Fuji branding / film simulations too. Tough market.
Here's what Panasonic need to do now...
Cull almost 90% of the lower-end Micro Four Thirds line and focus on a big exciting GH6 launch, make it do what only the GH6 can do - unique sensor size, fast frame rates, no rolling shutter, add what was missing from the GH5 (phase-detect AF and ProRes / RAW) - pitch it against Blackmagic and sell it for around $2200. Rebrand it CINEMA GH6 INSTEAD OF LUMIX GH6 FFS. Even a mini-XLR and SDI port could help sell MANY GH6 bodies.
Stills is a different matter - in my opinion the market is pressing heavily toward full frame. It is in video too, but with stills cameras all being so similar, it is harder to give a small 2x crop stills camera enough 'uniqueness' to make it a viable alternative to full frame, especially now there are small full frame mirrorless lenses and the lower price Sony stuff like A7C. So the size and cost advantage of M43 is being whittled away even on the lenses side. Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 for L-mount anyone?
Clearly Panasonic is 99% committed to L-mount now.
I honestly think the writing is on the wall and there will be no GH6.
It would be a huge mistake.
My Kern Switar 26mm F1.1 is very tearful today.

Panasonic’s logic is baffling. They seem to think by neglecting m4/3 users they’ll incentivize them to switch to L-Mount. Instead, they’ll drive them to Sony, Canon, Fuji, or Olympus. At this point I wonder if their camera business is viable at all. L-Mount certainly hasn’t been a roaring success, which was completely predictable considering they foolishly chose to take on Sony, Canon, and Nikon where they’re strongest, 135 format. M4/3, at least, was a defensible niche.

Sony sensors are not made on the same production line as automobile chips!
It could be that some obscure old components in the GH5 could no longer be sourced and Panasonic is bringing newer parts into to a like-for-like camera that is basically the same, just a new badge.
However this does not excuse the lack of GH6!
The chips that are in short supply are actually mostly for more mundane stuff. They come off production lines that have been hammered for demand and switched out.
At the opposite end of the spectrum, the 5nm supply has been booked out by Apple at TSMC but that doesn't impact camera electronics either.
GPUs are in short supply because everyone is stuck at home playing games. Again not really related to camera image processors.
Sony has got the A7S III out and Fuji the GFX 100S so I am sure Panasonic can at least tease us with a GH6 development announcement?

Controversy is brewing!
Ever since 2017 the very significant army of Panasonic GH5 fans and Micro Four Thirds users have been waiting for the GH6. They did not all go out and suddenly change to a $4000 Panasonic S1H. Our feedback has been continually piped to Panasonic HQ in Japan about needing a professional editing codec like ProRes, phase-detect AF, 6K, 8K or preferably 4K/120p would be a reasonable expectation versus the Sony A7S III and even an internal RAW codec like Canon now has on the EOS R5. Alas our dreams are probably ended by the fact our dream GH6 camera would have to cost $3000 with all that, minimum – and in the current market who is going to buy a 2x crop sensor camera for that much? Alas the never inaccurate Nokishita has leaked specs which suggest an almost identical camera will be re-released instead, with the same 20 megapixel sensor as 4 years ago. This strongly suggests there will be no GH6 for eager Micro Four Thirds punters to look forward to.
What’s going on? EOSHD takes a closer look.
https://www.eoshd.com/news/disappointing-panasonic-gh5-mark-ii-specs-leak-in-japan-where-is-the-gh6/

Clipping occurs when sensor photosites are saturated and can't collect any more photons. There is no "raw" on planet Earth that can "recover highlights" from a saturated photosite. The term "highlight recovery" that everybody throws around is not a real thing. You either clipped and saturated photosites on your sensor or you didnt. You either crossed that threshold or didnt. Neither Log video OR raw sensor data can save you from clipped sampling. Pure white....is always pure white. So is pure black. This goes for both log video and raw.

Sony Semicon's Exmor RS line has now fully matured and will come in various sensor sizes - all 8K capable.
One of the first to make the debut is a 45MP Micro 4/3 (MFT) sensor with 2.24um pixel size.
More to follow.

While nothing specific on the GH6 other than they are still considering it, Panasonic did mention a new prime and “revolutionary” zoom are coming. My guess is that the zoom would be designed for video similar to the 10-25.  
 
https://www.43rumors.com/great-news-panasonic-says-new-revolutionary-mft-zoom-and-new-mft-fast-primes-are-in-the-works-along-the-gh6/

I'll go further and say there should be a future for M4/3 but might not since Panasonic's backed themselves into a strategic corner.
To start with, why should M4/3 hang around? Well, aside from the obvious benefits that it generally yields smaller and lighter camera kits —especially for telephoto—has sufficient image quality for both stills and video and is broadly supported, there’s two other distinct advantages. The first is, for any given sensor generation, a M4/3 sensor will read data off faster. This is where I think the traditional camera makers have gotten lost. Did the stunning jumps in iPhone image quality come from bigger sensors? They’ve gotten marginally larger, but no. The jumps have come from throwing massive amounts of computational power at the data, which means reading it as fast as you can. Blown highlights? Merge multiple exposures. Terrible low-light performance? Same! But with different algorithms. Excessive depth of field? Depth map! A smaller, but still sufficient, sensor like M4/3 fits the computational imaging paradigm better. And as a bonus, they’ll also hold an edge in IBIS, heat generation, and battery drain due to the smaller size and mass.
The second is smaller sensors—or more accurately, smaller image circles—have distinct theoretical advantages for lens design. I don’t pretend to understand the theory, though I do know the complexity of making lens elements increases with the cube of its diameter, so all things equal you should get better, smaller, or cheaper lenses for M4/3 for any given field of view versus larger formats.
Which leads to the tragedy of Panasonic going the L mount route (in the dumb business decision sense, not Romeo and Juliette). I get the rationale of wanting to consolidate their cinema and Lumix lines on one mount, and the logic m4/3 was too small for the former. The problem was they picked a sensor size, 135 format, putting them in direct competition with Sony and Canon, who offered, or were inevitably going to offer, soup to nuts mirrorless solutions, picked a mount designed for APS-C, and stranded their entire current user base. Heck of a job, guys.
Worse, since L mount is now their halo product, they’ll be loathe to undercut it by offering better features on m4/3, even if they’re technically feasible. So a GH6 that substantially outperforms the S1 or S1H? Probably not going to happen, even if S series sales continually underperform. But I would love to be proved wrong.

There can be a future for M43, it just really depends on if Panasonic wants there to be one and if they're willing to pull out all the stops. Everyone has caught up or surpassed them, so they need to do something that grabs people's attention like they did for the GH4 and GH5. 3 years ago I'd have said there is little doubt that they will but then came the LX100 II, G95, and G100. Those releases pained me as a Panasonic user because of how underwhelming they were, particularly given how interested I was in the LX100 II and G95. 
Things like eND, internal ProRes (even if not Raw), proxy recording (especially if they go with 8K), and other higher end features need to be seriously considered. And it needs to be competitively priced. 
You may never be able to win over the people that refuse to use anything other than full frame, but there are a lot of people that don't care about sensor size and care more about what it can do more than anything. I think the Pocket 4K and 6K, and even the ZCams, have shown that to be true. If your provide value it will succeed. If you don't then it won't. 
One thing is for sure, at least for me: if they let M43 go out with a whimper I don't see myself going with Panasonic or the L-mount. As much as I love my Panasonic cameras and as much as I'm tempted by their FF offerings, I'd really feel as though they abandoned us loyal M43 users. I also have my doubts about the L-mount in general, and Panasonic in particular. The alliance doesn't seem very unified, Panasonic lenses are still very expensive compared to their Sony equivalents, and Panasonic's stubbornness when it comes to AF in my opinion has become a serious detriment to the brand at this point. As much as I hate to admit it, the influencers have influenced people into making it into THE selling point and it's impossible to ignore how many people, from larger to smaller YouTubers, have left Panasonic. It's pretty much the first thing people tell me they want more when asking for camera recommendations. As much as it shouldn't, that stuff matters a lot now. 
I'm watching for developments and already looking at plan b myself. Plan b is just trying to decide between Sony and Fuji, though the unlimited recording with Sony makes it the favorite which doesn't make me very happy. 

Based on information coming from OM Digital Solutions it looks like a new sensor is coming later this year in an updated E-M1X. With their renewed focus on wildlife I would think this sensor would have a faster readout like a99/a1.  I would expect to see the GH6 around the same time with the same sensor.  
 
https://www.43rumors.com/qa-with-om-digital-solutions-uk-hints-a-new-high-end-e-m1xii-might-be-coming/

Found this IMX492LQJ poking around Sony's website.
https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/products/common/pdf/IMX492LLJ_LQJ_Flyer.pdf
It's a multi-aspect sensor that does 8k video and has an all pixel readout of 8432x5680.   The 17:9 and 4:3 modes are subsets of this.  I think it has a global shutter mode too.
Could be an very interesting chip for the next generation of M43 cameras.  I used to not care so much about 8k video, but considering a GH6 will probably need to remain competitive for a 5 year or more product cycle, it is probably something Panasonic should think about as it will be competing with full frame cameras and cell phones that already offer 8k.  I'd personally probably shoot 99% of the time in some 4k 10 bit VLOG mode, but having the option of going to 8k video capture for special situations could be ideal.
Honestly, if this offers great (S1 like) color science and a full 10 bit VLOG in 4:2:2, I could be happy with this camera for 5-10 years.
Fun times!  I'm still hopeful for the future of M43 now that we've had a round of full frame camera releases from all the major manufacturers.

I don't think we'd only get 8K.
Any 8K sensor would mean an update to the colour science, which Panasonic has definitely improved in other cameras since the GH5 and I think is one of the GH5s main weaknesses.
4K120 would be pretty good and would also be a bit headline grabbing which is cool too.
Depending on the data rates and the imaging pipeline they put in there, I wonder if it could do 8K60?
8K downsampling would be cool.  It also adds the possibility of a 6K mode that's also downsampled, which would be pretty newsworthy.  I'm not sure how many of the 6K cameras are oversampling, and back in the day there was a significant IQ bump from oversampling rather than just doing a straight pixel readout.
At this point I'm not sure what it would take to be revolutionary.  If you take the R5 and A7S3 and imagine something that would blow them out of the water and having people coming back to MFT, then what would it have to be?
Not only don't I think it's possible to deliver that, but I'm not even sure that if it did that it would connect with the market.  Imagine that it had a ridiculous configuration like 16K, 8K60, 4K240, 2K600, internal RAW, triple native ISO, eyelash AF for people animals insects and amoeba, 12-bit h266 444, and 8 hour battery life...  who would sell their R5 or A7S3?  
It's still MFT in a FF hype world, would people really be abandoning FF because "I need 16K" or "My clients require 4K240" or "I have to film at f11 at night under a new moon with no lights"?
My inspiration for the GH6 was for it to be a solid upgrade but keep it's workhorse status.  We're all about those specs here, but other GH5 forums I am part of online are much more focused on the work and how to get good results with it.  Many shoot in 1080p (gasp!) because they never once had a client ask for 4K, etc etc.  I suspect those people would think that FF was an advantage in the sensor size that was more valuable than 2K600 or whatever.
Which I guess is a way of saying that beyond a certain point people don't care about specs when they're 'good enough' and I think that the pack is probably good enough for most, so going further doesn't really help much, and what people will pay for is an upgrade that is meaningful, which leads me to....
My logic for that thread was that now we're about to get a $6K medium format camera that is 'good enough' for most people (either internally or with the 4K Prores RAW) we can get a massive increase in sensor size, which is something more valuable to me than 4k120 or 8K.  
In a sense, my issues with the GH5 are minor enough that even if they fixed everything wrong with it the upgrade probably wouldn't be worth it for me.
I've recently worked out that the difference between videographers and film-makers is that videographers are having to please many future clients who may demand 4K or request radical changes in post so the priority is to be as flexible as possible, thus buying a camera with high resolution and frame rates and sharp lenses.  Film-makers only have to please one client at a time, and if there are particular requirements they can hire equipment without losing money, and if they have a good enough reputation or are independent then they only have to please themselves.
As someone who only shoots my own projects, this means that my camera purchase only has to please me and I'm not interested in 'what-if' questions about pleasing others.  I seriously doubt that anyone is buying the A7S3 because they have their own needs for 600Mbps 4K ALL-I or 4K120 422 10-bit.  Rather I think they will be buying these cameras because they don't know what future projects require and want to cover their bases and never have to turn down work.

Yeah, I feel the same, but seeing some new m43 sensors on Sony's website makes me think someone may pick it up and run with it.  It is still my favorite system for casual shooting and travel photography.  I've been lurking in the medium format thread and I think @kye may be on to something regarding a medium format system as a supplement to m43.  If money becomes no object for me at some point, I could see picking up a large format system for messing around with once in a while for that unique look.  But 90% of the time, I'd still just want to grab a trusty and compact m43 camera and have fun.  Hopefully, capitalism and the free market (or Panasonic) will take care of us diehards.  😎

Yeah, I feel the same, but seeing some new m43 sensors on Sony's website makes me think someone may pick it up and run with it.  It is still my favorite system for casual shooting and travel photography.  I've been lurking in the medium format thread and I think @kye may be on to something regarding a medium format system as a supplement to m43.  If money becomes no object for me at some point, I could see picking up a large format system for messing around with once in a while for that unique look.  But 90% of the time, I'd still just want to grab a trusty and compact m43 camera and have fun.  Hopefully, capitalism and the free market (or Panasonic) will take care of us diehards.  😎

Good info thanks. I'll move it to the GH6 thread

It appears Sony has a new M43 sensor that is 30+MP and is capable of 8K. 43Rumors lists it as an FT5 on their scale:
"At the beginning of November I got solid info that Sony will launch one new MFT sensor in 2021. I now got the confirmation this sensor will be able to record 8K video and have a 30+MP resolution. Now I have little doubt this is the sensor that Panasonic will use on the GH6."
I really hope it's not just a GH5 with 8K, which I won't need for years and years. It's gonna be hard to get me to upgrade right away no matter what they release but just the ability to do 8K or even 4K 120p isn't going to be enough. For me this release is as much about figuring out if M43 is worth sticking with for at least the next 5 years or if I should plan to move to Sony or Fuji sooner rather than later. As much as I love what I've seen from their full frame cameras, I am very worried about Panasonic long term if they are going to remain behind on things like AF even if I really don't need those features myself. Regardless of what I want or need, the market has spoken and you need to meet their expectations if you plan to stick around.