Ken Ross

I really don't see the rationale in pointing the finger at Panasonic for not implementing (or giving the choice for implementing) H265 across the board, simply because it's used in one iteration of its many modes. 
The rationale for giving Sony the pass simply because they haven't implemented the necessary hardware, is not adequate. Why haven't they released a camera with the necessary hardware? How long has it been since the NX1? If Sony wanted to do this they could, but obviously they don't...for whatever 'selfish' reason.
I'm sorry, IMO Panasonic deserves more credit, not more 'blame' than Sony and others, for at least a partial implementation of 265.
Further, at least in my case, if there was an obvious benefit in PQ (not guaranteed), as the result of H265's across-the-board implementation, I would switch editing programs just as I did with the NX1. Using the argument of more efficient storage utilization, doesn't sway me either. Storage is simply too cheap these days for me to ditch my favorite editing solution for that reason. 
Jost my 2 cents.
 

Jon, Panasonic might sell you some extra bits.

Color science...such a tired overused phrase...as tiresome as filmic actually....My preference in a camera is actually color fidelity...I don't want the camera to decide the image for me...I want the camera to reproduce the colors my eyes see...I'll change it to the look I want for whatever the occasion/reason...which is why I prefer Panasonic cameras...to my eye it produces what I see...not some fairytale version of what's there...and of course the other part that's most important to me....they work when you need them to...excuses about where cameras are today and what they can't do is just tiring and ridiculous....get a fucking hobby if any one of these cameras can't work for you!...

For many that have moved away from Sony, they'd need to improve the following:
* Figure out the overheating issue
* Improve their color science
* Move to an IBIS that really works and is demonstrably superior to just an OIS lens alone
* Implement 4K60p...again, without overheating
* A flip out VF would be nice, thank you. 
I'd be surprised to see if they really come up with something competitive to the GH5, but I'd certainly like to see that happen. It just seems to me that Sony is so set in their ways, they rarely deviate from the path. 
I've used Sony cameras for years, so I'd like to see them give Panasonic a run for their money. The more competition the better.

Stab, yes, you're largely correct. When you see the hand (sounds scary ;)), that is the IBIS, sensor-based system. If you couple that with a Panasonic OIS lens that is equipped to work with IBIS, then you get the IBIS2 and "DUAL 2" shows up in your VF/LCD. DUAL 2 is simply IBIS2...not sure why they don't call it that.
Now adding e-stabilization is an additional electronic (not sensor-based stabilization) that lays over the IBIS. That's where the sensor cropping occurs. You'll have to see if the cropping vs the additional stabilization is worth it. At least as it's implemented in the G85, I don't see much of a difference with E-stabilization. The good thing is there's no IQ deterioration with it engaged. 

100% agreed. I start getting nervous when I have to go to 3200 on 5D3 MLRAW, so the fact that that 3200 on the GH5 is more than adequate absolutely delights me. Pop a Speedbooster on there, as has been mentioned many times, and it's outperforming a full frame camera.
What kills me with 5D3 noise is the very low frequency banding which looks entirely unnatural. The GH5 noise, on the other hand, just looks grainy - and that's fine.

But you do realize that both Samsung cameras have not been in production for some time and they've exited the market entirely, right? Not too many people are rushing out for an orphaned camera. 
BTW, I too had an NX1 and besides its quirkiness (poor AF, spontaneous shutdowns etc.), I loved it.

A very common sense evaluation to low light, IMO.
Interestingly, to my eyes, the GH5 actually looked a bit cleaner at ISO 3200 & 6400 than the Sony. He also had an F2.8 on the GH5 and an F2 on the Sony. Beyond 6400, it was all A6300.

A very common sense evaluation to low light, IMO.
Interestingly, to my eyes, the GH5 actually looked a bit cleaner at ISO 3200 & 6400 than the Sony. He also had an F2.8 on the GH5 and an F2 on the Sony. Beyond 6400, it was all A6300.

So you started this thread simply because you didn't like seeing Andrew "gush" over a camera he's waited for, received, has in hand, and realized he likes? It's a good thing Andrew's 'gushing' didn't start to ramp up until after he received it, and had some time to really check out.  Maybe it's because you're taking offense to his opinion on Canon's current status in the industry? I mean, it's his opinion... and I'd kinda expect Andrew to post his excitement, dislike, opinions for any camera/camera manufacturer he chooses... especially on the front page of a site he created. Protesting personal opinion's on camera specs and camera selection... is that it?  I dunno - carry on

Yes, the GH5 does do 10 bit 4K internally.
I noticed you 'conveniently' left out 4K slo mo, IBIS and improved color science in your response. Instead you just focused on improved AF. The improved AF does work better than it did in the GH4 and that was the basis for my comparison. Some are also saying it's quite close to the A6300/A6500. I understand you're going out of your way to convince us (or yourself) why the GH5 just isn't that great. You're apparently not the target audience. 
Finally, yes, I can see a significant difference between the output of the GH4 & GH5. Apparently you can't, and that's fine. Can you see much of a difference between HD & 4K?  

How is that color bleed?
Why do some magnify an image beyond what anyone would watch, see changes in a color because of either reflections or some part of the image is in shadows, and then blame it on the camera. Does anyone really think that their customers would actually notice this and blame it on the videographer or camera?
I guess never having been a pixel peeper, I just don't think that way. If the image looks good the way I'd normally view it, I'm good to go. If the image begins to break down, magnifying it 3-5X greater or more than I'd ever view it, I really couldn't care less.
There are times I think some just look for issues, real or imagined.

The Codec defintely didn't break up, the colorgrading did!
 
Look at my example:
 

The point is I don't think we're seeing anything that's the result of an in-camera breakdown of the codec. This looks entirely normal for anything that's showing a slightly different coloration as the result of a difference in lighting caused by shadows or reflections.

How is that color bleed?
Why do some magnify an image beyond what anyone would watch, see changes in a color because of either reflections or some part of the image is in shadows, and then blame it on the camera. Does anyone really think that their customers would actually notice this and blame it on the videographer or camera?
I guess never having been a pixel peeper, I just don't think that way. If the image looks good the way I'd normally view it, I'm good to go. If the image begins to break down, magnifying it 3-5X greater or more than I'd ever view it, I really couldn't care less.
There are times I think some just look for issues, real or imagined.

The point is I don't think we're seeing anything that's the result of an in-camera breakdown of the codec. This looks entirely normal for anything that's showing a slightly different coloration as the result of a difference in lighting caused by shadows or reflections.

Even for the people not buying this camera (like me), I can't see how NOT to be excited.
It is the first time a manufacturer gives so much, for so little money, on a perfect operational and reliable camera body, covering most of the competition, and then add some.
It is an exciting release, but people tend to forget, that GH4 was exciting back in the day too, I am a bit old, and my memory works linear, so I clearly remember that - again- Panasonic pushed the limits a little bit further with the GH4, as exactly does with the GH5 now.
Well done Pana, but not for me, yet..
we will see how it goes the next few months, what others have to say (both real world reviews and other manufacturers), the firmware updates, and maybe, down in the road, most of us we will HAVE to own one!

For many that have moved away from Sony, they'd need to improve the following:
* Figure out the overheating issue
* Improve their color science
* Move to an IBIS that really works and is demonstrably superior to just an OIS lens alone
* Implement 4K60p...again, without overheating
* A flip out VF would be nice, thank you. 
I'd be surprised to see if they really come up with something competitive to the GH5, but I'd certainly like to see that happen. It just seems to me that Sony is so set in their ways, they rarely deviate from the path. 
I've used Sony cameras for years, so I'd like to see them give Panasonic a run for their money. The more competition the better.

For many that have moved away from Sony, they'd need to improve the following:
* Figure out the overheating issue
* Improve their color science
* Move to an IBIS that really works and is demonstrably superior to just an OIS lens alone
* Implement 4K60p...again, without overheating
* A flip out VF would be nice, thank you. 
I'd be surprised to see if they really come up with something competitive to the GH5, but I'd certainly like to see that happen. It just seems to me that Sony is so set in their ways, they rarely deviate from the path. 
I've used Sony cameras for years, so I'd like to see them give Panasonic a run for their money. The more competition the better.

Have to say the inbuilt stabilisation is amazing. I bought the 42.5 1.7 iOS lens solely because I didn't own a fast stabilised prime for my gh4. I had the 25mm 1.7 LUMIX lens but that had no iOS and was unusable handheld.
now with the gh5 I can happily use the 25mm 1.7 handheld.. and find myself using it more than the 42.5 because of the better focal length.
i honestly cannot tell much difference between the stabilisation the inbuilt gives with a non stabilises lens and dual is 1 with something like the 12-35 mk1!
oh and low light is a lot better, as is noise reduction.. pretty much shot in the dark at 3200 with minimal noise and after some neat video you would think I was shooting at ISO 400!

For many that have moved away from Sony, they'd need to improve the following:
* Figure out the overheating issue
* Improve their color science
* Move to an IBIS that really works and is demonstrably superior to just an OIS lens alone
* Implement 4K60p...again, without overheating
* A flip out VF would be nice, thank you. 
I'd be surprised to see if they really come up with something competitive to the GH5, but I'd certainly like to see that happen. It just seems to me that Sony is so set in their ways, they rarely deviate from the path. 
I've used Sony cameras for years, so I'd like to see them give Panasonic a run for their money. The more competition the better.

For many that have moved away from Sony, they'd need to improve the following:
* Figure out the overheating issue
* Improve their color science
* Move to an IBIS that really works and is demonstrably superior to just an OIS lens alone
* Implement 4K60p...again, without overheating
* A flip out VF would be nice, thank you. 
I'd be surprised to see if they really come up with something competitive to the GH5, but I'd certainly like to see that happen. It just seems to me that Sony is so set in their ways, they rarely deviate from the path. 
I've used Sony cameras for years, so I'd like to see them give Panasonic a run for their money. The more competition the better.

Shot with it yesterday and it's impressive. Colour is much better, you can tell it is 4:2:2 and 10bit. You've all been looking at badly graded V-LOG on YouTube at tiny bitrates compressed to 8bit 4:2:0.
The only downside of the 10bit files is they are hard to edit natively.
I can see a lot of transcoding to ProRes ahead.
ProRes would have been a much more suitable codec than H.264 on a camera with the GH5's performance... But the quality is there in spades. Amazing saturation and realism, super smooth feel to the files.
I'm just shooting on Standard BTW.

Sure, if you're not excited about:
*4K60p
*4K slo mo
*IBIS
*Improved color science
*Obviously improved AF
*Internal 10bit 4:2:2
*Improved low light that some say are in the range of an A6300
*Higher rez sensor for better stills
Then yeah, not much to get excited about.   (I'm sure I've left off some other things)

Hahahahahaha 
get out of your cave man. The "MF is for pro, AF for small hobbyists" is a thing of the past. 
Not so long ago we used MF in photography. Do you know many pro photographers shooting weddings photography in MF??
Nope. For video we are right at the curve now. In 5 years from now, 5% of pros using A7S like bodies will shoot MF in video. 
When you have used a Canon DPAF system you know it's the real deal, not only making your life a lot easier, but opening your creativity allowing shots impossible before (or very difficult for a one man operation).
Good luck run and gunning with swallo DoF with a DJI Ronin gimbal and your Manual focus camera mounted on it.