Amazeballs

Don't want to sound like a dick but what's with the picture covers on youtube? Everybody does the same thing. Funny face and the product smashed in front of it. Is there an agreement on this or just an established trend?

1/4000 would be typical in mid-day sun.  I'll shoot some video tomorrow and apply the trial plug-in.  See what happens.
Usually have a bunch of ravens flying around....filming that should provide a decent stress test.

It's not bright at all in RGB mode and huge in footprint. Do not recommend. 
I went with Vijim V-2 which is 50$ on Ali, 200 gramm, compact, has 3 hour fast charge battery inside, various effects and freakishly bright for its size. And yeah, you can stick it to metal as it has a magnet back. I do recommend this one

It's not bright at all in RGB mode and huge in footprint. Do not recommend. 
I went with Vijim V-2 which is 50$ on Ali, 200 gramm, compact, has 3 hour fast charge battery inside, various effects and freakishly bright for its size. And yeah, you can stick it to metal as it has a magnet back. I do recommend this one

Will the R5 include Zebras?
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/canon-eos-r5-has-zebras-can-turn-8k-into-uber-4k

Maybe they never thought Canon would give them what they actually wanted and not what they settled for in the R?
It definitely upsets the current state of the camera industry. Sony is the only real competitor as far as AF performance goes so it seems like the industry is going to converge around these two brands with Fuji filling in the rest.
Not really sure what Panasonic is going to do as they no longer have the resolution and FPS advantage anymore that they’ve had with the GH5 and S1H with 4K60 in MFT and now FF. In addition, 8K is, at the moment, a hard wall. Going higher becomes exponentially more impractical.
Resolutions 8K and higher become increasingly more specialized (360, volumetric imaging, sports broadcasting) and make less and less sense for consumer consumption and capture.
Thats leaves Panasonic Lumix brand in a tough position. They need to deliver trustworthy AF as good as DPAF with the best Varicam color science and high dynamic range to survive in the coming market.

I am seriously impressed by DeepL though 😍

It had IBIS working only in stills mode, not video.

It had IBIS working only in stills mode, not video.

Advanced DFD doesnt sound very optimistic. I wish they would just add PDAF everyone is asking for the past 4 years.

Advanced DFD doesnt sound very optimistic. I wish they would just add PDAF everyone is asking for the past 4 years.

Advanced DFD doesnt sound very optimistic. I wish they would just add PDAF everyone is asking for the past 4 years.

Not ideology..  we're all chasing an image that's as high-end or highest quality as we can.
The issue that we have here on this forum is that we are very out-of-touch with what techniques are used to get the images that we admire, from large budget productions, or from classic films anyway.  There is a lot of stuff that isn't spoken about online, and it kind of exists outside of the internet, or at least is hidden behind paywalls.  It's easy to spend a long time consuming content and interacting with people online without ever really knowing that this stuff exists, especially now with social media 3.0 actively creating echo-chambers.
In order to move out of the realm of ideology completely, let's look at some data.  I'm going to assume that you know how to read an MTF chart, since you seem to value resolution so highly.  If you don't then I'd highly recommend you look into them, they're invaluable.
One thing you may not be aware of however, is that lenses don't have a "resolution".  To say one lens is 14MP and another is 16MP is oversimplification to the point it's misleading, because it's not that simple.  The resolution of a lens will blur detail, which essentially has a softening effect, lowering contrast of that detail.  Yes, there does get a point where if the detail is fine enough then the lens has lowered the contrast of that detail to zero, but the transition from it being very sharp (ie, high contrast) to very soft (ie, low contrast) is actually a progressive one.  MTF charts show this softening effect by measuring contrast at varying lines per mm, lp/mm, and obviously the higher the lines per mm you use to measure, the less contrast a given lens will have.  This is an important distinction, as we will see later.
Amongst the most popular workhorse cinema lenses are the Zeiss CP.2 primes.  Here is how they measure: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/06/just-the-cinema-mtf-charts-zeiss-cine-lenses/
Here is one of the MFT charts:

This indicates that with fine detail they have very low levels of contrast, ie, low resolution.  
Here's a chart from the Xeen testing article: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/05/just-the-cinema-lens-mtf-charts-xeen-and-schneider/

This is even lower resolution again.
Lets compare a 50mm Zeiss CP.2 to a high resolution lens:

The Zeiss is obviously inferior in resolution terms to the other lens by quite some margin.  Also, that other lens also happens to be an MFT lens.  
So why are cinematographers happy with such poor resolution.  Well, there's two factors that I can see, one is that digital video has been low resolution historically, and the other reason is that cinematographers actually like lower contrast lenses and will go to reasonable lengths to lower it.  Remember when I said above that a "lower resolution" lens is actually a lens that has relatively lower contrast on finer details than another lens.  Have a read of this article: https://www.provideocoalition.com/the-secret-life-of-behind-the-lens-nets/
This article talks about how cinematographers are deliberately putting netting / fabric between the lens and the camera, in order to lower the contrast of fine detail.  ie, to lower resolution.
Some examples from that article...  A close-up with no net:

Black sparkle mesh:

Silver sparkle mesh:

Cropping is indeed a thing now, especially on lower budget productions where multiple cameras or multiple takes with different focal lengths are beyond the budget, and in this case, people may now move to controlling image softening in post.  Film halation effects also do this.  
To go one step further, softer light sources do this, especially for skin texture, which is where the desire for lower contrast is typically expressed.
In photography there is a very strange set of behaviours:
Insatiable desire to get the highest resolution lenses and the highest resolution camera and the highest quality image format (RAW) in order to capture the finest details, then.... Get the model to put on makeup (which lowers the contrast on larger skin features like lines, wrinkles, etc - it's called "concealer" for a reason) Cart around ridiculously huge soft boxes in order to smooth the skin (lowering the level of contrast across all detail sizes) Now we go into photoshop and we: dodge/burn with a brush (lowering the contrast of medium sized details) paint over skin areas with filters that lift shadows, or similar (lowering the contrast of all skin details) and then potentially we do frequency separation, where we literally seperate the frequencies, which correspond to small, medium and large detail, and then basically eliminate medium sized detail What is left after all this contrast reduction (lowering resolution) seems to be that we have the models eyes and hair rendered in glorious detail, but skin at detail levels approaching 720p with a Petzval lens.
I'm not sure about you, but in the context of all that, I've kind of lost the logic as to why we need a wide angle lens that is 36MP wide-open (8K resolution).  They do exist, but go have a look at DXOMark and tell me how many lenses there are that exceed 30MP that anyone here can afford.

Looking at XT4 I start thinking that APC-S could be the sweet spot between video-specs\overall size of the system\dof and lowlight\price. I wounder what X-H2 may bring to the table as well. 

It's amazing to me how dismissive people are of the benefits of M43. To me the only "insurmountable" negative of the system, at least on the Panasonic side, is the auto focus but even that, in my opinion, is overblown. Everything else can be pretty much remedied. Poor in low light? Throw a little light on your subject/scene! Need shallow depth of field? Just use the right lens! 
I understand why people love full frame. I really do! But you don't NEED full frame, you just WANT full frame. There's nothing wrong with that either but are you incapable of creating your vision using a smaller sensor? I doubt it. 
Two weeks ago I filmed a pro wrestling event with my 3 camera set up. My buddy did stills using the A7iii with the Sony 70-200mm. I blew his mind when I showed him the GX85 with the 35-100mm f/2.8. The two side by side was comical. Cost of his set up, by the way? $4,600. I paid $250 for the GX85 and $400 for the 35-100mm on the used market. Even if I bought them new though it'd have been $1,500. I know it's not the best comparison, but my buddy could've easily done his job with a G9 instead. Price of that new? $1,200.
I'm rambling, sorry, ha ha, but hopefully some of that makes sense! 

Who else thinks that this puts pressure on the GH6 to deliver more bang for the buck, especially considering that it will have have the smaller sensor disadvantage, and thus unable to justify a higher price than this? 

I am very sad for 30min recording limit in 24-30p of any resolution. No promised wdr mode too. 

I am very sad for 30min recording limit in 24-30p of any resolution. No promised wdr mode too. 

Of course but we are reaching a point of diminishing returns. We've had 10 bit 422 for a while now(GH5), we've had great low light (A7S), we've had RAW(Pocket camera) but nothing has combined all of them together. Sigma has come close, the S1H comes close, the Pocket 4k/6k come close. They are all missing on of the ingredients. 

BRAW is an open source codec! What does this mean? Can it be used in other cameras without paying any money to Blackmagic? If so why no one still paying any attention to it?
Why Prores why not BRAW?

Socialblade.com 

This could very well be a case of irrational exuberance. Take a look at the camera. We know that Panasonic required a vent on the back of their S1H to do 6k. Look at most cinema cameras that do 6k or 8k. Fans are usually a must unless you have an exceptional heat sink and w/o an EVF. Add an EVF to a camera and you have lots of heat. Try doing 8k for any extended length and you'll have a shitload more of heat. Canon's 1DX Mark III is capable of up to 2,600 Mbs but has a body the size of a 1969 Buick and no EVF. How is Canon dissipating heat on this smaller camera with 8k capability?
I see forums littered with phrases like "Canon take my money!" Really? Not only have we not seen the full specs. No one has been able to test the camera.
Something seems fishy to me.

Now I really wish Fuji would be able to achieve IBIS performance on the level of GH5. That would be just really a perfect camera for me. 

What racism is he talking about? Did he say a word about what's going on South Africa right now? Where "kill the boar" is the official policy of the government. Than he probably better shut the fuck up cos this all hypocrisy and populism. 
Thank your agent, your God and fuck off. (c) 

What racism is he talking about? Did he say a word about what's going on South Africa right now? Where "kill the boar" is the official policy of the government. Than he probably better shut the fuck up cos this all hypocrisy and populism. 
Thank your agent, your God and fuck off. (c)