Arikhan

There are no "dumb" documentaries in my eyes...A documentary mostly tells a story...
It's quite hard to do 2-3 minutes shorts...It's an art to do a self-contained and explaining story in this short time...BTW: Don't believe the claim "films longer than 2-3 minutes are useless because people don't watch them". It's an ignorant lie - may be relevant for news, selfish corporate image films or commercials, but not for good stories...

There are no "dumb" documentaries in my eyes...A documentary mostly tells a story...
It's quite hard to do 2-3 minutes shorts...It's an art to do a self-contained and explaining story in this short time...BTW: Don't believe the claim "films longer than 2-3 minutes are useless because people don't watch them". It's an ignorant lie - may be relevant for news, selfish corporate image films or commercials, but not for good stories...

@jonpais
That's it! BTW: I like your portrait shootings, specially composition, skin tones and general settings, as currently done with your gx85.
I would wish a story...a story about the people or locations you're filming...something narrative, making your beautiful and balanced images even more beautiful...People telling their story - there are no banal stories out there, dumb reviews solely fixed on imagery (IQ) are banal and boring. Engaging stories about people and locations (special places in Vietnam?) are much more interesting for your audience than 5.000 boring reviews on the same subject/camera. Don't rely on the "love" of gear heads, use your talent in portraiture to tell stories (with voice over) about real life and real people and locations. It could be a harder way at the beginning, but it will last longer...Just my 2 cents...

"Pulsing" in AF mode is an old Pana problem, facing FZ1000 and new models too (as the FZ2000). The only way to sail around this AF flaw (continuous AF) is to lock and use the area mode (I told this @jonpais in this forum some times though...). When using a Pana in area mode (subject within a fixed AF area), there is no much pulsing/micro-hunting forth and back (microadjustments of the faulty AF).
Take a look at the "successful" AF video of PhotoJoseph...Full of visible and abyssmal pulsing forth and back in the background. Look at the video of Peter Gregg...Again the pulsing when focusing on the remote of his TV...Hehe, this is a "P&P"-camera - permanently pulsing and pumping...
It's simply a shame to blame users by saying, they can not handle it. Same users do well with Canons DPAF and with Sony's standard settings. No need to go to a university to use AF. It's simply a barefaced claim of fanboys & paid henchmen, who simply don't want to accept the truth. BTW: I use more Pana cameras, but AF on them is simply BS...far away from current standards...By "tweaking" you can get it to work in some situations...Continuous AF for professional use has to be reliable, that's why many DOPs rent the C300 mII...
The AF ist not a great strength of the GH5...But as many Pana fanboys claim, AF is only for pussies... 

"Pulsing" in AF mode is an old Pana problem, facing FZ1000 and new models too (as the FZ2000). The only way to sail around this AF flaw (continuous AF) is to lock and use the area mode (I told this @jonpais in this forum some times though...). When using a Pana in area mode (subject within a fixed AF area), there is no much pulsing/micro-hunting forth and back (microadjustments of the faulty AF).
Take a look at the "successful" AF video of PhotoJoseph...Full of visible and abyssmal pulsing forth and back in the background. Look at the video of Peter Gregg...Again the pulsing when focusing on the remote of his TV...Hehe, this is a "P&P"-camera - permanently pulsing and pumping...
It's simply a shame to blame users by saying, they can not handle it. Same users do well with Canons DPAF and with Sony's standard settings. No need to go to a university to use AF. It's simply a barefaced claim of fanboys & paid henchmen, who simply don't want to accept the truth. BTW: I use more Pana cameras, but AF on them is simply BS...far away from current standards...By "tweaking" you can get it to work in some situations...Continuous AF for professional use has to be reliable, that's why many DOPs rent the C300 mII...
The AF ist not a great strength of the GH5...But as many Pana fanboys claim, AF is only for pussies... 

"Pulsing" in AF mode is an old Pana problem, facing FZ1000 and new models too (as the FZ2000). The only way to sail around this AF flaw (continuous AF) is to lock and use the area mode (I told this @jonpais in this forum some times though...). When using a Pana in area mode (subject within a fixed AF area), there is no much pulsing/micro-hunting forth and back (microadjustments of the faulty AF).
Take a look at the "successful" AF video of PhotoJoseph...Full of visible and abyssmal pulsing forth and back in the background. Look at the video of Peter Gregg...Again the pulsing when focusing on the remote of his TV...Hehe, this is a "P&P"-camera - permanently pulsing and pumping...
It's simply a shame to blame users by saying, they can not handle it. Same users do well with Canons DPAF and with Sony's standard settings. No need to go to a university to use AF. It's simply a barefaced claim of fanboys & paid henchmen, who simply don't want to accept the truth. BTW: I use more Pana cameras, but AF on them is simply BS...far away from current standards...By "tweaking" you can get it to work in some situations...Continuous AF for professional use has to be reliable, that's why many DOPs rent the C300 mII...
The AF ist not a great strength of the GH5...But as many Pana fanboys claim, AF is only for pussies... 

"Pulsing" in AF mode is an old Pana problem, facing FZ1000 and new models too (as the FZ2000). The only way to sail around this AF flaw (continuous AF) is to lock and use the area mode (I told this @jonpais in this forum some times though...). When using a Pana in area mode (subject within a fixed AF area), there is no much pulsing/micro-hunting forth and back (microadjustments of the faulty AF).
Take a look at the "successful" AF video of PhotoJoseph...Full of visible and abyssmal pulsing forth and back in the background. Look at the video of Peter Gregg...Again the pulsing when focusing on the remote of his TV...Hehe, this is a "P&P"-camera - permanently pulsing and pumping...
It's simply a shame to blame users by saying, they can not handle it. Same users do well with Canons DPAF and with Sony's standard settings. No need to go to a university to use AF. It's simply a barefaced claim of fanboys & paid henchmen, who simply don't want to accept the truth. BTW: I use more Pana cameras, but AF on them is simply BS...far away from current standards...By "tweaking" you can get it to work in some situations...Continuous AF for professional use has to be reliable, that's why many DOPs rent the C300 mII...
The AF ist not a great strength of the GH5...But as many Pana fanboys claim, AF is only for pussies... 

@TheRenaissanceMan + @kidzrevil
Yeah...Modern AF cameras and generally electronic driven devices are for girlies and mollycoddles only. "Real" filmmakers shoot only with old sovjet cameras for max. 150 USD bought on Ebay. 

@Kisaha
I know, you use the NX1. I use for the NX1 and the A6500 the Tiffen variable ND. As you say in your post, not what you just want at the moment ("just not a variable one"), but it's worth giving it a try as it is a very good quality because not falsifying colours (no optical secondary effects at all in my eyes) at all. The only thing you should care about with the Tiffen, is not overdriving beyond "max." - if so (and you can not see it through viewfinder), you could get some unwanted vignetting.
Before this, I used a cheap one, which was a true desaster, transforming some footage in pure garbage....

@kidzrevil
Not as childish as the claim "pros don't need AF"...No offense please... 
As childish as the old style photographers claiming NOWADAYS the same and not wanting to accept facts and reality...Living in the 60s can make some fun, but I'm wondering why this kind of people doesn't use horses & carriages but cars...
In many situations you will never be able to focus manually like a reliable and powerful AF...And still, there are many situations, when you want and have to control your focus speed and process manually...There is no conflict between focusing manually / or per AF, the two systems are a complement to each other. But oviously not for nostalgic know-it-alls...
@Chrad
They even don't need to make it "inexpensive"...Spending 4.500 - 5.500 bucks for a capable (portable) FF with reliable AF (like A6500), 60fps (4K), clean 1080p 4.2.2 10bit up to 100/120fps, very good low light skills and a pleasant colour science OOC isn't too much nowadays.

@TheRenaissanceMan + @kidzrevil
Yeah...Modern AF cameras and generally electronic driven devices are for girlies and mollycoddles only. "Real" filmmakers shoot only with old sovjet cameras for max. 150 USD bought on Ebay. 

@BTM_Pix
Thank you very much for your efforts! Quintessence (as I understand your experience): There is not much difference between the D500 and the X-T2 concerning focusing in very low light on not fast moving subjects.
@Django
Thank you for sharing your experience concerning the difference between D750 and the X-T2! 
Yep...Technology moved on during the past years, but there is still a big difference between APS-C and FF in many aspects...shooting moving subjects in poor light conditions is only one aspect of the story....
@j-oc
That's why (+ the poor shadow recovery and poor DR) I switched - for stills - to Nikon. The 5D m3 is a great camera (I sold all my Canon cameras - 1D line, 5D x line - except my first Canon camera 400d and the 7D, keeping these because of nostalgy) but for my needs the D750 is much more better (AF constancy, DR, etc.). The 5D m3 had (not only for me) a minimum of double as many misfocused shots as the D750 (not only in low light) when shooting moving subjects on location with high requiremets in detail.
Some buddys told me, the 5D m4 would be much more consistant when talking AF and DR, but finally the Canon photo game is over for me.

OK, I've done a basic little test.
Its tricky to do it exactly equivalent because of lens variances etc and my range of X mount lenses is limited compared to my Nikons but anyway.
The test 'scene' was a bedroom with a tiny fragment of outside light, an empty clear mineral water bottle stood on a beige duvet cover with a plain light coloured wall behind. 
So it was low light and not much for the AF to grab hold of as the more distinct contrast points were the creases on the duvet cover!
The illumination level at the bottle was 2 lux according to my Sekonic.
Exposure for the cameras was ISO 12800, f3.2, 1/50th.
On the D500 I used a Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED FX and on the XT-2 the closest thing I've got to that which is the XF18-55 f2.8-4.
Not doing the Fuji any favours really by putting a mid-range kit lens against one of Nikon's holy trinity but I'm guessing you'd sooner have a less than ideal case scenario anyway.
Also, I've used the Nikon 24-70 for years in every permutation of light and environment you can imagine so I'm comfortable with using it as the benchmark in this instance.
The test was to manually set lenses to infinity (so they had to do some work), switch AF on and then swing around to the bottle in centre frame and fire.
The results were that there wasn't a massive amount of difference to be honest.
Both of them locked in as short a period of time as to leave me comfortable that if I was ever in a scenario where I had to shoot an empty water bottle in a virtually dark room that I wouldn't miss a second of the action.
Neither of them hunted particularly. The majority of the time you could hear the motors had only gone in one direction without overshooting and coming back. Very occasionally they'd go back again but they both did it and never more than one overshoot. 
Where the Fuji scored big though of course is with the EVF you could actually see what it was you were shooting whereas of course with the OVF of the D500 you're virtually blind in that scenario.
Changing lenses out on the Fuji to the 35mm f1.4 and the 50-230 f5.6 was a different issue though.
The 35mm was the worse of the two and would almost always overshoot at least once whereas the 50-230 would generally just do it once.
So, all in all, even with the right lens, its marginally slower than the D500 and even with the wrong lens it will get you there without too many overshoots if you happen to find yourself shooting in conditions where, to be fair, you might want to re-think whether its a video camera you need or a thermal imaging one.
How this test would have gone if the water bottle had decided to get up and run around and which one would track the better I don't know.
But from the actual real jobs I've been doing with the XT-2 the past couple of weeks, I wouldn't be massively concerned about that either.

ex-D750 owner, current 5D3/XT2 user. out of the three, 5D3 is by far my favorite stills cam for overall AF performance. D750 might have the edge in low-light situations but I use speed lights with AF assist anyways for those cases (D750 does rock in shadow recovery).  XT2 is far far behind in AF and flash options. I'd never use it in any kind of demanding situation. In fact I've been kinda disappointed in it for photography vs DSLR FF but that's a different story.. I'm using it mainly for video. Am looking forward to all the AF enhancements the new firmware should bring..

@Arikhan ive never used the d500/d750 but i did some testing of the xt2 last night in my back garden. With the 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 it was able to lock focus on things i could barely see. With the 18-55 it wasnt nearly as successful. When i had the 23mm f2 wr, it was even a bit faster to lock on to low light subjects than the 1.4. 

@funkyou86
Nice explanation...But facts and knowledge don't count any more. Feeding the naive people's phantasy with claims like "the GH5 is the ARRI for enthusiasts" is much better and you get more likes. Irrational fanboyism seems to be the new religion...
The famous German philosopher Hannah Arendt said once:
Panas marketing and social media guys did with the GH5 hype an excellent job and acquired hundreds of sales representatives - aka "independent enthusiasts / reviewers" - (mostly) for free. This reminds me of the paid Canon video posting in DPReview some weeks ago, a guy who claimed to sell his RED for a Canon 80D...Of course... :-))))
Conclusion: Feed people's phantasy and they will give you their money and their soul! (+1 for Panas marketing devision - Guys you did an excellent job!)

@funkyou86
Nice explanation...But facts and knowledge don't count any more. Feeding the naive people's phantasy with claims like "the GH5 is the ARRI for enthusiasts" is much better and you get more likes. Irrational fanboyism seems to be the new religion...
The famous German philosopher Hannah Arendt said once:
Panas marketing and social media guys did with the GH5 hype an excellent job and acquired hundreds of sales representatives - aka "independent enthusiasts / reviewers" - (mostly) for free. This reminds me of the paid Canon video posting in DPReview some weeks ago, a guy who claimed to sell his RED for a Canon 80D...Of course... :-))))
Conclusion: Feed people's phantasy and they will give you their money and their soul! (+1 for Panas marketing devision - Guys you did an excellent job!)

@funkyou86
Nice explanation...But facts and knowledge don't count any more. Feeding the naive people's phantasy with claims like "the GH5 is the ARRI for enthusiasts" is much better and you get more likes. Irrational fanboyism seems to be the new religion...
The famous German philosopher Hannah Arendt said once:
Panas marketing and social media guys did with the GH5 hype an excellent job and acquired hundreds of sales representatives - aka "independent enthusiasts / reviewers" - (mostly) for free. This reminds me of the paid Canon video posting in DPReview some weeks ago, a guy who claimed to sell his RED for a Canon 80D...Of course... :-))))
Conclusion: Feed people's phantasy and they will give you their money and their soul! (+1 for Panas marketing devision - Guys you did an excellent job!)

@Davey
Davey, I work intensively with Panas for documentary and interview...I know and tested the Pana focusing system extensively and it is by far the worst when comparing with Sony A6x00, Canon DPAF and Fuji X-T2.
Contrast AF + DFD CAN NOT compete with phase detection + contrast detection or DPAF. I worked with several Panas and dived very deep in testing different AF modes, but...It's somehow usable in some scenarios after tweaking, but far away from a reliable method to seriously work with.
Very good for wide shots and subjects moving from side to side. BUT a desaster when facing unpredictable back and forth moving of subjects. OK, when stepping aperture down, it could work, but with fast lenses and shallow DOF it's a mess...
At the end of the day, this AF flaw will NOT be such important for many shooters used to focus manually, but for ENG style and Run & Gun for one man bands (journalists, etc.) it will be not first choice for moving objects and shallow DOF....Thouigh we should consider, that this camera has enough strengths... ;-)
@jonpais
My FZ1000 doen't hunt on the background back and forth when using "focus area". So move the focus area on the place you want it to be during self filming (middle. left, right, etc.), increase the size of your green focus square to the maximum possible and half push the focus button. Then start filming...
This method works for me and my FZ1000 (eg during interview situations,  when I am completely alone and I can not stay behind the camera but have to discuss with my interview partner), even the background should be very contrasty. I use to lighten my subject (even during daylight), so since using this method, I never had any problems with hunting forth and back)....

That's poor...quite miserable in my eyes...just take a look at the background focusing permanently back and forth - unusable with this flaw. It's the "old" Panasonic "pumping issue", sometimes in background, sometimes with the subject in foreground. It works a little bit better when defining a certain focus area and trying to keep the subject within this area, but it's far away from Sony A6x00 AF or Canon DPAF...

I was already like did me and webrunner5 even watched the same video?? Even on the scene with the girl it's pumping around, you can also tell by the heavy breathing of the lens.
Don't know, luckily I gave up on C-AF with Panasonics a long time ago. If you must... get a Canon for the type of shots where you really need to have it. Otherwise, S-AF & MF.

That's poor...quite miserable in my eyes...just take a look at the background focusing permanently back and forth - unusable with this flaw. It's the "old" Panasonic "pumping issue", sometimes in background, sometimes with the subject in foreground. It works a little bit better when defining a certain focus area and trying to keep the subject within this area, but it's far away from Sony A6x00 AF or Canon DPAF...

@funkyou86
You don't have to compare the GH5 or other Lumix devices with a 15K camera to talk about color science. You only have to compare the Pannys (NOT camcorder or pro devices) simply with am Nikon D750, which is cheaper than a GH5. No chance for the Panny to reach the pleasant Nikon colors OOC (with correction / grading in post, of course).
And don't say, it's in the eyes of beholder...I made some A/B tests with real people (not with woolly-minded gear heads living in a parallel universe) and a vast majority prefer the Nikon color rendition (OOC) over the Panny one. ;-)
In my eyes Pana still got better in the last two years in handling color science OOC. Just take a look at some pieces of face studies of @jonpais with his GX85...When comparing it with OOC Pana footage from two years ago, you will realise a substancial difference...

So, I have been simplifying my post workflow and to practice I've been messing with some old D5500 footage. I decided to stop using Color Finale, Film Convert and Colorista and only use the basic tools in FCPX.
The D5500 has proven to be a great camera for this simplified process... just enough DR to handle a little post processing but not enough to let me get out of hand.
With my latest tests I have been using some Film Grain from Red Giant Renoiser. I have been using it at default but I think it may be too much... even for Vimeo's compression. Any film grain tips would be greatly appreciated.
 

@jonpais
Fact is, 99% of people NEVER hold the GH5 in their hands. Most AF talk is speculation and assumption.
Furthermore there are surely fanatic GH5-fanboys defending the camera, even it was complete crap (for sure it is NOT). And paid "social media marketers", paid to spread / advocate the most positive aspects of this product and fight criticism...
On the other side, there are enough Pana-hater, trying to question and miscredit nearly all features of the GH5. Why? No clue...Fanboyism and hate aren't very useful for curious potential buyers, but this "war" does influence their decision for sure...It's all about money and fanatism - and this is quite sad...Take a look at the comments on this video - "The GH5 AF-War":
Let's wait until one can regularly buy and properly operate the GH5 and then praise or hate it...It will be more than fair...