Dimitris Stasinos

LCD is not as high resolution / color accurate.
No C4K.
No 400Mbps All-I
No Cine 24.00 Hz
No anamorphic
No shutter angle / synchro scan
No focus transition feature
No XLR-1 support
No timecode
No HDMI LUT display / record trigger
No video property display layout
No unlimited recording

Don't get me wrong, i am enjoying the platform too. My iMacs have been real workhorses and FCPX is a gem. 
But when you get into a situation similar to the one i described above you are forced to reconsider the real value of these products, especially the hardware part.
Imagine paying 4500$ from your hard earned money for a laptop and then plugging in your earphones to avoid listening to the 2000 pops that will be produced during an editing session. Then imagine claiming your customer rights from a company that like @kaylee said above "doesn't talk about it". 
Also, the customer support in USA is way better than here in Europe. 

Don't get me wrong, i am enjoying the platform too. My iMacs have been real workhorses and FCPX is a gem. 
But when you get into a situation similar to the one i described above you are forced to reconsider the real value of these products, especially the hardware part.
Imagine paying 4500$ from your hard earned money for a laptop and then plugging in your earphones to avoid listening to the 2000 pops that will be produced during an editing session. Then imagine claiming your customer rights from a company that like @kaylee said above "doesn't talk about it". 
Also, the customer support in USA is way better than here in Europe. 

i used to work at an appl store, and the "known unknown issue" is a thing. it SUCKS. you haveta pretend like "ANYTHING THAT ISNT ON APPL DOT COM" doesnt exist, even if we just had a meeting *abt not talking abt it*
its amazing

Guys, believe me the latest MacBook Pro generations are total garbage. After too much scepticism I finally decided to pull the trigger on an almost maxed out 2019 model.
Just 3 months ago i ordered a BTO Macbook 2019 with 32 GB Ram and a Vega 20 inside.
The first thing i noticed was the crappy butterfly keyboard but i already knew the story so I ordered a silicone cover to protect it from dust.
Then while installing my apps i noticed that the right speaker was producing a pop sound every 30-60 seconds. After an extensive research i found out that this is a common problem with 2018-19 MacBook generations and Apple refuses to investigate the cause of this issue and fix it. You can find many videos demonstrating this issue on the net. Here is mine:
 
The audio popping in my case is constant. On the video above you can see just a way to replicate this. Working with Final Cut is a nightmare as every time the cursor is falling on a clip or the timeline a pop is produced from the right speaker.
Almost every 2019 model produces this pop while playing - skipping any type of media, although in a different volume. If there is a volume threshold where this is starting to annoy you, mine is over that. I visited 3 different Apple stores and i could clearly listen the pop on their display machines, although in a much smaller volume than mine. So many models have been affected.
It is not known yet if this is a software or a hardware issue.
As i said above, Apple technicians are refusing to investigate this. I don't know if the new 16 inch model will have this issue, as they changed the speaker configuration.
So be aware, this new 16" model might seem ideal for video editing but if serious problems like mine appear, Apple may never fix them.
PS. Shot on GH5 and Olympus 12-40, LOL

When new users sign up and the only thing they do is praise/condemn a certain product it always smells a little fishy to me... sure some might be genuine, but I doubt the majority are.

Cheers to the real EOSHD forum users out there. ?

Some people have been using them for a longe time without serious issues. My worst experience was with the Hero 7. I lost almost a full day of shooting on a kayak. I had the latest firmware back then, a tested SD card formatted in the device and while everything seemed perfect the camera didn't record a single frame. Actually i pressed record many times as i didn't want to end up with a single file and i could see clearly the record status on the display. 

This is just specs comparison. In real life OSMO action works like a charm with acceptable image quality in Cine D while GoPro cameras where always glitchy and unreliable. I can't tell about the new GoPro as i don't have it but Hero 4, 5, 6 and 7 where simply unreliable. Those bugs where never resolved so i wouldn't expect the 8th version to be better. 

For the majority of content creators (including my self) this machine simply does not exist. It was released yesterday in a parallel universe. Stop looking at it.
If you need 28 cores and 1.5 TB of RAM for your every day jobs then this price tag is probably just fine for you. 
If you are about to start saving money by sacrificing other needs that you may have, so that you can buy the base configuration in the next year, then don't this. It's just silly.
When you are buying the base configuration of a Mac Pro, you are actually paying for things that you can't use until you stuff it with overpriced components. You are paying for the "fact" that your machine has the "ability" to get significant upgrades like 1.5 TB of Ram, 4 TB SSD, 4 x Vega's etc. If you need to "save" money for the base configuration then good luck with the rest. It won't happen. Stop looking at it.
The iMac 2019 right now is the perfect balance for almost any content creator that can't afford the new MacPro. iMac Pro is also overpriced for the majority of users.
I' am working with iMacs and FCPX for the last 10 years as a full time video editor for TV shows. Every 3-4 years i am selling my iMac and getting the next one, so the actual cost for every upgrade comes to 1500 to 2000 euros. FCPX is a truly unique and reliable application and yes i have worked with Premiere, Vegas and Resolve before. You have to actually "work" with an application and not just "test" it to make conclusions. If you are editing 10 min highlights or low budget commercials then all of these work just fine but wait until you need to edit a full length movie or a 2 hour documentary to see how the app reacts to this massive amount of data. FCPX is "rock steady". Period. 
A "slightly" upgraded iMac 2019 with Intel Core i9, 1TB SSD and Vega 48 (plus user upgraded RAM to 32 GB) will cost you about 5000 bucks. Is this overpriced? Of course it is. But it's also much faster from the base configuration of the cheese grater and you get a great monitor plus peripherals. Is it upgradable? Of course not. But nothing is upgradable nowadays, even this cheese grater. In about 5 years from now, this badass Mac Pro 2019 and it's tech will be totally obsolete and in 10 years from now that fu*^%ing  bul*&@t Afterburner (that i am sure it will cost 10.000.000 dollars plus tax) will be sold for 100 bucks in ebay.

For the majority of content creators (including my self) this machine simply does not exist. It was released yesterday in a parallel universe. Stop looking at it.
If you need 28 cores and 1.5 TB of RAM for your every day jobs then this price tag is probably just fine for you. 
If you are about to start saving money by sacrificing other needs that you may have, so that you can buy the base configuration in the next year, then don't this. It's just silly.
When you are buying the base configuration of a Mac Pro, you are actually paying for things that you can't use until you stuff it with overpriced components. You are paying for the "fact" that your machine has the "ability" to get significant upgrades like 1.5 TB of Ram, 4 TB SSD, 4 x Vega's etc. If you need to "save" money for the base configuration then good luck with the rest. It won't happen. Stop looking at it.
The iMac 2019 right now is the perfect balance for almost any content creator that can't afford the new MacPro. iMac Pro is also overpriced for the majority of users.
I' am working with iMacs and FCPX for the last 10 years as a full time video editor for TV shows. Every 3-4 years i am selling my iMac and getting the next one, so the actual cost for every upgrade comes to 1500 to 2000 euros. FCPX is a truly unique and reliable application and yes i have worked with Premiere, Vegas and Resolve before. You have to actually "work" with an application and not just "test" it to make conclusions. If you are editing 10 min highlights or low budget commercials then all of these work just fine but wait until you need to edit a full length movie or a 2 hour documentary to see how the app reacts to this massive amount of data. FCPX is "rock steady". Period. 
A "slightly" upgraded iMac 2019 with Intel Core i9, 1TB SSD and Vega 48 (plus user upgraded RAM to 32 GB) will cost you about 5000 bucks. Is this overpriced? Of course it is. But it's also much faster from the base configuration of the cheese grater and you get a great monitor plus peripherals. Is it upgradable? Of course not. But nothing is upgradable nowadays, even this cheese grater. In about 5 years from now, this badass Mac Pro 2019 and it's tech will be totally obsolete and in 10 years from now that fu*^%ing  bul*&@t Afterburner (that i am sure it will cost 10.000.000 dollars plus tax) will be sold for 100 bucks in ebay.

For the majority of content creators (including my self) this machine simply does not exist. It was released yesterday in a parallel universe. Stop looking at it.
If you need 28 cores and 1.5 TB of RAM for your every day jobs then this price tag is probably just fine for you. 
If you are about to start saving money by sacrificing other needs that you may have, so that you can buy the base configuration in the next year, then don't this. It's just silly.
When you are buying the base configuration of a Mac Pro, you are actually paying for things that you can't use until you stuff it with overpriced components. You are paying for the "fact" that your machine has the "ability" to get significant upgrades like 1.5 TB of Ram, 4 TB SSD, 4 x Vega's etc. If you need to "save" money for the base configuration then good luck with the rest. It won't happen. Stop looking at it.
The iMac 2019 right now is the perfect balance for almost any content creator that can't afford the new MacPro. iMac Pro is also overpriced for the majority of users.
I' am working with iMacs and FCPX for the last 10 years as a full time video editor for TV shows. Every 3-4 years i am selling my iMac and getting the next one, so the actual cost for every upgrade comes to 1500 to 2000 euros. FCPX is a truly unique and reliable application and yes i have worked with Premiere, Vegas and Resolve before. You have to actually "work" with an application and not just "test" it to make conclusions. If you are editing 10 min highlights or low budget commercials then all of these work just fine but wait until you need to edit a full length movie or a 2 hour documentary to see how the app reacts to this massive amount of data. FCPX is "rock steady". Period. 
A "slightly" upgraded iMac 2019 with Intel Core i9, 1TB SSD and Vega 48 (plus user upgraded RAM to 32 GB) will cost you about 5000 bucks. Is this overpriced? Of course it is. But it's also much faster from the base configuration of the cheese grater and you get a great monitor plus peripherals. Is it upgradable? Of course not. But nothing is upgradable nowadays, even this cheese grater. In about 5 years from now, this badass Mac Pro 2019 and it's tech will be totally obsolete and in 10 years from now that fu*^%ing  bul*&@t Afterburner (that i am sure it will cost 10.000.000 dollars plus tax) will be sold for 100 bucks in ebay.

Cinematography dreams can only be expensive!

It seems the Pana has adopted Sony's pattern in their mirrorless names. We have a plain S1 and S1R so maybe a model named S1S will follow later this year just as G5S came after GH5. I haven't seen a single rumour about this yet but it's very logical and possible to happen. Maybe they are waiting for A7 SIII to come out and then fight back. 
Given the fact that the pricing is on par with Sony, making them serious investments, i wouldn't buy any of these two at the moment (maybe a second GH5 would be a better purchase).
Also, the pricing of the 3 new lenses is not competitive at all. These are normal prices for full frame lens but quite expensive for Lumix users that will make the jump into the new system. The new 50mm lens is seriously overpriced. I am curious though to see the build quality, hoping that it will be a step up from Pana's MFT line with their lame plastics.

It seems the Pana has adopted Sony's pattern in their mirrorless names. We have a plain S1 and S1R so maybe a model named S1S will follow later this year just as G5S came after GH5. I haven't seen a single rumour about this yet but it's very logical and possible to happen. Maybe they are waiting for A7 SIII to come out and then fight back. 
Given the fact that the pricing is on par with Sony, making them serious investments, i wouldn't buy any of these two at the moment (maybe a second GH5 would be a better purchase).
Also, the pricing of the 3 new lenses is not competitive at all. These are normal prices for full frame lens but quite expensive for Lumix users that will make the jump into the new system. The new 50mm lens is seriously overpriced. I am curious though to see the build quality, hoping that it will be a step up from Pana's MFT line with their lame plastics.

It seems the Pana has adopted Sony's pattern in their mirrorless names. We have a plain S1 and S1R so maybe a model named S1S will follow later this year just as G5S came after GH5. I haven't seen a single rumour about this yet but it's very logical and possible to happen. Maybe they are waiting for A7 SIII to come out and then fight back. 
Given the fact that the pricing is on par with Sony, making them serious investments, i wouldn't buy any of these two at the moment (maybe a second GH5 would be a better purchase).
Also, the pricing of the 3 new lenses is not competitive at all. These are normal prices for full frame lens but quite expensive for Lumix users that will make the jump into the new system. The new 50mm lens is seriously overpriced. I am curious though to see the build quality, hoping that it will be a step up from Pana's MFT line with their lame plastics.

@Andrew Reid Some food for thought as winter is coming. EOSHD is already a big and healthy community. Guess what could compliment your site...
Right! A bunch of servers. It does't have to implement personal funding. I would prefer paying a fee to you and this community than any company to store my videos.
Not big enough to be subject to those silly regulations. Big enough for your videos to reach your audience. 

These are all valid points. I am going to try this anyway and give you guys some feedback here. The plans are monthly so it won't be o costly test.
We can do some other tests too. I can post a video here and you can give me some feedback about it's playback performance.
The facts are solid though. YouTube is low quality, Vimeo is unreliable and all the alternatives are expensive, at least for the majority of users.
So we can push this further from being a debate to a collective effort towards a simple and clean solution. Apparently we are not trying to cover an extreme scenario, say a website with 2000 visitors a day and 4 digit number of videos. Something like this would produce a significant amount of income so the cost would not be a problem.
Let's put down a typical scenario, something like a 100 video portfolio collection and 50-100 visitors a day. Would a dedicated server nail this? I don't know... 
But if there is a place we can address this it's this forum.
I think we lean towards Cloud Storage VS Dedicated Server, money wise.
 

I just did a quick search on dedicated servers & pricing. Prices start from 8 bucks/month to 100 for a dedicated server (dual core Atom, 2 TB of storage and unmetered traffic for the cheapest option) and there is also the solution of a virtual machine where your data are being copied to different machines and stay intact in case of a hardware failure. You can rent a virtual machine with 18 bucks/month for 100GB of storage (again with unmetered traffic and 100mbps speeds). 
It seems like a solid solution. A little more expensive than vimeo but definitely cheaper than Wistia, Vzaar etc. You can always split the cost between associates.
We just did a test by uploading an HD clip on our site's host and playing it through a free video plugin for wordpress and it worked fine. The video plays instantly (i can't say this for vimeo) and you can upload three different versions for different devices.
 

I'd take this a step further an investigate how competitive $$$ a dedicated server is versus using cloud storage from the big 3: Amazon S3, Azure Blob and Google Cloud Storage.
Managing a dedicated machine can become a PITA if you're responsible for security patches and updating software.
 
I do have some personal experience with all of this. Am currently using Google for my hosting...
and, back in the old days, 2006-2010, I used to run a website that streamed videos. This was before Amazon AWS was mature enough to use, so I was running my "CDN" on dedicated linux servers. It was expensive, even with aggressive targeted advertising. It took a few years to simply break even every month. Good learning experience: bandwidth is expensive, videos are large files and visitors always expected things for free. 

I just did a quick search on dedicated servers & pricing. Prices start from 8 bucks/month to 100 for a dedicated server (dual core Atom, 2 TB of storage and unmetered traffic for the cheapest option) and there is also the solution of a virtual machine where your data are being copied to different machines and stay intact in case of a hardware failure. You can rent a virtual machine with 18 bucks/month for 100GB of storage (again with unmetered traffic and 100mbps speeds). 
It seems like a solid solution. A little more expensive than vimeo but definitely cheaper than Wistia, Vzaar etc. You can always split the cost between associates.
We just did a test by uploading an HD clip on our site's host and playing it through a free video plugin for wordpress and it worked fine. The video plays instantly (i can't say this for vimeo) and you can upload three different versions for different devices.
 

@Dimitris Stasinos
I took closer look at this.
Dropbox does not re-encode your videos. So you get whatever quality you want, BUT, you have maximum bandwidth of 20 GB free and 200 GB paid, per day, for entire account.
Elite Player method for streaming Gdrive videos is bad. Can't do large files and your videos stop streaming arbitrarily due to exceeding an unknown amount of bandwidth. You'll be seeing a lot of this... (edit: actually you won't, the videos will simply not stream.)

I believe the majority of film makers are interested on a place to build their portfolio collection. So with the same money that Vimeo asks, you can share a dedicated server with 2-3 persons and build your portfolio there. Then you can enjoy many benefits like better speeds, reliability and a player of your choice. At least this what i 'll do. Vimeo sucks anyway and DMCA regulations are here to stay. It will only get worse from here.

Lol that was funny  I am always enjoying your choice of words.
They (and by "they" i mean all those giant companies) are always funding and embracing that waiting game. Actually we are all waiting for the next one (whatever this is). The only difference is that some of us can afford every single step while waiting for the next one while others will wait till the end of humanity for a product that will never exist. I am somewhere in the middle with a moderate GAS syndrome.
The whole "mavic" concept was genius and innovative. If we set the Sony RX100's output as a golden standard for 1 inch sensor cameras at this specific time, then Phantom 4 is pretty close and that could be the case with Mavic 2 Pro. But apparently it's not. I bet this has to do with marketing decisions and not overheating problems or the lack of processing power. Sadly, this is the result of modern marketing in the camera manufacturing world: "great sensors being wasted due to marketing decisions for sustainable profit". We finally get this.
Don't get me wrong. It's a great drone. It's very convenient and probably the right tool for many jobs. But it's not what most professional content creators expected. Of course we can't blame DJI for delivering a product that can't satisfy professional content creators in this price range. But it would definitely not be a "miracle" if they decided to do this. The "Lord" has it all: great sensors, blazing fast tiny processors, great developers and a massive audience.

I see you two are as hard as the most tough Greek philosophy school... LOL : ) Embrace the excuse you want for that waiting game but... IQ??! The same you find along any 10-bit capture tool (applies for 8-bit or 12-bit devices anyway) if you don't care for your acquisition ballpark. There are no miracles outside the realm of the Lord : )) That's it (E : -)

Dimitris, maybe the problem is the codec you are using to export the files.
Which codec do you use? 
After effects has color management. Premiere doesn't. You have to create a lut for it.
On After can go to Project Settings -> Color Settings and choose the color space you want to work.
I have found that Rec 709 Gamma 2.4 has inconsistencies when exporting ProRes files.
For ProRes export, working in sRGB 2.1 colour space gives me the most accurate results.