kye

I just saw this video where Waqas demos the OFX version of the Motion Blur effect, and it does a seriously good job - I've linked to the final result:
He's also applied a blur to counteract the ridiculous sharpening (what a great idea!), corrected for the lens distortion, and added a subtle grade.
I have no idea if the OFX version of this has recently gotten better or if it's just been there all along, but it's waaaaaay better than the tool in the UI, which is what I tried previously.
I haven't played with it yet, so this might be a cherry-picked example where it worked ok, but it's interesting and worth playing with, especially on clips with more subtle movement.

Easy!  It's that black thing with some white writing on it....  duh!

If I had to choose just one lens to keep out of my collection, it would be the Pana 14-140mm F3.5-F5.6 - for the range it provides it's relatively small (75mm long) and light (265g), it supports dual-IS2, focus breathing isn't noticeable and on my copy at least the zoom ring is reasonably smooth. It's been my most-used lens ever since I got it as a bundle with a G6 years ago.
If I could keep a few more, then...
The Oly 12-40mm F2.8 - just a great all-round, reasonably bright, moderate wide to moderate telephoto, no noticeable focus breathing, 85mm long and 382g. (The Pana 12-35mm F2.8 is a bit smaller and lighter and gets you dual-IS - I was considering both a while ago and then a really good used deal on the Oly came up so I went for that).
The Oly 75-300mm F4.8-F6.7 - what I use most often for wildlife, pretty small (117mm long) and light (423g) for the focal range, and decently sharp for something that small/light/cheap.
Low light? usually just chuck the Pana 25mm F1.7 into the camera bag or pocket in case I need it - cheap/small/only 125g.
I also own the old Pana 20mm F1.7, but that's noisy when focusing, so I might swap it for a 17mm or 15mm fast AF prime at some point (Oly or Pana Leica probably).
I've recently acquired a used Pana 35-100mm F2.8 (to complement the Oly 12-40mm F2.8). Decent lens and not too large/heavy for a 'pro' lens, but it's got noticeable focus breathing so not ideal for video C-AF use.
(and yes, the Pana 12-32mm pancake is great when you want to keep things as small as possible, especially if you're taking two cameras on a trip, so that would be a 'keeper' too).

I really like this pairing and whether one body and switching lenses, or a matched pair, if I was shooting 4/3rds video, stills or hybrid, those full frame focal lengths of 20-50 (indoors in my world) and 50-100 (out) are near perfect.
The only thing that bothers me is the size and weight that isn’t quite in keeping with the 4/3rds approach, but then compared with equivalent (that don’t exist!) full frame zooms, they are hardly tanks.
I prefer primes in principle but fast zooms are just more convenient more of the time.
 

I have the GH5 and GX85.
The GH5 was my default body, and I used it with the Laowa 7.5mm F2, the Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 and the Voigtlander 42.5mm F0.95.  Occasionally I'd use a longer lens for wildlife etc, like the FD 70-210mm F4, or the Tokina 400mm F5.6.  I would carry the 12-35mm F2.8 for difficult situations where I need very fast zooming or extra IS.
That was up until a recent trip when I discovered the GX85 with the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens combo.  Not only did I fall in love with the size of the setup, and the lack of attention it raised, but I also discovered that the AF-S was extremely useful and the DoF was adequate.  
I've since come upon the idea that there are three setups that I think I will pursue:
GX85 with 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom lens
Having a 10X zoom lens will be liberating because I'll be able to shoot whatever compositions I can see, the AF-S will allow me to work really quickly, and (after spending a lot of time with a DoF calculator) I realised that the DoF should be sufficient for the work I do.  This is a day-time setup.
Interestingly, this lens is the same size as the 12-35mm F2.8 lens, so not too bad in practice. GX85 with 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 pancake lens
Compact walk-around setup when size really matters, and still gives a good zoom range.  Similar use-case to the above. GX85 with 7.5mm F2, TTartisan 17mm F1.4, and TTartisan 50mm F1.2 lenses
This is the low-light setup. All that is in combination with iPhone, and especially the wide camera, which acts as a second body and gives quick access to a super-wide angle.
If I was going somewhere that camera size didn't really matter, like doing a tour with a busload of tourists, then I'd consider taking the GH5 instead, but I'm struggling to put my finger on why it would be that much better.  I know it has various better specs, but in reality I'm only doing home video stuff, so the shooting experience and the reaction of people in-frame matters more than DR etc.
My philosophy is to think hard about how I shoot and what I am trying to achieve and to challenge my assumptions.  Hope this is useful 🙂 

Check out this Blackmagic studio/broadcast camera setup (try and discover where the camera is hiding....):

 

Enjoy!!  I think it's a solid choice - apart from the size of the body making people very excited it looks like a great spec'd camera.

i’m dit-ing a european co-produced feature rn. Theyre shooting on an A35. Almost every feature and tv show here is being on this thing now from what ive heard. The last commercial i was pa-ing on was miniLF.

Indeed. I work with 3-4 cameras, 2 of which can be static any time, 2 lights, 6 audio recording devices, shooting video and stills 100% (or as close to as makes no difference) all day long.
But only because of 3 essential ingredients.
1. Practice practice practice, starting simply and building up over time, adding and eliminating elements that work or do not.
2. Having a game plan in advance based on an understanding of what is going to happen and when etc. Advance knowledge is key.
3. Determination/hard work.
4. Bonus element, being organised and having a system.
My environment is weddings and at one level they are ‘all the same’ but at another, they are all different and people do random stuff. But it’s rare for there to be enough random stuff to make a difference.
It’s not rocket science and there are limits so it’s a case of knowing those limits and working up to what is possible but without it totally frying your brain.
It’s more weird for me if I am doing just video or just photo and the latter feels like I am doing just 20-25% compared with both and the kit level is tiny by comparison.
My brother by comparison gave up working in the video industry because he couldn’t work alone or make more than solo shooting viable. 
We must have different genes!

With that lack of passion I doubt they'll be going far in the cutthroat real world after graduation.
Well, you can still do a lot with just three static cameras.
I was thinking for instance I could position myself at a Track & Field event:
Cam1: Me (positioned up high in the stands) with an EX3 beside me with a B4 telezoom for extra reach, which I would not actively man it second by second, but if I was to change it from a mid shot of the track finish line to instead zoom in on the LJ pit at the other side of the field, I could. Then I'd sit back down at the switcher again.
Cam2: a wide shot of the track finish line at ground level.
Cam3: wide shot looking down the back straight.
Ideally this coverage would attract the support of the local sporting club(s), and I might get a keen volunteer who can be trained up to do basic manning of one camera. Perhaps with luck some volunteers to do live commentary too. Could then have them micced up and throw a random camera (even merely a a GoPro, or perhaps a Sony RX0) to occasionally cut back to them.
Then with time, an extra camera or three could be added to this setup.

I liked it. I felt like there was a rather large learning curve having come from very consumer Panasonic cameras to something that has so much in it. The AF seemed serviceable to me, but I'm sure the G9 ii will make it look bad. It seemed a little overkill for me and my family stuff. I better understand the menus now; so, the G9 ii will be fine, but still, there's more than what I need out of a camera. If everything goes well, I'll sell my E-M1 ii and use the G9 ii for my "big" camera with big lenses and a GX800 for my "fun, small" camera. It's funny because I've bought and sold the GX800 3 times now and it's one of the most fun cameras I've ever had. I just can't live with so many audio and video quirks. I expect the G9 ii to perform better for all of my needs over the GH6 and the E-M1 ii.

Well, I've decided to get the G9 ii. Should arrive around November 2. If people have questions, I'll do my best to answer.
Also, now that I've given up my CF Express Type B that I used for my GH6, I have many v30 cards, but no v60 or v90. I don't really need the highest data rates, but I want 4k 120fps. What card to I need for that? On my CF Express card, I could just do everything without thinking about it, but I'd rather not have to shell out serious money for a v90 card unless absolutely necessary. When I look at the 4k 120fps files, their only 100 Mbps in HVEC. Can a v30 card handle 5.8 open gate?

Just upscale it - people can't see the difference anyway!

One difference I can see is that on a drone you can't just put on a stronger ND, but you likely could adjust the aperture remotely.  
Of course, I agree with you that an aperture would have been a handy addition.  I'd imagine including the ability to have shutter speeds that are crazy short is a cheaper alternative and achieves the same exposure.

In 2017 DJI had a 1 inch sensor with aperture control (2.8 to 11) on the Phantom 4 Pro that was really good, I'm not sure why they did not take that one and evolve it... it would have been quite practical for a DJI Osmo Pkt.

BMCC6K arrived a couple of days ago. My first day test.
 

Very true a lot of them think they can sit around and just graduate and magically make it. Classes barely teach what you need there is so much I’ve learned about cinematography from YouTube that no one in the department will ever learn if they themselves don’t take advantage of online resources. Also they all shoot on crazy old canon vixia camcorders. And I’m over here shooting full frame mirrorless with a bunch of light. 

Being serious, it was quite a big issue with the S5 for me, especially with stills because if the camera captured it, then it was game over.
I had one wedding where the groom and all his men, their jackets…all day long… 🙈
Not really tested it with the S5ii as I moved the S1H into the photo role and now with the Nikon Zf, that very rare thing these days, an OLPF as standard. Yay.

I don't think it works that way though.  A 12K sensor would be sensitive to moire if there were repeating patterns that happened to align with the gaps between the pixels, just like a 4K sensor.  
It might be that common causes of moire are around a certain size and therefore impact one combination of sensor resolution / sensor size / and focal length more than other combinations.  Also, lower resolution sensors might be more prone to moire as they're typically older and there were larger gaps between the pixels than there are now.
Lower resolutions are likely to have issues on cheaper cameras too, due to the camera line skipping and therefore effectively creating very large gaps between the active pixels.  
Sadly, there's lots of different ways to create moire, and many of them tend to come from strategies to make the product more affordable!

RED had their niche for a little while, when the ARRI cameras were big heavy so not doable on a gimbal (or to fly on a drone, or easily rig up on a car or crane etc). Or even in the pre gimbal era, a steadicam op who can handle a full size ARRI Alexa is expensive. But someone who can fly a stripped down RED body?? You can find them a lot cheaper! (if you're flexible about standards) So you can quickly see the appeal of a RED vs ARRI for say Music Videos. 
Plus if you want to do slow motion, and wanted better quality than the likes of a Sony FS700, then for a very long time your only real choice was RED. 
Sony F5/F55 (and later on, VENICE) however nibbled away at that. 
But once the ARRI Alexa Mini arrived? It crushed the RED and ate it for lunch. 
You've got a gimbal friendly camera that does up to 200fps. 
Only high resolution remained as a "reason" for RED. But for many people that's irrelevant. I think I haven't worked on a single production in the last couple of months that is doing more than FHD! (aside from that one day on an ultra low budget short film, shooting on a P4K) 
I don't think it is unique to LA/NYC.
Same here in NZ. 
Anywhere/anybody with tastes tends to go with ARRI. 
Newer features, performance, plus the lenses choices will push them to the ARRI 35

The solution re. moiré is to go back in time and eradicate The French as they invented it.
You can tell by the é.

Yes and no. 
The Foveon sensor would mean that demosiacing wouldn't be required but it might still have dead spots between the photosites, which is what I was talking about.
Here's an image showing what I mean...  the yellow areas indicate the light from the scene that would be captured by each photo site, and the blue areas indicate the light from the scene that would not be detected by any photo site on the sensor:

If the micro lenses were configured to make sure all light made its way onto a photo site then it would eliminate this issue, like the below shows on the right with the gapless micro lenses:

It's worth mentioning that not all lenses project the scene onto the sensor from directly in front either - some lenses have the light hitting the sensor at quite an angle, which can interfere with how well the micro lenses are able to direct all the light to a photo site.   
These lenses are typically from older cameras which were designed to project onto film, which didn't care about the angle it got exposed from.  This is why different lenses often vignette differently on different cameras, especially vintage wide angle lenses that might be projecting the image circle from the middle to the edges at quite a steep angle.

I suspect that there will be a GH7, and that it will be out sooner than their usual release schedule (as the GH6 wasn't well received) but I also wouldn't wait for it, it could be a couple of years and still be "ahead of schedule".
In terms of moire, the only guaranteed solutions are an OLPF or to have pixels that have 100% coverage (ie, no gaps between the pixels).  If you don't have either of those, there is always the possibility that a repeating pattern will fall into the gaps between the pixels and therefore be completely invisible to the sensor at that location where the pattern and pixels are identically spaced.
AI can't deal with moire because it happens before the image is digital.  The only way AI could deal with it would be for the AI to re-interpret the whole image and replace sections of the image because it "knows better" than what the camera captured.  Getting a good result in video is a long way off I suspect.
Your eye will have moire because the interference comes from the actual objects exhibiting this behaviour, not the capture mechanism.  The "lines" shown in the below images are formed because the objects physically line-up when viewed from this particular vantage point, and the areas that don't have "lines" are because the objects didn't line-up from that vantage point.


 
I've been saying this for years now.  In the conversation that follows, people resume talking about PDAF and CDAF like my comment never existed.  It's nice to hear someone else say it, but don't expect to raise the level of discussion!

It is fixed aperture so no aperture control

I agree. My only conern is the audio - no manual control of audio levels. Almost all the other 1" sensor cameras have audio manual control. The other is no aperture/shutter contol that I see. Bright light needs external ND filters (which are available), very awkward to even attain 180 shutter. The 1"  Canon V10 has full manual control of audio and video settings and builtin ND.