Nathan Gabriel

I wish they had tested the video AF from a tripod. IMO the GX80's AF during video with IBIS doesn't really work properly. It seems to wait for the image to clear up, then AF. The 20 billion phase detection focus points on the Sony will be a tough match for the GX80's contrast-only AF... In Europe, good thing the GX80 has manual focus, plus you get 550 Euros left over for GOOD, high-value lenses.   I'm pretty happy about that.

I'm sure Andrew will do more comprehensive tests and show some artistic footage later. All I have time for right now is little tests.
To users of the G7, this may be kind of old news. But I'm finding with 4k and the improved processing compared to the GH4, you can raise shadows more cleanly than ever before on a Panasonic mirrorless camera. In this test, I shot at ISO 200 and exposed to just before the 105% zebras started showing. The first clip is the raw footage, the second is with raised shadows and the third is graded. With this method you can easily get a shot with the same tonality as what your eyes see and have absolutely minimal noise.
 

Not sure what you are after in regards to a "stable/secure desktop," but running an OS in a VM might not be the best way to test such "stability," because of the resource drain and potential glitches.  I have used a lot of different desktops and window managers in the past 14 years, and I never had any problems that I can recall.  I tend to use lightweight window managers instead of full desktops.  By the way, those who use tiling widow managers usually run circles around their "point-&_click" counterparts.
 
In regards to "pro and free" video and photo editors, the two are most definitely not mutually exclusive.  A significant number of pros use open source (free) software -- even photo and video editors.
 
 
For an NLE/compositor, you would probably be using Blender, Cinelerra, Lightworks or Pirnanha (proprietary, with the high-end version at US$250,000).  Kdenlive looks like a good NLE, and it is has become more robust and a lot more popular since I played around with it many years ago.  The studio version of the Lightworks NLE is probably pretty good, but I have never tried it.
 
There are numerous image editors/processors that run on Linux.  My favorites are GIMP and Darktable, but there is also Krita, CinePaint, RawTherapee, Raw Studio, Delaboratory, UFRaw, GTKRawGallery, LightZone, Pixeluvo (looks like an interesting processor/editor combo), Photivo, AfterShot Pro, Fotoxx, etc.  These are mostly raster image editors, and, of course, there are also a few open source vector image creators/editors.
 
 
Both proprietary and open source projects come and go, and no one can guarantee the future.  I am guessing that you don't want to stick with FCP.  For open source NLEs, Blender has a strong community with a lot of folks crazy about its editing capabilities.  The community version of Cinelerra is updated fairly regularly, and it has some unique capabilities (but its default theme is rather garish).  I don't know much about the proprietary NLEs, but I think Lightworks has a following.  I am keeping my eye on Kdenlive.
 
 
I wouldn't be so sure of that.  I would guess that a few others in the list of the open source image processors above can already read raw files from the GX80.  Open source projects can move fast.
 
 
Most of the raw image processing apps have fine color control.
 
I don't know much about RawTherapee, but Darktable has preset camera color profiles for certain camera models/brands/film stocks.  Darktable usually defaults the profile brand/model it reads from exif info, but I sometimes use an Agfa profile on my Canon raw images.  Of course, Darktable also allows one to create and save custom profiles.  I would imagine that RawTherapee and a lot of the other open source raw image processors offer similar preset/custom profile capability.
 
 
Judging from the fact that RawTherapee already has the capability to import the GX80/85 raw files, I would guess that there is some current activity in that project.
 
I don't know if people have moved from RawTherapee to Darktable -- there are so many options in the open source world, as evident from the above list if photo editors and raw image processors.  I use Darktable because that's what I started with years ago.

For Linux I highly recommend kdenlive. It's easily the best free NLE I've seen, it handles my gh3 footage no problem. I know there are better proprietary options, but you might be surprised at how capable kdenlive is.

ouch.
But the thing is, it's not really "the same in photo"- shooting still photography is a whole other beast than shooting video, in many ways. AF is great for stills because it's one static image. AF for video is irractic, having to choose 24 times a second what to focus on. I'm sure it will at some point get good enough, but there's a reason why focus pullers still exist, why AF isn't used for movies or television show. 
 

The camera which Panasonic can't decide what to call (GX80 in Europe, GX85 in the US and GX7 Mark II in Japan!) really excites me.
It's the first time that anyone has put 5 axis in-body stabilisation in a 4K camera which exceeds the performance of the stunningly good Olympus 5 axis system.
It's not quite as effective as a gimbal for sweeping handheld movement, but that pain-in-the-ass tripod you can certainly dispense with now, along with that Olympus 1080p mush too!!
GRAB A CUP OF TEA, PUT DOWN YOUR F***ING IPHONE AND READ THE LONG ARTICLE!!

Love mine so far... It's all about the stabiliser, leave the tripod at home... It's basically an Olympus E-M5 II with 4K video, none of the Sony menu troubles, decent physical control layout, good EVF and tilt screen.

Charging the camera... via USB! Nice.
5 axis IBIS works well with the EF Speed Booster with primes.... Not much luck with zooms or IS lenses yet, maybe Metabones needs to update firmware.
Loving the 4K image so far.

Andrew, there is some Glitch wrt to Uploading Pics from a Smartphone. I had to use a laptop, just to be able to Upload this Pic.

Anyway, I don't know why people continue to create confusion, when everything is outlined so clearly. Please read and watch everything, and stop misinterpreting things.

And, thanks ntblowz

It shouldn't break the deal, as perhaps you don't get 5-axis Dual IS, but you still get 5-axis B.I.S. with anything else... unless some new info has come to light I'm not aware of? Here, read some more: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lumix-gx80-gx85-review-29143 .

Panasonic not considering larger sensor in GH 
 

You can wait until October / November for a 5 axis IBIS GH5 with VLOG and 6K, plus upgraded EVF and body or you can get the bargain GX80 with the older sensor now, either way it's a winner

5 axis...
X
Y
Roll (rotation - this can be done mechanically for stills, or digitally with crop in video mode)
Pitch (tilt up / down correction)
Yaw (tilt left / right correction)
I can see roll, pitch and yaw being done digitally with a crop in video mode or via OIS.
It depends if the mechanical sensor movement covers all 5 axis, or just X, Y and Roll, using the lens for pitch and yaw (like Sony's system)
Does the Olympus system correct by tilting the sensor pitch and yaw? I think it probably does.
If so then Panasonic might be doing the same thing - all 5 axis on the sensor.
Then it would work with manual lenses with no electronic contacts, just like the Olympus system.
Or it may be that in video mode the electro-magnetic IBIS compensates for 3 axis (X, Y and roll) but uses electronic image shift with small crop to achieve pitch and yaw correction in 4K video mode. Maybe roll would be electronically compensated too.
OIS usually compensates for yaw and pitch.
EDIT: it looks like they do indeed have 5 axis IBIS so the sensor can move on the X and Y axis, plus rotate, plus tilt horizontally and vertically. So same as Olympus.
What they do with the OIS is probably improve the yaw and pitch control by switching the IBIS to 3 axis and doing the other 2 on the lens. This might reduce image warping especially with wide angle lenses. This was an issue with the Olympus system in video mode

I hope they'll feature the 5 axis IS in the GH5, but I'm not sure. They excluded it from GH4 after introducing IS in the GX7.
 
Then again, they'd be foolish not to include it now that it's a feature of the Sony flagships.

Absolutely. This is So much more camera for $800 than almost everything else in the market. The only thing they didn't really include is a mic jack (apparently), which is bad, but then one can always use a mic like the Shure LensHopper VP 83af or something. 
Apart from that it seems very good for the price. 

In video, yes. The LX100 also had this improved processing, which is why many confused reviewers were reporting better noise performance in 4K.
I haven't had hands on with the GX8 yet, but it has the same per-pixel noise as the G7 in RAW and the improved processing, so it would stand to reason that it too is improved over the GH4. The few samples I've managed to find online seem to bear that out.

I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.

True the option of 4K is great, sure 6K could come in handy for certain work. But I would like a boost in film IQ, more like the Varicam. More DR, better highlight rolloff, less noise, better codec(prores,h265, raw). If 6K and 4k 60fps are the only selling points over the GH4. I will not be buying one, then I even choose the A7S ii over it. Why would you wait till photokina for such specs.

Well the Dual Pixel AF isn't just useful for youtube, it's a great tech.
Problem is the entire rest of the camera.
Nikon will give you better for $500!

Unfortunately not quite D5300 / GH3 good. Canon's new APS-C sensor doesn't have the moire & aliasing control of the former or the resolution / sharpness of the latter.
D5500 even better as it has the lovely flat profile and newer sensor, very very clean in the shadows.
Canon continue to disappoint - the 80D is basically a non-event, when it could have been a game changer.

apsc gh5 wouldn't make sense to me. the gh4 was also the first of that kind of camera to have 4k, and it's still the cheapest way to get 10-bit, if I'm not mistaken. the 96fps 1080p slowmo was pretty revolutionary at the time too. that's not really playing catch up. even low light when speed boosted is still pretty impressive, as you know. and it's the best for anamorphic too. others still need to catch up to panasonic

4K 60fps and/or 10bit internal, and that alone would "kill" the A6300 in the eyes of many people in favor of the GH5!! (of course there would still be many people who would hold out and prefer the A6300 of course, everything is all very subjective in the end as to which is more important than another factor or not)
 
I somehow doubt the GH5 will however...  but could be the GH6 would! A bit like the GH2 => GH3 => GH4 progression.

I feel the GH2 to GH3 was more like a half step forward, but GH3 to GH4 was a GIANT LEAP!
So GH4 => GH5 might just might be a consolidation and refinement stage, before they make another GIANT LEAP to the GH6? (organic sensor at last for the GH6?)

I'll say this. Its getting harder and harder for us to come up with excuses for not making films

Diffraction is an inherent property of light passing through an aperture. What you end up with is each part of the light turns into an Airy Disc with particular physical properties. The diameter of the disc only depends on the f-stop, nothing else. Hence the smaller the pixels the more of an issue it is. This is worth a read and includes a calculator (just ignore the camera section in the lower half):
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm
(Astronomers are even more interested, as stars, being point light sources, really show the effect.)
Generally (IMHO) diffraction blurring starts to become an issue at the pixel level when it hits two pixel widths and gets worse at three widths. Exactly how bad it is depends on stuff like the strength of the anti-aliasing filter (if any) and how much blurring the de-bayering algorithm adds (which is always some). It isn't a hard limit, it's always there and just gets worse, so people have to define the point they start to care about it, which varies somewhat depending on who you read. For still photography it has been taken, for a fair while now, that a 30um blur on a FF sensor (divide by crop factor for others) is the limit for good sharpness of uncropped still images (which comes from lots of perceptual testing of people and a bunch of assumptions, like using 8"x10" images at a particular viewing distance). At the pixel level the 2-3 pixel widths seems to be where people are. I personally think if you are at 2 pixels or less you can ignore diffraction effects at the pixel level (compared to other factors).
(Edit) P.S. reverse engineering the graph on the previous page gives about 4.4um as the diffraction limit for f8 (10.7um Airy disc), which is 2.43 pixels and 5.8um for f11 (14.7um Airy disc), which is 2.53 pixels, so I suspect they used 2.5 pixels as their limit. It doesn't magically get really bad at this point, just gradually worse.
P.P.S. Also remember as you move away from the plane of focus the image gets gradually blurrier, this is where the 30um value is most often used, as the limits of the depth of field. Diffraction softening just adds to this.
 

Am I reading this incorrectly? It seems to agree with me to a decent approximation. The f8 and m43 lines intersect at about 13MP, which is about the 8MP (in a 16:9 crop) needed for 4k.