kye

This is the trailer for the film - are the sections you're talking about in here?
There are a few shots in here with lots of noise, but they're either a heavy film emulation or a video camera emulation, so are artistically relevant.
and the other trailer doesn't have any noise I could see at all.
Film Emulation is super hot right now, and heavy grain is a part of that.
Both of these trailers look like they have considerable subtractive saturation, so that seems to align with film emulation.

Very much Batman 1966 with the Dutch angle when in the lairs of the villains to indicate that they were crooked.

Not sure thats the vibe that Canon would want to portray but it would have been quite apt for the launch of the original R5.

The UK price for the R5ii is £4499 versus £3299 for the Z8.
The R5ii has some neat new features but the core stuff doesn't seem like its justifying 35% a hike against the more flexible mounted Z8.
I'll be interested to see the overheating scrutiny it gets after the erm "interesting" history of the mark 1.

I'm off to the Cambridge folk festival next week with my 15 yr old and I'm going to be shooting a mini-doc focusing on why people love this nearly 50yr old festival so much, ie I won't be risking trouble by filming the big acts etc - more aiming for lots of vox pops and street-style imagery.
After a lot of thought I'm just taking my A6600, a couple of my Super Taks - probably the 20mm and the 55mm, together with a straight adapter and a focal length reducer. To go with it and allow me to have some control I'll be adding a 12 inch tube light and a magnetic little RBG, a 14 inch collapsible 5-in-1 reflector/diffuser, 2 little wireless lavs and a VideoMic. All needs to fit comfortably in my mid-size messenger bag. I may take my knock-off cinesaddle as it can double as a pillow in my tent and something to sit on while watching bands!

Well I'm guessing that whatever massive feature set these new cameras have that a level meter isn't one of them 

Panasonic 35mm f1.8 L Mount.
Frame extracts from 4K file on my Panasonic S5ii.
It isn't lacking in sharpness that's for sure.

 

Blasphemy!
Don't you want the FF cinematic look?
Here's me in NY:

Here's me in Seattle:

Here's me in LA:

Here's me in Texas:

(appols for the DOF, I'm saving for the F0.95 version of my lens)

Another GH7 + LogC and ARRI discussion..
TLDR; Brady used the combo on two narrative projects, they matched up nicely in post (but not perfectly), and he sees it as a great option for a B-cam to an Alexa if you didn't have the budget for two Alexas.
There's some side-by-sides in the video, including graded to match and also not.
 

It's kind of liberating sometimes when you set aside all your perfectionism and just have a good time with modest tech. Recently I went on a several day bike trip on Vancouver Island (beautiful place) so I couldn't bring much. I also wanted something I could pull out of a belt pouch with one hand and click while still cycling.
I have a Canon G16 (garage sale find for $6) I was first considering which takes beautiful pictures but is kind of bulky then I found in a drawer an old Sony DSC-T100. It's only does JPGs at 8 megapixels. Below my current standards but then these things are a trade off. I was only just going to email a few people some pics when I got home so it's good enough. I liked how small it was on the trip.
I also used my phone but it's an older one without a zoom, also it's awkward to use compared to a camera. I had to stop cycling to take a picture with it. With the "real" camera, I could reach down, put the wrist strap on, flip down the front flap to turn it on and click, and put it back, all while still cycling.
So it all worked out and I got some amazing pictures within the limits of the situation.

I already have lost my part in a few of them with my OnePlus 9 Pro, pure true, so me too, 1st scope to pay attention to. And hence why my recent FX30 purchase is the answer for.
No active cooling? Not my wallet : ) No small overheating toasters are breaking my heart nor bank account : D either such as a Z8 unit BTW :- )

I think the problem with some of these discussions is the fact that we argue about gear like we are using it for the same purposes. We are discussing the merits of specific trucks, only some of us are using the trucks for a country drive to church, and some of us are hauling loads cross country. This makes the conversations very frustrating. 
 
You can take a drive with an 8 stop DR GH1 and get some pretty shots of the trees at sunset and feel the wind in your hair. But have you ever tried to shoot a commercial project or a modern documentary with 8 stops of DR and be competitive in today's market? 

Yeah my point exactly. I have very little doubt AI will take over huge swaths of the market, it's just I think there will always be room for human made products. 

Maturity level 1: specs are everything
Maturity level 2: specs don't matter
Maturity level 3: let's talk about specs in a nuanced way
Let's try and elevate the discussion, shall we?

Absolutely.  I once overheated an iPhone shooting in direct sun in probably 40-43C (104-110F), and considering that iPhones overheating is something that is practically unheard of, overheating is something I pay a lot of attention to.

Absolutely.  It's like people have forgotten what the images in the cinema actually looked like, or that they were 35mm film.  I say that because people who apply a "filmic" or "cinematic" look seem to apply a film emulation at about 284% of what is realistic.
This is a scan of (IIRC) Kodak 200T (source) :

The video above is:
too sharp too heavy split-tone very heavy-handed diffusion ridiculous halation etc It's like they got a film emulation plugin and put some sliders to 0% emulation, and others to 350%.
In colour, "if it looks good then it is good" definitely applies, but it doesn't seem to have a look of its own, it's just got a bad film emulation on it.

No doubt, and these options are definitely worth pointing out.
For me though, I prefer a much larger range of focal lengths for travel.  I'm sure you know this stuff far better than I, but for @SRV1981 and others, here are some thoughts..
I'm not far enough into the film theory, but I know they shoot documentaries and ENG with zooms for a reason, and I suspect my reasons for wanting that flexibility is the same as theirs.  I shot travel for a couple of years with a 35mm FOV being the main lens, and after a while I noticed a same-same kind of look to the footage.  I noticed this same look when iPhone video first got popular but it only had one focal length, and the same for action-camera-only videos.  
My analysis of award winning documentaries and travelogues showed me two critical things about the cinematography:
1) the shots were nice, but not incredible
2) the way they were used in the edit was what made the final product really great
I was also amazed at how many shots there were, and their variety.  We all know that the average shot length of today's media is around the 2-4s (with 4s being on the slow side), which is 1400-700 shots for a 45 minute episode.  This is easy to achieve if you don't want the shots to be that different from each other, but if you want variety and you want them to be interesting, you either need to go to a large number of locations or you need a zoom.  
The average vantage point will potentially have a large number of interesting compositions..  the wide shot of course, the low-angle wide and the high-angle wide might also be interesting, but beyond that it's about zooming in to interesting details.  Due to compression at longer focal lengths you can also juxtapose different foreground and background elements by getting closer and wider or further away and zooming in.
For travel, your ability to "zoom with your feet" is often severely limited, and you have to shoot from where you are allowed to be:
At the zoo or the safari park, you can't go into the lions cage and walk up to the lion to get a close-up On the top level of the hop-on-hop-off bus you're not allowed to stand up when the bus is moving.. so the choice is either shooting the wide shot only (which might include the people next to you), or zooming and getting all kinds of compositions My shot of the pope giving a Sunday address at the Vatican would have been a shot of a tiny speck in a window of a rather grand building if I'd only had the wide, but thanks to the 10x zoom I had on that trip I am zoomed in enough that you could see his facial expressions Any landscape photographer will tell you that having a telephoto is wonderful because all mountains in the distance look small with the wide but the tele is how you make them look big Any time there's an animal - birds, squirrels, monkeys, etc...   often you want the close up but don't want to get close to them, or they don't want to get close to you etc etc The online world seems reluctant to look at or learn from the professionals, who often have hundreds or thousands of times the experience and insight that the online crowd has.  Or, if they do, they only pay attention to what Deakins might say about shooting a feature film.
But travel isn't a movie set - it's real life and the doco shooters use different equipment for a reason.  
Ignore their experience to your own detriment.

Maturity level 1: specs are everything
Maturity level 2: specs don't matter
Maturity level 3: let's talk about specs in a nuanced way
Let's try and elevate the discussion, shall we?

Absolutely.  I once overheated an iPhone shooting in direct sun in probably 40-43C (104-110F), and considering that iPhones overheating is something that is practically unheard of, overheating is something I pay a lot of attention to.

Sony practically doesn't give a shit about overheating. In fact, it is now a trademark.
It seems here in Italy in the summer you can't use the camera at home.
 

pdaf may pulse too. my c300 og is upgraded to dpaf. I used it for continuous af. at infinity for landscape, I can see it pulse. I have to use one shot af to force the lens to stay at infinity, then pan or tilt. for subjects 3-5 meters away during an event, c300 og dpaf works fine, I have not seen significant pulse. c100 mk ii dpaf is much more reliable. at infinity, I don't see pulse on c100 mk ii. 

There sure is.. and the music people are freaking out more than the film-making people.

Maturity level 1: specs are everything
Maturity level 2: specs don't matter
Maturity level 3: let's talk about specs in a nuanced way
Let's try and elevate the discussion, shall we?

This partly true. Many pros will also come up with a lens/camera/filter combo that matches the look they want for a specific project, then stick with that combo all the way through. They then will add specific filters for specific shots. It's what I see done a lot anyway. 

I think the missing part that no-one seems to mention is how they're used.
Pros will choose which filter, at which strength, if any, is used for each camera angle and each shot.  It will be tailored to the exact contents of that composition, including the actor/actress who is in the shot.  It was common back in the day for big-name actresses to include a clause in their contract that all shots that they appear in must have a particular filter used.
Amateurs buy one, slap it on their lens, and never take it off.
There's a reason that amateur footage looks amateurish.  Probably the biggest giveaway is razor sharp footage with diffusion on it.