Django

OK lets talk about this. First of all like I've said: AF isn't magic. There is skill involved in using an AF system, no matter what kind. Especially with challenging scenes, subjects and fast glass. AF is there to help but you should always be in control of it.  DPAF absolutely allows you to choose who's in focus, that's absolutely crucial and the whole beauty of it. The most common method is simply to move your AF box with either joystick or touch & drag gestures or just tap to focus on your subject and it will not only lock but track. R3 can even do Eye-AF selection right inside the EVF (a tech developed on EOS 7 DSLR). Point being that you have total control on who it focuses on. That's absolutely essential and always the job of a solo operator. You can also do rack pulls or even allow DPAF to guide you using rack focus tools to manually pull in between subjects. Here is a break down on the old DPAF:
There are a bunch of settings and tricks to make it even more effective. And DPAF2 brings faster, better settings.
It isn't at all limited to talking head content either, its actually most practical when R&G handheld or on gimbals doing dolly shots. Not limited to pro usage neither, use it for travel, family, hobbies, whatever.
Most challenging things to track is action/sports, animals & kids. There are AF tracking modes for each.
Now it isn't fail proof but if you know what you're doing, your hit rate and motion shot creativeness will improve tenfold over unreliable contrast AF. 
That said never go full retard and let the camera on Af autopilot. I always have one finger on disable Af and the other hand on the focus ring when using AF on a paid job. It rarely disappoints though and is so much less stressful than punching in to check focus every time your subject moves or coming home with those unexpected OOF shots.
Like anything, your mileage may vary and I have tremendous respect for manual focus which will always be what I prefer when conditions allow it. DPAF can be almost too perfect, the MF Guide mode is brilliant for that though, especially as it works on manual-only cine glass.

It's all good, we're all entitled our perspectives & opinions. And perhaps indeed splitting hairs.
Panasonic is not for me for various key reasons but I respect the company & its users. I'm not attacking them, its pretty much factual that their AF system is lagging behind competition. They excel in other domains though like DGO sensor & ProRes in GH6 which is fantastic.
Now wether or not AF is important is definitely subjective. I try and not use it as a crutch, it's not magic neither. It's actually always off by default and I dedicate an on/off toggle button. I have a whole DPAF technique I've developed. Its really more of a safety net for challenging situations. 
I'm actually not much in favour of the "dumbing-down" of skill brought by tech. fortunately I learned a few things the "hard way" i.e. pre-digital. And I still keep myself in check by doing full manual shoots and 35mm film photography whenever possible. I love shooting shoulder mount on the FS7, I love that real ENG look over super steady floating gimbal look for example. But I'm not fighting tech either. Its all about finding that right balance that works for you.
 

Kinda late to this but its a subject I can definitely relate to and comment on. Clients are more and more educated/savyy about gear. Not only do they know most mirrorless models, they even know about lenses, audio, rigs, gimbals etc. Especially the younger ones, i.e. juniors, interns, assistants in their 20s/30s. I think it's mostly thanks to Youtube. Not always a bad thing, especially if you've got nice gear. Nice glass often gets the most respect, justifiably so. So I won't front, we do tend to overdo it a bit, especially with new clients: cine cams, big lenses, cages, rigs, gimbals, lights, tripods in fancy pelican cases. It's part of the show, even if sometimes less than half actually gets used. It can sometimes backfire though, because more equipment means more setup time etc. And clients aren't stupid, if all that gear isn't backed up with adequate footage, or you're inconsistent with what you're bringing, they'll see right through you and you're just an overpaid clown eating up their time. I've never actually experienced that but it's always on my mind.
There are so many more elements to get right on a paid shoot. More gear also means more things to manage and higher risks/mistakes. I've done some dumb shit by overdoing it. Sometimes less is more.  I won't hesitate to go monopod, handheld over tripod or gimbal, or even whip out an action cam if timing, shot or location constraints demand it. 
Same thing with bringing a ton of people on set of a bigger budget crew type project. Rookie mistake. More people, more problems. Keep it down to the essential.
In the end only, only respecting the time frame + footage results really matters. Show some creativity and confidence with your shots, composition, direction, decision-making, time management and human skills and even the toughest client will respect you no matter the gear..

OK lets talk about this. First of all like I've said: AF isn't magic. There is skill involved in using an AF system, no matter what kind. Especially with challenging scenes, subjects and fast glass. AF is there to help but you should always be in control of it.  DPAF absolutely allows you to choose who's in focus, that's absolutely crucial and the whole beauty of it. The most common method is simply to move your AF box with either joystick or touch & drag gestures or just tap to focus on your subject and it will not only lock but track. R3 can even do Eye-AF selection right inside the EVF (a tech developed on EOS 7 DSLR). Point being that you have total control on who it focuses on. That's absolutely essential and always the job of a solo operator. You can also do rack pulls or even allow DPAF to guide you using rack focus tools to manually pull in between subjects. Here is a break down on the old DPAF:
There are a bunch of settings and tricks to make it even more effective. And DPAF2 brings faster, better settings.
It isn't at all limited to talking head content either, its actually most practical when R&G handheld or on gimbals doing dolly shots. Not limited to pro usage neither, use it for travel, family, hobbies, whatever.
Most challenging things to track is action/sports, animals & kids. There are AF tracking modes for each.
Now it isn't fail proof but if you know what you're doing, your hit rate and motion shot creativeness will improve tenfold over unreliable contrast AF. 
That said never go full retard and let the camera on Af autopilot. I always have one finger on disable Af and the other hand on the focus ring when using AF on a paid job. It rarely disappoints though and is so much less stressful than punching in to check focus every time your subject moves or coming home with those unexpected OOF shots.
Like anything, your mileage may vary and I have tremendous respect for manual focus which will always be what I prefer when conditions allow it. DPAF can be almost too perfect, the MF Guide mode is brilliant for that though, especially as it works on manual-only cine glass.

It's all good, we're all entitled our perspectives & opinions. And perhaps indeed splitting hairs.
Panasonic is not for me for various key reasons but I respect the company & its users. I'm not attacking them, its pretty much factual that their AF system is lagging behind competition. They excel in other domains though like DGO sensor & ProRes in GH6 which is fantastic.
Now wether or not AF is important is definitely subjective. I try and not use it as a crutch, it's not magic neither. It's actually always off by default and I dedicate an on/off toggle button. I have a whole DPAF technique I've developed. Its really more of a safety net for challenging situations. 
I'm actually not much in favour of the "dumbing-down" of skill brought by tech. fortunately I learned a few things the "hard way" i.e. pre-digital. And I still keep myself in check by doing full manual shoots and 35mm film photography whenever possible. I love shooting shoulder mount on the FS7, I love that real ENG look over super steady floating gimbal look for example. But I'm not fighting tech either. Its all about finding that right balance that works for you.
 

Squid Game is a Netflix Original Series and was fully developed/produced by Netflix Asia based in Seoul.
Budget was $21 million for 9 episodes. Fairly low budget by US standards, perhaps not so much by Korean. 
Of course all that is changing after the overwhelming success of K shows.
Henry Graham is DOP of GoG2 & Suicide Squad, both shot on RED.
The Alexa LF is definitely cutting into the Netflix market, and the upcoming Alexa35 surely even more.
Getting back to RED, is Matrix 4 big enough budget/high-end? 
15 RED Rangers & a custom Komodo..

RED bottom of the barrel?!! cmon.. their politics were often fishy with all the overpriced proprietary stuff and the cheap OEM scandals.. and the compressed RAW patent is cringe. They sure got good lawyers it seems. But in the end the cameras deliver. 
And with Komodo its definitely a new chapter. Looks we finally got 6K for 6K. Its the best IQ for price factor out there imo.

12-bit H265 is an unused format, because hardware decoding just isn't there yet. Most computers struggle with even 10-bit h265. ProRes is much less compressed and therefore can be easily supported up to 12-bit. 
ProRes 4444 XQ which is the highest quality and indeed available on ARRIs has huge data rates (1700mbps).
REDs strangle hold on RAW is for compressed RAW.
I'm not sure how BRAW or Canon Raw Light get around this (I guess it's a ratio threshold).

This one? One of my all-time favourites!
Those guys are on another level of finesse..

Totally. 
We had a RED available for the shoot. Director wanted it and I said the Sony’s would be better. 
Why? 
Well, our crew was small and we needed to move fast as we had a day and a half to shoot.
Also, we didn’t have a very good lighting budget, although I intentionally didn’t want to use lots of lighting in this video because I wanted the bulk of the shots to look natural. A lot of it was done using bounced light from natural sources. 
The native 12,800 ISO allowed me to use only fire light and reflectors without having to bring in and constantly move around lights per shot. The fire was burning out fast, so we had to blitz it. It worked out. 
Had we shot on the RED, the shoot would have been a disaster. 
If we shot on the GH5/6 - it would have been “ok” but very murky and noisy. The picture would have suffered. 
So yes you are right. The camera is crucial. In this case, the merits of the Sony system allows you to work in a way that you would greatly struggle with using something else. 
After various experiences, I’d confidently say the Sony trilogy of “FX6 / FX3 / A7S3” is likely the best all-rounded system on the market. You can work in a unique way. The only challenge is yourself. 

I actually think what camera you choose can be crucial for a project like this but not for the reasons most may think. 
I'm thinking mostly about budget and time constraints. 
A big cine cam takes time to rig, to setup. do reverse angle shots etc. It all eats up precious time.
Having two or even three cameras like OP can allow multi-cam or multi-rigs speeding up down time.
Then you have the crew to think about. Big cam usually means first AC, 2nd AC etc.
With an A7S3/FX3 you could get away with AF on gimbal shots, handheld with IBIS, monopod instead of tripod etc.
This all saves you time & budget that can be allocated to more shots, location, production value.
Anyways maybe OP can share his own experience & congrats to him on the music video!
 

I actually think what camera you choose can be crucial for a project like this but not for the reasons most may think. 
I'm thinking mostly about budget and time constraints. 
A big cine cam takes time to rig, to setup. do reverse angle shots etc. It all eats up precious time.
Having two or even three cameras like OP can allow multi-cam or multi-rigs speeding up down time.
Then you have the crew to think about. Big cam usually means first AC, 2nd AC etc.
With an A7S3/FX3 you could get away with AF on gimbal shots, handheld with IBIS, monopod instead of tripod etc.
This all saves you time & budget that can be allocated to more shots, location, production value.
Anyways maybe OP can share his own experience & congrats to him on the music video!
 

I'm well aware of all this. Worked with steadicam operators on BMD cams and Nikon AIS glass up until about 2016. Every single shoot these days where we hire a crew, even super low budget: 1st AC is on wireless focus system, sure. This isn't news to me, and I'm not debating any of that either.
However, surely you realise that outside of the film crew bubble you're in, there is an entire world of amateur, hobby, influencers and pro solo operators. I'd even say that is the main target of most of these mid-tier hybrid cameras.
And while one can get around contrast based AF or MF, that doesn't negate the fact that latest-gen AF can be a strong asset for certain applications. Just like IBIS. Nobody waited for IBIS to shoot videos with their DSLRs, but we're all glad to have it standard on-board now on our MILCs.
Well you'd hope so, the FS7 came out in 2014 ! The main point here though is that Canon, Nikon or Sony autofocus (FX3/FX6/FX9) puts Panasonic DFD AF to shame.
I don't think it gets compared to Canon's DPAF specifically. The reality is that all mirrorless systems expect Panny have more or less caught up with DPAF. They are by far in last position as far as AF. So sure, AF is a major concern there, I'd even say it's the main hurdle keeping many of us from switching over to that system. That said, it seems like a portion of Panny users have simply accepted their fate and work around it. That's cool, doesn't mean its not a deal breaker to the other majority.
 

haha that's hilarious: 
None of these can be mimicked on Red, Alexa, or any digital system. This is film. Film is part of the reason this has so many hits and likes. Point an MX at that low sun and tell me what the shadows look like, or the running figures if you flicked on HDR. Point an Alexa at the girl against the tree and tell me her skin will look anything like the kind, clear, rich image you see here. Nothing compares.
Still I will retire tomorrow if this was shot anything but film.
But I guess there is a reason why they say the Canon 5D2 started the FF Revolution.
More impressive than 8-bit is its in 720p. Definitely a statement that bit-depth & resolution aren't the end-all.
Those early 5Ds sure had some mojo though, my god. Makes me wanna pick up a 5D3 again and shoot MLRaw.
Or maybe that elusive 1DC, possibly the best 8-bit camera out there?

haha that's hilarious: 
None of these can be mimicked on Red, Alexa, or any digital system. This is film. Film is part of the reason this has so many hits and likes. Point an MX at that low sun and tell me what the shadows look like, or the running figures if you flicked on HDR. Point an Alexa at the girl against the tree and tell me her skin will look anything like the kind, clear, rich image you see here. Nothing compares.
Still I will retire tomorrow if this was shot anything but film.
But I guess there is a reason why they say the Canon 5D2 started the FF Revolution.
More impressive than 8-bit is its in 720p. Definitely a statement that bit-depth & resolution aren't the end-all.
Those early 5Ds sure had some mojo though, my god. Makes me wanna pick up a 5D3 again and shoot MLRaw.
Or maybe that elusive 1DC, possibly the best 8-bit camera out there?

haha that's hilarious: 
None of these can be mimicked on Red, Alexa, or any digital system. This is film. Film is part of the reason this has so many hits and likes. Point an MX at that low sun and tell me what the shadows look like, or the running figures if you flicked on HDR. Point an Alexa at the girl against the tree and tell me her skin will look anything like the kind, clear, rich image you see here. Nothing compares.
Still I will retire tomorrow if this was shot anything but film.
But I guess there is a reason why they say the Canon 5D2 started the FF Revolution.
More impressive than 8-bit is its in 720p. Definitely a statement that bit-depth & resolution aren't the end-all.
Those early 5Ds sure had some mojo though, my god. Makes me wanna pick up a 5D3 again and shoot MLRaw.
Or maybe that elusive 1DC, possibly the best 8-bit camera out there?

Ah, I found the reduser discussion, it's still there, just the URL has changed: https://www.reduser.net/forum/shooting-red/cinematography/94365-sleepwalking-in-the-rift-anyone-know-what-this-was-shot-on

Whenever I think of the possibilities of 8 bit I come back to this gorgeous short film, Sleepwalking in the Rift, shot a decade ago on a Canon 5D Mark ii. It famously fooled a DP in New York who insisted it must have been shot on film (the discussion thread on reduser appears to have been deleted, unfortunately; the colorist who worked on the footage confirmed that it was shot on a 5D Mark II).
 

@webrunner5 You can export to all ProRes flavours in Resolve, even free version. On a Mac at least that is..

There are substantial reasons why BRAW is better than CinemaDNG mainly file sizes and post workflow:
Blackmagic RAW is much more preferable than CinemaDNG. Filmmakers that have worked with CinemaDNG know exactly how much this codec is complex from post production point of view. CinemaDNG makes post production more complicated. Furthermore, in CinemaDNG every single frame is actually separate file (image sequence), which means that before the exporting to NLE, a transcoding process must be performed. You get the RAW, but with a lot of hassle. Balckmagic RAW is much more post production friendly, since you treat it as a regular file (like ProRes).
 

12-bit H265 is an unused format, because hardware decoding just isn't there yet. Most computers struggle with even 10-bit h265. ProRes is much less compressed and therefore can be easily supported up to 12-bit. 
ProRes 4444 XQ which is the highest quality and indeed available on ARRIs has huge data rates (1700mbps).
REDs strangle hold on RAW is for compressed RAW.
I'm not sure how BRAW or Canon Raw Light get around this (I guess it's a ratio threshold).

I think OP needs to understand that to achieve those looks it's a lot more work than just what camera model is being used. 
Everything is actually broken down in that video: C70 shooting Clog2, 28-70F2, Aputure lights. Graded in Resolve (5 node tree). 
The C70 itself has a DGO sensor that gives you extra DR and clean shadows. R6 in contrast has pretty poor DR.
Clog2 is also the most flat profile, most ideal for grading. R6 has Clog3 which is pretty close.
The 28-70F2 is a jewel of a lens ($3,500). 
Lighting can go long ways, ND filters etc and finally the grading process which they say can take from 5 hours to 2 weeks depending on the project.
So yeah that's quite a bit of gear, work and skill to get there. Getting great cinematic image quality is a lot more than just having good color science or the right camera body. Every step of the way counts and you will certainly not achieve that look SOOC.
I love the R6 and you can get close to that look with the right tools (lens, lighting, grading) shooting Clog3. But you're definitely going to have to learn a few things. There is no magic "cinematic" mode like on iPhone13.

There are substantial reasons why BRAW is better than CinemaDNG mainly file sizes and post workflow:
Blackmagic RAW is much more preferable than CinemaDNG. Filmmakers that have worked with CinemaDNG know exactly how much this codec is complex from post production point of view. CinemaDNG makes post production more complicated. Furthermore, in CinemaDNG every single frame is actually separate file (image sequence), which means that before the exporting to NLE, a transcoding process must be performed. You get the RAW, but with a lot of hassle. Balckmagic RAW is much more post production friendly, since you treat it as a regular file (like ProRes).
 

There are substantial reasons why BRAW is better than CinemaDNG mainly file sizes and post workflow:
Blackmagic RAW is much more preferable than CinemaDNG. Filmmakers that have worked with CinemaDNG know exactly how much this codec is complex from post production point of view. CinemaDNG makes post production more complicated. Furthermore, in CinemaDNG every single frame is actually separate file (image sequence), which means that before the exporting to NLE, a transcoding process must be performed. You get the RAW, but with a lot of hassle. Balckmagic RAW is much more post production friendly, since you treat it as a regular file (like ProRes).
 

There are substantial reasons why BRAW is better than CinemaDNG mainly file sizes and post workflow:
Blackmagic RAW is much more preferable than CinemaDNG. Filmmakers that have worked with CinemaDNG know exactly how much this codec is complex from post production point of view. CinemaDNG makes post production more complicated. Furthermore, in CinemaDNG every single frame is actually separate file (image sequence), which means that before the exporting to NLE, a transcoding process must be performed. You get the RAW, but with a lot of hassle. Balckmagic RAW is much more post production friendly, since you treat it as a regular file (like ProRes).