BTM_Pix

So true.
I worked with some people in my other other life years ago in music that actually had the reputation for creativity via cutting edge technology but who I found were surprisingly lacking in technical knowledge when it came to discussing some projects with them. They had a skill for recognising and exploiting the actual real benefits of the technology without being troubled by the minutiae all of its features. Being able to see the wood for the trees is a major skill in itself.
Their other skill was finding nerds who could harvest these benefits for them.
As its seeing exactly the same thing across the whole frame its theoretically agnostic to metering mode.
Which is why I leave it on centre weighted

Yeah, sure it was
 

So true.
I worked with some people in my other other life years ago in music that actually had the reputation for creativity via cutting edge technology but who I found were surprisingly lacking in technical knowledge when it came to discussing some projects with them. They had a skill for recognising and exploiting the actual real benefits of the technology without being troubled by the minutiae all of its features. Being able to see the wood for the trees is a major skill in itself.
Their other skill was finding nerds who could harvest these benefits for them.
As its seeing exactly the same thing across the whole frame its theoretically agnostic to metering mode.
Which is why I leave it on centre weighted

The two major problems those LED ad board actually present to us shooting in stadiums as they become so widely adopted are :
1) We've had to get taller stools.
2) They are quite temperamental so you often have their techs crouching next to you and fiddling about with them.
White balance changing in a fast burst due to floodlights pulsing is an order of magnitude higher as a lighting issue than the LED boards.
For this LED board stuff to be causing a genuine problem for people shooting at stadiums with the A9 then people would have to be actually shooting at stadiums with the A9 in the first place. And in my experience, they're not. For reasons that have zero to do with banding.
Such an odd thing to go after them for in the overall scheme of things with that camera.
This image they've used to show the banding though....
I'm not being catty, because I don't mind that fro fella, but I don't look at it and think "Wow, look at the banding"
I think "Where's the ball, why is your horizon off, why is the focus on the wrong player, why is it so noisy for a shot in broad daylight, why is it so heavily processed"
If I sent that on the wire, it wouldn't be the banding that would be preventing it from getting published.

Man, Jon I love your passion about filmmaking. I don't always agree with you, but I appreciate the depths you'll go to improve your craft.
With that being said, ETTR is a bad habit to rely on. Sure it can work, but in a lot of instances you're setting yourself up for more work in post and risking ruining shots if you can't pull back those highlights or you end up with weird skin tones because now the curve is messed up.
It all depends on the curve. sLog2 needs to be overexposed by about 1.7 to 2 stops, otherwise it is an unrecoverable, noisy mess. CineLikeD works best -2/3 to +2/3 depending on the shot.
You have lucked out in your tests because you've needed the +2/3 and it seems to coincide with ETTR. Plus from your test, we've already surmised that since you are relying on the lens' aperture stops and not an incremental change from a variable ND or a clickless aperture that you are actually not even truly using ETTR correctly.
Try it with an actor with a bright blue sky behind them and trees in the background in mid day sun. Or light an actor's face until 100% zebras appear and then back off with a variable nd, clickless aperture or the dimmer from the light. Those skin tones will be a pain in the ass to correct.
Why do you think Panasonic cameras have their zebras set to 80% and 100% out of the factory? The 80% is for skin tones.
These cameras are only capable of so much DR. I don't think it's worth the risk of losing shots with ETTR to get an extra half a stop.
I respect your pursuit of craft, you have way more patience and skill than I have, but you would probably be better served with a light meter than from the Leeming LUT. In most instances, the camera's light meter is sufficient enough. 
I was constantly worried about ETTR after I dumped my EOS-M for an NX500 and all of my footage suffered from banding and bad color. Part of that was my lack of skill, but part was due to my ETTR with every shot, in every scenario, without regard. I did the same with the G7 and I had the same results. Finally, after getting the GX85, I started using the in camera light meter instead and I had better results overall. But it really wasn't until I got the D5500 which won't even meter on older Nikkor lenses, let alone has zebras, so I had to go back to exposing by eye and without a doubt it was some of my favorite and best work. 
No doubt that zebras are a tool and they are great for reference but they are not a reliable measurement of light and exposure. If you want or need that then you should definitely get a light meter.
I don't mean to keep bringing this up to argue with you about, but if you Google ETTR and video, on the very first page, near the top, the infamous Ebrahim Saadawi's long post about it pops up. When I first started coming around this site, I thought he was an authority on video, I took some cues from his bloviated posts because I thought he knew his shit. We know how that turned out. 
Again I think ETTR can work in some instances and I would never not use it when needed. Hell, I use it most of the time now with ML Raw but even then, I will back exposure away if I feel the shot requires it. 

Aaah ok. Am still keeping my fingers crossed. I just got back from a trip without a camera. But I think the colors on the GX85 would make a great VLog.
Thanks for the prompt reply. I am keeping my fingers crossed. 

The Expodsic (or at least this £13 'equivalent' version) is a good cheap alternative to an incident light meter as well as being a quick and reliable way to set white balance.
You just hold it over your lens whilst pointing to the light source that is falling on your subject so and when the camera meter hits centre then thats the exposure set correctly as the camera expects it to be because it is seeing 18% grey through the Expodisc.
Its quite interesting to see how that can look on screen when you then take away the Expodisc and on the histogram (especially with cinelike d) as it is definitely not ETTR but sure enough with zebras at 100% the peak highlights are only just pinging the zebras.
I wouldn't say its a definitive way to expose but its a very consistent starting point from which to make the decision and as its measuring whats falling on the subject rather than whats reflecting from it then its more appropriate IMO.
Kicks arse for white balance setting.
 

The GH4 capture from a forum user hasn't materialised so thats the blocker right now.
When it does, it will be looked at to see if it can be harvested or not.

The Expodsic (or at least this £13 'equivalent' version) is a good cheap alternative to an incident light meter as well as being a quick and reliable way to set white balance.
You just hold it over your lens whilst pointing to the light source that is falling on your subject so and when the camera meter hits centre then thats the exposure set correctly as the camera expects it to be because it is seeing 18% grey through the Expodisc.
Its quite interesting to see how that can look on screen when you then take away the Expodisc and on the histogram (especially with cinelike d) as it is definitely not ETTR but sure enough with zebras at 100% the peak highlights are only just pinging the zebras.
I wouldn't say its a definitive way to expose but its a very consistent starting point from which to make the decision and as its measuring whats falling on the subject rather than whats reflecting from it then its more appropriate IMO.
Kicks arse for white balance setting.
 

I think the reason this is a popular thread on EOShd is simply because this is a nerd site for cheap cameras. 
We know, or want to know, the intricacies of techniques and  equipment.  
What we do with these bits of info, if anything, is another matter altogether. 
I will say that, personally, the people I know and admire creatively aren't  obsessively concerned with the nerdy tech stuff.  
They know enough to work and the rest ain't a big deal ---or trust others to carry that water. 
That's my world though. Yours might be different. 

The two major problems those LED ad board actually present to us shooting in stadiums as they become so widely adopted are :
1) We've had to get taller stools.
2) They are quite temperamental so you often have their techs crouching next to you and fiddling about with them.
White balance changing in a fast burst due to floodlights pulsing is an order of magnitude higher as a lighting issue than the LED boards.
For this LED board stuff to be causing a genuine problem for people shooting at stadiums with the A9 then people would have to be actually shooting at stadiums with the A9 in the first place. And in my experience, they're not. For reasons that have zero to do with banding.
Such an odd thing to go after them for in the overall scheme of things with that camera.
This image they've used to show the banding though....
I'm not being catty, because I don't mind that fro fella, but I don't look at it and think "Wow, look at the banding"
I think "Where's the ball, why is your horizon off, why is the focus on the wrong player, why is it so noisy for a shot in broad daylight, why is it so heavily processed"
If I sent that on the wire, it wouldn't be the banding that would be preventing it from getting published.

If he's anything like the dog I used to have as a kid then he could sit utterly immobile if there was a biscuit dangled in front of him. 
If it was a chocolate one he could hold the pose long enough for you to cover him in papier mache and make a mould of him.
I'd be inclined to email the guy who runs that review site and see what he thinks. Its the scale of it that may or may not be an issue as those ones in the supermarket tended to be action figure size.

With regard to audio, I think the innovation has largely come from the music side of the fence rather than the broadcast/film side to be honest.
From that point of view, there have been numerous 5DMKii moments.
The Portastudio was one, the LinnDrum was another, the Akai S900 sampler, the Atari ST with Cubase, the ADAT digital multitrack, the Yamaha 02R mixing console and of course SoundTools as it was and ProTools as it became.
Arguably, these were all much bigger game changers than the 5DMKii, particularly the latter ones as they changed the entire industry at the high end as well as the low.
The 5DMKii let you make images that looked somewhat  like the movie studios could do, the audio products didn’t just allow you to produce audio that sounded like a real recording studio did but actually became the real recording studios.
The nature of broadcast and film is intrinsically more conservative.
I’ve been involved in product development for one company where it seemed inconceivable why the BBC, for example, would spend five times more for something that did less and then for another company where it seemed inconceivable to me why they would spend five times more on what we were proposing to them than they could on something similar they could get from a music store.
Some days you’re the statue, some days you’re the pigeon !
The problem with audio developments for music is that it plateaued and then became a race to the bottom price wise from which it will never return. It means that the innovation is now in the cost reduction and arguably why not because there really isn’t many more places for it to go in terms of functionality or quality. Which is good for us!
As all of this rapid development was going on in music technology, say between 1982-2000, it was like the wild west at times with companies coming from nowhere with bombshell products that either drove their competitors out of business or drove them on to greater heights.
And the vast majority of these companies were small ones (generally created by musicians who had to invent what it was the market didn’t have for them to buy), which made them lean and agile.
Over time though, the eating each other’s lunch routines often combined with little, no or reckless business practices (and ESPECIALLY poor cash flow from over ambitious product developments) left them vulnerable to being put out of business or, more usually, being bought out by the major manufacturers who were predominantly large Japanese companies. The likes of Oberheim (Yamaha), Linn (Akai), PPG (Korg) and Sequential Circuits (Yamaha again) all went that way and the innovation generally went no further for them once they were under the wing of those bigger manufacturers.  Eventually freed from their ‘consultancy’ deals, most have resurfaced as boutique operations serving an ever more niche market.
If I look at someone like Fairlight and my relationship with them as an example of what happened to an innovative company, its quite informative. I went from being an awestruck kid when they brought the CMI out, to then working for a manufacturer who basically drove them out of the sampler business they’d created, to eventually working on OEM development with them when they transitioned to broadcast. In the subsequent 20 years they’ve changed hands countless times and are now just a tab on a piece of free(ish) software. Its hard to grasp such a transition for me but for anyone who’s too young to know what the CMI was, its the equivalent of RED’s RAW pipeline ending up as a free download in the Sony PlayMemories store for your RX100.
Lexicon are exactly the same. From making jaw dropping almost other worldly products to being gobbled up by a company that was making most of its money off providing car stereos for GM etc and Lexicon was reduced over time to being included in every low end mixing console and software bundle that it could be licensed to. The company that bought them has done the same to every company its bought and I can’t even dignify them by mentioning their name even 20 years after them destroying the company I worked for !
So there’s just no incentive there for anyone to be innovative in music audio anymore as its littered with similar stories and the ones left standing wouldn’t see the amount of volume in broadcast/film that they need to press the button on the mass production runs they now need due to how cheap everything has to be now.
The company that COULD do it are the much maligned Behringer. 
If you look at something like the X Air XR12 digital mixing console and see what they can knock out for £239 retail (inc VAT!!) then it doesn’t take a genius to see what they could do against Sound Devices if they had the inclination but there just isn’t the market there. Because, believe me, they wouldn’t have blinked if there was.
So, unfortunately, I don’t think we’re going to get that 5DMarkii moment and the innovation such as it is will come from individuals themselves looking at products from the music side of the fence and modifying it themselves. Like getting that X Air XR12 and powering it from Sony NP batteries to make an extremely capable digital field mixer and recorder for £269 (including the £30 for the bits to do it) or being a smartarse and using cheap midi controllers to create remote focus and control systems for Panasonic cameras for under £75  (ahem!).
Because music audio had its numerous 5DMKii moments a few years ago there is a backlog of a ton of cheap stuff that flies under the radar for film makers that is waiting for them if they look for it. 
 

There was a company a couple of years ago that had scanning booths in some UK supermarkets to do this and produce 3D models of people and pets.
There are still companies that do it such as this one 
https://www.shapify.me
Then there are companies like this one that will make you a 3D model from images you send them too
http://www.uscan360.com
If you want to go DIY then this site has a lot of information about hardware (yikes on the price!) but also free and low cost apps to do it yourself.
 
Its funny that you should mention 3D scanning and printing as we were looking at a 3D printer the other week in an electronics shop while we were buying a memory stick and marvelling how cheap it was. We'd recently watched the documentary 'Print The Legend' which is about how the low cost manufacturers had started (its a far more interesting film than it sounds!). We then determined that we'd never actually use it because we couldn't think of something to print on it that we couldn't get in a shop and for cheaper (and certainly quicker because they take a looooong time to make anything). Since then of course, I've had a need for multiple different things I could've used it for!
 

The two major problems those LED ad board actually present to us shooting in stadiums as they become so widely adopted are :
1) We've had to get taller stools.
2) They are quite temperamental so you often have their techs crouching next to you and fiddling about with them.
White balance changing in a fast burst due to floodlights pulsing is an order of magnitude higher as a lighting issue than the LED boards.
For this LED board stuff to be causing a genuine problem for people shooting at stadiums with the A9 then people would have to be actually shooting at stadiums with the A9 in the first place. And in my experience, they're not. For reasons that have zero to do with banding.
Such an odd thing to go after them for in the overall scheme of things with that camera.
This image they've used to show the banding though....
I'm not being catty, because I don't mind that fro fella, but I don't look at it and think "Wow, look at the banding"
I think "Where's the ball, why is your horizon off, why is the focus on the wrong player, why is it so noisy for a shot in broad daylight, why is it so heavily processed"
If I sent that on the wire, it wouldn't be the banding that would be preventing it from getting published.

Canon Rumors is a general-audience Canon site with no emphasis on video, yet their poll currently shows 36% of photographers are angry about the lack of 4K.
That's a huge amount of people.
Although 9000 voted so far in that particular poll, if you extrapolate that 36% to 36% of Canon's total sales, they are in the shit.
Why piss off over a third of your customers?
I have the Mk IV with latest firmware!
Sometimes, with certain lenses, the AF can be pretty good... It's more the random reliability that kills it, along with the low light AF.
It was a big reason behind me sticking with the 1D C and 1D X Mark II for stills work.

This is me with all the abysmal kit lenses that I've bought over the years with the intention of using them as a DIY rebate scheme by selling them off.
 

Maybe they wanted to stay nimble in case Vlad rode in on a bear?

The two major problems those LED ad board actually present to us shooting in stadiums as they become so widely adopted are :
1) We've had to get taller stools.
2) They are quite temperamental so you often have their techs crouching next to you and fiddling about with them.
White balance changing in a fast burst due to floodlights pulsing is an order of magnitude higher as a lighting issue than the LED boards.
For this LED board stuff to be causing a genuine problem for people shooting at stadiums with the A9 then people would have to be actually shooting at stadiums with the A9 in the first place. And in my experience, they're not. For reasons that have zero to do with banding.
Such an odd thing to go after them for in the overall scheme of things with that camera.
This image they've used to show the banding though....
I'm not being catty, because I don't mind that fro fella, but I don't look at it and think "Wow, look at the banding"
I think "Where's the ball, why is your horizon off, why is the focus on the wrong player, why is it so noisy for a shot in broad daylight, why is it so heavily processed"
If I sent that on the wire, it wouldn't be the banding that would be preventing it from getting published.

Here's the source DPReview are using for the article
Doesn't look like click bait to me   

Here's the 1D X Mark II reacting even worse to high brightness pulsing LED light sources https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4133297
But it didn't make the front page, obviously

I suppose it depends on the definition of problem to be honest.
Can Nikon and Canon have the same issue? Yes, if the circumstances are right.
You'd have to test both of them side by side to see if its exactly the same circumstances or if, as you'd expect, the electronic shutter is more prone.
But taking it all as an actual problem?
Nah.
As I say, white balance changes off floodlights are a far, far bigger problem than LED boards and they all suffer from that.
Those LED boards are a problem because they ruin shots aesthetically rather than technically.
The article is talking about when your subject is predominantly lit by them, which when you consider they're predominantly used in field sports is a bit of an interesting comment!
In the shot I put up that they are highlighting it with, the photographer has a sideline position and the boards are very close to the touchline and the players themselves are very close to it too.
That is definitely the worst case scenario and also the least likely.
The more usual position would be behind the goal where there would be at least 10 metres between the boards and the subject.
Even with sideline positions, the stadiums that are of the ilk to be having them would generally have a greater distance from them to the subject and not be as tight to the line as this.
The real story here of course is that of course its highlighted on a short shooting distance because the A9 doesn't have the lenses to do anything else. It just makes it so bizarre to be making such a fuss over the banding when you've got that particular elephant in the room.
Thats what makes me think its just general clickbait rather than some shill stuff for Canon because I'm pretty sure that until Sony magic up some lenses for it that this is Canon's (and Nikons) reaction to a problem like reports of banding on the A9  
 

The two major problems those LED ad board actually present to us shooting in stadiums as they become so widely adopted are :
1) We've had to get taller stools.
2) They are quite temperamental so you often have their techs crouching next to you and fiddling about with them.
White balance changing in a fast burst due to floodlights pulsing is an order of magnitude higher as a lighting issue than the LED boards.
For this LED board stuff to be causing a genuine problem for people shooting at stadiums with the A9 then people would have to be actually shooting at stadiums with the A9 in the first place. And in my experience, they're not. For reasons that have zero to do with banding.
Such an odd thing to go after them for in the overall scheme of things with that camera.
This image they've used to show the banding though....
I'm not being catty, because I don't mind that fro fella, but I don't look at it and think "Wow, look at the banding"
I think "Where's the ball, why is your horizon off, why is the focus on the wrong player, why is it so noisy for a shot in broad daylight, why is it so heavily processed"
If I sent that on the wire, it wouldn't be the banding that would be preventing it from getting published.

@BTM_Pix
This is a nightmare and paradise at the same time. 

This is me with all the abysmal kit lenses that I've bought over the years with the intention of using them as a DIY rebate scheme by selling them off.
 

No, its fine. Its based on Panasonic's own DMW-AC8 and DMW-DCC11 system which also has 8.4V coming off the actual supply which the dummy battery then takes care of.
Yes, its that kind of thing.
I couldn't remember who did a range of them but I do now and its Ex-Pro.
So they sell the coupler and their own power pack as a package and then you just add more dummy battery types if you've got different cameras.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01MXHMOPZ/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1498831490&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=Panasonic%2BDMW-DCC11&th=1