Novim

I am a Big Casey Neistat fan. I know, I am a old Turd. Why?? Well he can light a fire under peoples ass, he makes stuff happen, and that is a good thing, and, and I think this video I have linked might light a fire under my ass, and well some other peoples asses, is that a word??, well I enjoyed it, and I am old, if you are young, hell you ought to enjoy it even More!!
 
It Makes me think, hell is it good because I am shooting it on a Arri Alexa, or is it good because I shot it on a Go Pro, strapped to my crotch, and it is a view no one has ever seen! Well maybe that is a gasp, BAD example!    You get what i mean.
Hell making movies or videos, what ever we want to call it is suppose to draw the audience into it. Cry, smile, laugh howl, cower, boo, you name it. Do they really give a rats ass if it was shot on a Sony F55 or a Panasonic GH1. WE need to just go out and make stuff happen, be it with a $10,000.00 camera or a 150 dollar one. I don't think the people that are going to look at it really care.
These YouTubers are really where it is at right now.  And they ain't going away. And they are NOT using Arri Alexia's!!

Ambivalent about it. I had GH4 for about a year, and played a lot with its myriad of settings, so much so that I regularly took C100 or XC10 (later), or BMPCC (and BMPC4K) to get job done. GH5 is 2K$ body, but if the SB is added, and some decent glass, it comes to 3,5-4K$. For that money one can buy BM Ursa mini (or, to double the sum, a new Pro). So, I agree with Laurier, and wait to see some peersuasive videos to decide about GH5. For time being, I'll postpone it.

Panasonic GX85 in 4K has no time limit, and also USB battery charge.

I had luck to buy XC10 last October for some 1600 euros (with a CFast 128 GB), and I am happy to use it for "gun & run", documentary, interviews, travel and similar things. I expect to use it in next 2-3 years at least. Like you, I was struggling with GH4 last year. Even I found that XC10 is not difficult to pair with Blackmagic cameras (Pocket, Micro and Production). Its 4K (with C-log) is, in my opinion, better in quality than FHD.

How far have the modern camera companies come from the founder of Panasonic and his business principals -
http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/16225/konosuke-matsushita-principles
A long way backwards by the looks of it!!

Can you post some pictures shot with it ? I don't have this lens, as it is quite rare, but I do love my MD 135/2.8, would love to see a comparison. Is it sharp @f/2 ? The rokkorfiles test shows it not being that sharp, but is it sharp enough for video wide open ? Should be great on a full frame (Sony E-mount ?)

Agreed, although the GX80/85 is currently discounted heavily and has in my opinion a better color than the G7 and has no time limitations (in the NTSC region) so that may be a good alternative.
Here are some shots made by the G7:
 
 

I am slowly getting round to finishing my mammoth XC10 review.... expect it this week!

This big techno change (mass photo & video using cheap cameras on smartphones, which the photo/video elite - „pros“ - despise) looks similar to the big techno change in the XV-XVI Century, when the Gutenberg press machine enabled that "everybody" could publish a book in large quantity, instead of handwriting/copying them. And than the elite said it would ruin culture. But, not "everybody" started to write and publish books, "everybody" start reading (consuming), and the press broadened from books to magazines and newspapers. Etc.
The analogy is this: like in those times, "everybody" now makes photo/video with smartphones, the culture has changed from verbal texts into pictorial texts (photo & video are texts, too), and this has broaden the audience into the new market. Only some will continue to make movies ("write books"). The former do not need 2000-5000$ ILCs, 2000-5000$ set of lenses, cages, rigs, tripods, gimbals. The later care and will continue to care about quality of the movies, and for it they need better equipment.
Here the analogy should stop. The question (both of Northrup and Reid) is weather the divide between the two camps will grow, and what is the sense of it. It is a big question and I can say only this:
With the massification of video culture, we now have young videomakers (some of them will become moviemakers later) who look less like the the movie directors or producers before when they were almost all alpha males (or had to behave like alpha males to find the funds and put the filmaking chaos into some sort od order); the new generations start to learn photo/video on their smartphones, some of them will move onto higher quality level, but their non-ILC beginnings could give them some experience and sensitivity we from the old times did not get. I wish I had a smartphone 40 years ago to start with.
So, "Do you want them to learn it with crappy smartphones? Thats just bullshit" (Deadalus0506) does not stand, imho.

This big techno change (mass photo & video using cheap cameras on smartphones, which the photo/video elite - „pros“ - despise) looks similar to the big techno change in the XV-XVI Century, when the Gutenberg press machine enabled that "everybody" could publish a book in large quantity, instead of handwriting/copying them. And than the elite said it would ruin culture. But, not "everybody" started to write and publish books, "everybody" start reading (consuming), and the press broadened from books to magazines and newspapers. Etc.
The analogy is this: like in those times, "everybody" now makes photo/video with smartphones, the culture has changed from verbal texts into pictorial texts (photo & video are texts, too), and this has broaden the audience into the new market. Only some will continue to make movies ("write books"). The former do not need 2000-5000$ ILCs, 2000-5000$ set of lenses, cages, rigs, tripods, gimbals. The later care and will continue to care about quality of the movies, and for it they need better equipment.
Here the analogy should stop. The question (both of Northrup and Reid) is weather the divide between the two camps will grow, and what is the sense of it. It is a big question and I can say only this:
With the massification of video culture, we now have young videomakers (some of them will become moviemakers later) who look less like the the movie directors or producers before when they were almost all alpha males (or had to behave like alpha males to find the funds and put the filmaking chaos into some sort od order); the new generations start to learn photo/video on their smartphones, some of them will move onto higher quality level, but their non-ILC beginnings could give them some experience and sensitivity we from the old times did not get. I wish I had a smartphone 40 years ago to start with.
So, "Do you want them to learn it with crappy smartphones? Thats just bullshit" (Deadalus0506) does not stand, imho.

2 days ago I made shots of the Belgrade October Salon 2016 - it is a biennial expo of mostly conceptual art, nothing especial in itself. I wanted to break a bit with usual „naturalistic“ approach, and to get more in line with conceptual expo objects etc. so I choose to play with WB a lot in shooting and, yesterday, in grading this video. I got some (imho, of course) very interesting results. The video is here (GX85, PanaLeica Summilux 15mm f/1.7, FCPX and DaVinci):
 
 

A comparison beetwen GX85 and BMPCC (the same subject, some waters and lights):
GX85:
BMPCC: