kye

Welcome to doing video!  Stills photography is so easy by comparison that comparing the two is almost impossible.  I also came from taking RAW stills into doing video, so you're on a difficult but well-worn path.
Of all of my advice, this is the most important...  Don't believe anything you read - test as many things yourself as you can.
I have done this over the years and I have routinely found that a third of what "everyone knows" is completely false, and another third on top of that is completely misunderstood.  It shouldn't surprise anyone, but the misconceptions and outright lies will often push you in the direction of buying things that you don't actually need, and come from the manufacturers pushing very one-sided or suspect information and then it being "re-interpreted" by consumers who are too stupid or lazy or both to question it.
Best of luck!

I really want to "own nothing and be happy" but I'm not sure about the second half of that sentence. 

Yes I was talking about Nikon 4.1k Nraw vs H256 codec. Saying it was quite a nice compromise. 

I'll chime in with my usual advice about colour grading.
The simple fact is that colour grading has a much more significant role in getting great looking images than the camera does.  I'll also re-enforce the points above that what you point the camera at is more important than anything else.
When we look at something shot on ARRI or RED or the high end Sony cameras, the reason they look great are 70% the scene, 25% the colour grading and 5% the camera.  I know this is a bold statement, but I stand by it.
Colour grading is the elephant in the room of all online discussions about cameras.  Everyone is looking at sample videos and going "wow, this looks great - I want to get that look without doing any colour grading or work in post at all!" and it's just not true.
If you need more convincing, here are a few things to look at:
The BMPCC 4K can match the Alexa almost perfectly...   So, why don't all P4K videos look as good as Netflix shows?  It's not the camera! The image from the GX85 is more flexible in post than you think...  @John Matthews I haven't forgotten about doing a follow-up with skin-tones in it. Simple colour grading > Camera colour science...  I compare a few examples of the 709 version of some professional grade images with the final colour graded image, and it's pretty obvious that the 709 version looks quite plain - a lot like the images we get when us mere mortals shoot The best film-making advice I ever got was to do with colour grading, but it helped me improve my shooting, editing, sound design, etc etc, the whole lot. Here are a bunch of GX85 shots SOOC that I took in Korea last year..  this just goes to show you that not only is the GX85 a very capable camera, but that it's the subject that you put in front of it that really makes the difference.  Of course, colour grading will elevate these beyond that level. High-end TV shows and movies look nothing like the standard images out of a camera... In this thread I compare some standard images from ARRI with real images from TV shows and movies and it's pretty obvious that not only are the colours significantly changed, the real images aren't sharp and clean like the videos that camera YT seems to idolise.  The goal isn't technical purity, the goal is creativity, and this means taking your sharp and clean images and giving them some character.   I could go on (many will wholeheartedly agree on this!) but long story short...  the camera is a minor part of the journey that the image takes from finding / creating something cool to point it at, to all the work done in post.
Also, learn to edit.  Well edited bad-quality clips are better than boring high-quality images every time.

One of the best books that I read about color theory is The Art of Color by Johannes Itten. It can be found on ebay for cheap. 

I recently asked for book recommendations to learn about human vision and was given a link to a free PDF.
It is incredible.
I'm only a quarter of the way through, but I'm absolutely blown away.  The human vision system looks like it was designed by committee and then re-imagined by Dali and Picasso, while on drugs.  It is a wonder we can see anything at all!
Did you know that the rods and cones (which detect light) are BEHIND a bunch of nerves and nerve cells and blood vessels, so the light has to go through a bunch of crap before you even sense it?   
The book is actually a mix of how the human vision system works and also what we have done with the tech to try and align to it, so it's a nice blend of biology and tech.  It's also very readable and tries to be as non-technical as possible.  This is a rare find compared to other books that are hugely tech heavy.
Take the red pill with me...  download it here: https://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/support/documents/colourbook/colourbook.php (download it by clicking on the box next to the file size).

I'll chime in with my usual advice about colour grading.
The simple fact is that colour grading has a much more significant role in getting great looking images than the camera does.  I'll also re-enforce the points above that what you point the camera at is more important than anything else.
When we look at something shot on ARRI or RED or the high end Sony cameras, the reason they look great are 70% the scene, 25% the colour grading and 5% the camera.  I know this is a bold statement, but I stand by it.
Colour grading is the elephant in the room of all online discussions about cameras.  Everyone is looking at sample videos and going "wow, this looks great - I want to get that look without doing any colour grading or work in post at all!" and it's just not true.
If you need more convincing, here are a few things to look at:
The BMPCC 4K can match the Alexa almost perfectly...   So, why don't all P4K videos look as good as Netflix shows?  It's not the camera! The image from the GX85 is more flexible in post than you think...  @John Matthews I haven't forgotten about doing a follow-up with skin-tones in it. Simple colour grading > Camera colour science...  I compare a few examples of the 709 version of some professional grade images with the final colour graded image, and it's pretty obvious that the 709 version looks quite plain - a lot like the images we get when us mere mortals shoot The best film-making advice I ever got was to do with colour grading, but it helped me improve my shooting, editing, sound design, etc etc, the whole lot. Here are a bunch of GX85 shots SOOC that I took in Korea last year..  this just goes to show you that not only is the GX85 a very capable camera, but that it's the subject that you put in front of it that really makes the difference.  Of course, colour grading will elevate these beyond that level. High-end TV shows and movies look nothing like the standard images out of a camera... In this thread I compare some standard images from ARRI with real images from TV shows and movies and it's pretty obvious that not only are the colours significantly changed, the real images aren't sharp and clean like the videos that camera YT seems to idolise.  The goal isn't technical purity, the goal is creativity, and this means taking your sharp and clean images and giving them some character.   I could go on (many will wholeheartedly agree on this!) but long story short...  the camera is a minor part of the journey that the image takes from finding / creating something cool to point it at, to all the work done in post.
Also, learn to edit.  Well edited bad-quality clips are better than boring high-quality images every time.

Indeed.
It's a pity that reality doesn't fit in a sound-byte.

There’s talk in the camera industry of introducing a subscription model for firmware updates, with Sony being one of the companies believed to be considering this as an option for larger updates in the future. Currently, Sony is planning an A7S III update in the coming weeks with DCI 4K and content authenticity ID, but major updates have been few and far between for a camera released nearly 4 years ago.
https://www.eoshd.com/news/firmware-updates-could-become-subscription-model-under-new-plans/

The reason here is a bit different though. V-Log L clips at 80 IRE so my LUTs in the V-Log L LUT pack will push that to white. V-Log on the S1 clips at 88 IRE if I remember correctly so any information between 80-88 IRE will be lost, even if the interpretation of the clip is correct (full vs video range).

@kye Great. Thank you for adding that note. I'm quite protective of highlights generally at the point of capture (as long as I'm not compromising skin tones) as I find that clipping is the greatest remaining "digital tell" that can usually be avoided. But this is always good to keep in mind. 
@Attila Bakos I've never approached LUTs as a "click and done" solution, particularly wanting to preserve options for the further application of tone curves. Since moving on from (and now partially back to) Fujifilm, I have missed Eterna as a baseline for further work. To date, my best, neutral LUT for V-Log has been a 2021 LUT by Gamut applied at 80% - even then the shadows would generally be more crushed that I'd prefer for further grading.
Your Eterna LC LUT! It's marvelous for how I like to work! I am now editing a piece that I filmed primarily last year. Replacing the Gamut with this low-contrast LUT - I really like the color interpretation (even in some challenging mixed-lighting) and a whole world of shadows is available to further work with, rather than to try and pull back in some fashion. 
Just so, so nice. 

It's worth noting that this highlight clipping behaviour is a limitation with all LUTs, not just in this case.
Increasingly, cameras are supporting "super-whites" which are values above 100%.  My GX85 is one of them, and in my standard node tree I just have a curve with the white-point dropped down a bit to bring values back into range prior to all the subsequent adjustments, so I don't forget or accidentally clip anything that was available in the file SOOC.

I'll chime in with my usual advice about colour grading.
The simple fact is that colour grading has a much more significant role in getting great looking images than the camera does.  I'll also re-enforce the points above that what you point the camera at is more important than anything else.
When we look at something shot on ARRI or RED or the high end Sony cameras, the reason they look great are 70% the scene, 25% the colour grading and 5% the camera.  I know this is a bold statement, but I stand by it.
Colour grading is the elephant in the room of all online discussions about cameras.  Everyone is looking at sample videos and going "wow, this looks great - I want to get that look without doing any colour grading or work in post at all!" and it's just not true.
If you need more convincing, here are a few things to look at:
The BMPCC 4K can match the Alexa almost perfectly...   So, why don't all P4K videos look as good as Netflix shows?  It's not the camera! The image from the GX85 is more flexible in post than you think...  @John Matthews I haven't forgotten about doing a follow-up with skin-tones in it. Simple colour grading > Camera colour science...  I compare a few examples of the 709 version of some professional grade images with the final colour graded image, and it's pretty obvious that the 709 version looks quite plain - a lot like the images we get when us mere mortals shoot The best film-making advice I ever got was to do with colour grading, but it helped me improve my shooting, editing, sound design, etc etc, the whole lot. Here are a bunch of GX85 shots SOOC that I took in Korea last year..  this just goes to show you that not only is the GX85 a very capable camera, but that it's the subject that you put in front of it that really makes the difference.  Of course, colour grading will elevate these beyond that level. High-end TV shows and movies look nothing like the standard images out of a camera... In this thread I compare some standard images from ARRI with real images from TV shows and movies and it's pretty obvious that not only are the colours significantly changed, the real images aren't sharp and clean like the videos that camera YT seems to idolise.  The goal isn't technical purity, the goal is creativity, and this means taking your sharp and clean images and giving them some character.   I could go on (many will wholeheartedly agree on this!) but long story short...  the camera is a minor part of the journey that the image takes from finding / creating something cool to point it at, to all the work done in post.
Also, learn to edit.  Well edited bad-quality clips are better than boring high-quality images every time.

I'll chime in with my usual advice about colour grading.
The simple fact is that colour grading has a much more significant role in getting great looking images than the camera does.  I'll also re-enforce the points above that what you point the camera at is more important than anything else.
When we look at something shot on ARRI or RED or the high end Sony cameras, the reason they look great are 70% the scene, 25% the colour grading and 5% the camera.  I know this is a bold statement, but I stand by it.
Colour grading is the elephant in the room of all online discussions about cameras.  Everyone is looking at sample videos and going "wow, this looks great - I want to get that look without doing any colour grading or work in post at all!" and it's just not true.
If you need more convincing, here are a few things to look at:
The BMPCC 4K can match the Alexa almost perfectly...   So, why don't all P4K videos look as good as Netflix shows?  It's not the camera! The image from the GX85 is more flexible in post than you think...  @John Matthews I haven't forgotten about doing a follow-up with skin-tones in it. Simple colour grading > Camera colour science...  I compare a few examples of the 709 version of some professional grade images with the final colour graded image, and it's pretty obvious that the 709 version looks quite plain - a lot like the images we get when us mere mortals shoot The best film-making advice I ever got was to do with colour grading, but it helped me improve my shooting, editing, sound design, etc etc, the whole lot. Here are a bunch of GX85 shots SOOC that I took in Korea last year..  this just goes to show you that not only is the GX85 a very capable camera, but that it's the subject that you put in front of it that really makes the difference.  Of course, colour grading will elevate these beyond that level. High-end TV shows and movies look nothing like the standard images out of a camera... In this thread I compare some standard images from ARRI with real images from TV shows and movies and it's pretty obvious that not only are the colours significantly changed, the real images aren't sharp and clean like the videos that camera YT seems to idolise.  The goal isn't technical purity, the goal is creativity, and this means taking your sharp and clean images and giving them some character.   I could go on (many will wholeheartedly agree on this!) but long story short...  the camera is a minor part of the journey that the image takes from finding / creating something cool to point it at, to all the work done in post.
Also, learn to edit.  Well edited bad-quality clips are better than boring high-quality images every time.

Yes, I saw a few videos regarding this. He's right- it's a fun camera and I wish Panasonic would update it. The best part of it is the flip-up screen. Unfortunately, the worst part about it is the moiré in 1080p and overheating in 4k at 5 minute or less. As a travel camera or B-cam, it's a great choice IMO.
What I find amazing is the fact that many of the newer small cameras cannot be kept in-stock; yet, we see nothing from Panasonic who IMO is the leader in know-how for this category of camera. I'm not sure if their heads are stuck in the sand or just bad forward thinking. In any case, it isn't good. Hope they turn it around soon.
 

This is the same for me, the good stuff is all personal.
I make lots of little edits as camera tests, and put a reasonable amount of time into the edit, adding music etc, to keep as a momento.  So by the time I've done that the last thing I want to do is another public edit and re-do the frame-level editing and music and sound design etc.
One thing I did do, which is a little besides the point but might be useful, is I found that I wanted to repeatedly reference clips from various cameras and projects, typically to try new colour grading techniques, but sometimes for other stuff too.  What I did was I got organised and found the best clips from each trip / shoot and copied them onto a folder on my SSD as reference clips.  Under that I had two folders for each camera, one for clips I can share in public and the other for personal stuff.  Then I made a timeline with all the personal clips from each camera first, then a gap, then all the publicly sharable clips from each camera after that.  Then if I have an idea for trying out some technique I can quickly pull that up, maybe take a copy of the timeline, and experiment on footage from across all the cameras I've shot on over the years.  I've found it really handy since I did it actually, and I refer to it quite a bit.

Gary W bought the GX850 when this thread was going strong, and he's just posted his 2 month review with it.  He mostly takes stills so that's the focus of his review.
TDLR; he really likes it and finds that it has an X-factor that he can't explain that makes him really enjoy using it.  It's not going to replace his GX85, but it makes a great compliment to it.
 

Best of luck!
The ATEM models do seem to be great, especially considering the historic price of such things (which every review painstakingly explains to you at the start) but they do seem to be very "industry".  ie, the answer to every question is to build a TV station and hire an army of people to do everything manually in the same way it was done in the 1980s.  This is similar to when I ask a question to any pro who works in the studio system and their answer is to shoot my home videos how a studio shoots a feature film.
When I look at the ATEM device, I see a few buttons that do a single thing, and a few buttons that run some hard-coded macros.  Why there aren't buttons to run the user-defined macros until you buy the $1000 Extreme model is silly - the Mini has buttons I won't need, let alone the 500 buttons on the Extreme.  What you really need are a few buttons where you can store and then recall configurations, so you can have Config 1 with HDMI 1 (showing yourself), and Config 2 with custom PiP settings (showing your slides with you in PiP with custom location etc), etc, then you could swap back and forth without having to punch a bunch of buttons each time to re-create the settings while also looking professional in front of your audience.  The saving grace is that in the default setup you can swap from HDMI 1 (you) to HDM1 2 (the presentation) without looking, and then when you have to look down at the ATEM to find the stupid PiP button at least they can't see you fumbling around because you aren't currently visible.
It's typical BM though.  Like with the Speed Editor - the middle and largest section of the controller is for multi-cam only and can't be configured to do anything else.
Anyway, rant over.
Using an iPad to run the slides seems like an elegant solution.
I find that when you're presenting to a group, you need two main things:
To see what you're sharing to the group To see the people in the group For my day job I do this using MS Teams (the platform chosen by corporate) and having a triple monitor setup where I have the meeting on one screen and I share another screen, so I can just drag any window I want onto that monitor and it's shared.  I share a lot of different things like Word documents, Excel sheets, web content, as well as Powerpoint, etc.  Oddly, Powerpoint tries to be "smart" with Teams, and when you're in Teams and hit the Present button in Powerpoint they try to be clever and talk to each other but just screw everything up.
My wife is just getting setup and her business hasn't gone live yet, but she'll be using Powerpoint and Zoom with a USB webcam, which our early tests show is a similar situation with them trying to be clever but screwing it up.  I suspect the eventual setup will be a real camera and a laptop running Powerpoint going into the ATEM, then that plugged via USB into a second laptop that is running Zoom and controlling the call.  The goal is to be able to fit the whole setup in a suitcase for travel, including camera / tripod / switcher / lights / stands / diffusers / etc, so we can operate from anywhere.  The laptops would fly carry-on of course.

If you do go down the ATEM path then I think you might be interested in my new product as it addresses exactly this type of operation, amongst many other things.
 

I use the ATEM mIni in a very simple way. Again, it's to limit the things that could go wrong, but it has been very reliable. I only use it to show my iPad screen (this can be very customizable). I just push the picture in picture button to "on" and there's my screen. I'm on the side of the screen so my students can still see me. There are macro features and tons of other things, but you cannot do simple things like play a media file (that's why I have the iPad). Also, a lot of stuff is simple too hard to get ready. On the iPad, it's a cake-walk. You could also use in combination with OBS or something. I have done this but find the iPad solution works better and it's more intuitive- again, no preparation provided I've prepared the lesson on the iPad in the first place. My goal was to simple go to the live setup area, turn on a power strip or two and connect. I should say that I only do one-to-one classes, not groups and it further simplifies everything. The number of variable is astounding and I'm surprised I've had few problems (knock on wood). In April, I'll be getting fiber put in (not that I really need it), but it could be the biggest challenge that my system has faced- wish me luck.

I watched a bunch of ATEM Mini reviews yesterday and it looks like that would be a great setup to upgrade to once we're up and running.
A few minor questions, if you happen to know:
If you enable picture-in-picture and have it so that the setting persists between inputs, and then switch to input 1 (the source of the PiP) does it give you input 1 with a PiP of input 1?  or does it disable the PiP for that angle?  and if it does disable it, does it re-enable it when you swap to another angle? Does it delay the audio inputs to match the audio delay on the HDMI inputs? Did it get upgraded to have a multi-screen view on the HDMI out?  or is it still limited to either Program or Preview? Is there any way to run macros from the hardware device?  Having a custom PiP would be great but the PiP buttons erase any custom settings apparently. Unfortunately the best reviews were the ones done when it came out, and they are obviously only of the initial firmware.

Try PhotoJoseph’s complete 3 1/2 hour masterclass here:
The Mini Pro versions of the ATEM have the MultiView option for the HDMI output and the Extreme has the hardware macro buttons.
Audio delay is adjustable per channel.
If you can stretch to the ISO version of the Mini Pro or Extreme then each individual channel and the master are recorded to SSD along with a project file of all the cuts that you can then load directly into Resolve to re-cut it.
If you are using BM cameras then you can then automatically swap in the original camera media and there is now a workaround (see PhotoJospeh’s channel) to do this with any camera.
I have designed two products for the ATEM that will be released at the end of April and one of those will be of interest in terms of creating custom functionality for DVE etc as well as offering more direct control of existing functions that do not have dedicated hardware input on the control surface.

I've done hundreds of hours now in English training. It's not my main gig, but it's good to do something a little different.
I use a GH2 with the Olympus 17mm f/1.8, a M2 MacMini, a Behringer mixer, a Atem Mini, a Audio-Technica AT 875 R, an iPad Pro 12.9", an Apple Pencil, 3 cheap lights with softboxes, and some decent headphones. I've tried many other things too, but so far, this works best for me. My cardinal rule is to have as much as possible with a cord and no batteries as to reduce my single point failures. My only exception is the Apple Pencil, but I plug it in whenever I'm done. The key for me is to have as little setup time as possible- just flip one or two switches and I'm up and ready to go.

Thanks, I appreciate that. I have a running thread on Fred Miranda soliciting submissions and so far the response has been good. To encourage participation I've been buying the Arduino boards on Amazon and having them shipped directly to members who have cameras I would like tested. Going forward my hope with the crowdsourcing is that the group interested in these kinds of measurements would be enthusiastic about having their own reliable method for measuring readout speeds whenever they need, so that the small investment in the Arduino board wouldn't be an impediment. Time will tell if that turns out to be true.

I know a lot of people still watching 720p on their TV, or even SD, without any problem. I personally, don't think the likes of 8k will be sought by customers, but they will get it because as today you nearly can't find a 720p television even if you wanted to. My guess people are more keen and see more qualitative difference in the size of display rather than pixel. 
I think the shift into VR is a bit of a pipe dream. I see it more in gaming, and these are more about gpu speed and 3d generation.