kye

You did great considering how many cups of Coffee you drank! Thanks for the work you put in.

not sure if anyone gives a shit, but since there's a new MFT camera out, i thought this could be useful for some people. a little 1 minute field of view comparison test from the same camera position using some of the nicest cine lenses for the money, the meikes, with only available light:
 
 
excuse my lack of acting abilities and general laziness, but i think they look nice, and they match really well. 

I think with the prices of the FD 20-35 3.5 L for about the same or maybe less, can get the later EF 20-35 2.8 L and while I am a fan of FD L lenses in particular, and I am not a huge fan of zooms, there is just something about the old EF 20-35 2.8 L that i hang onto mine (the alternative is throw it in the trash since it is very battered and the MF/AF switch cover is gone and I use a piece of coloured electrical tape in its place).

I'm not sure what it is on the GH5. On the S1 / S5, V-LOG native ISO is 640.
But your point is well made. It is technically only a stop and 1/3rd (or 2/3rds) more.
Normally I shoot with a three-stop ND filter on the S5 during the daytime, but I am usually shooting at around f/8 to f/11. So I think mostly for my shooting I would end up around f/4 on m43. 
So maybe around five or six stops of ND would be what I am used to.

I don't have any experience with those power zoom lenses, but one feature that I think would be of huge benefit from them is the ability to hold down the zoom rocker just a bit and do a smooth zoom during a shot.
The more serious MFT lenses are nice, but I'm not sure that the manual zoom ring is damped and smooth enough to really pull off a flawless zoom during a shot, certainly my second-hand 12-35mm and kit 14-42mm zooms aren't.
That was a thing that those ENG lenses were really good at weren't they?
Definitely agree there.
In terms of firmware updates, do we even know when the camera will be shipping?  I haven't seen anything about it so am curious.  No point having firmware updates if no-one has the camera!!
I'll be curious to see what the math is like for shooting at, say, f0.95 in bright sun, at ISO2000 for high DR mode, and what that equates to in an exposure time.
I did note that they improved the shortest shutter time of the camera, so maybe that is why.  Not much good having a camera that can't expose properly in aperture priority mode while wide open at noon - that would be seriously embarrassing I'd imagine!
In terms of ISO2000 compared to 800 (wasn't 800 the native ISO for Vlog on the GH5?) isn't it only slightly more than a stop more exposed?  If so, you only need to add a single-stop of ND to your setup and it's the same.  Or am I missing something?

I saw a video a while back comparing the all-i codecs on the GH5 with prores recorded on a Ninja and it seemed like the prores was better at avoiding macroblocking in motion. So I guess in theory it allows better keying in post. I thought the video was by Andy Dax, but apparently it was by another group of filmmakers (in Norway)? I can't seem to find it on the Andy Dax channel.

I was always amazed that Blackmagic was able to make money on their early cameras having to pay Apple for ProRes and Adobe for CinemaDNG. Now That is a Codec I Really like.

The main advantages of ProRes over H.264 and H.265 are smoother playback and better facility for bouncing down to further generations.  Its designed to work really well in a post production environment, which it does superbly in my experience.

Its no surprise at all that the codecs look similar at the same data rates, in fact it is H.265 that you would expect to look the best as it is the most efficient encoder.

Of course H.264 looks good at reasonable data rates.  If it didn't it wouldn't have been utilised as an acquisition codec by just about every manufacturer under the sun at some point.

The point is that IPB codecs are horrendous in a post environment.  People are excited by ProRes 422HQ in the GH6 because, unlike the other two codecs, it is *guaranteed* to have high data rates (1.9 Gbps is what they are saying), and it will fit straight into our post workflows.

I will be the first to admit that it does seem to be just about everything other than really reliable AF everything a person really needs. With all the super-fast cheaper lenses out now even the DOF low light thing is off the table.
I still wish they would set in stone what and when the firmware updates are coming. They did a good job on it no doubt, but I think they had to do it to be honest. If you can't shoot decent video with this camera you need to give it up.

Something I forgot to add was the latest Power Zoom lenses are just killer on OIS with the GH5 and I am sure for the GH6. You really don't even need a Monopod to get great stuff, it works that good handheld. It is the best on the market. Scary steady.

Good point.
Also, good on Panasonic for allowing the ability to punch in while recording. Really wish my S1 and S5 had that ability.

I think it was the combination of the screen and the fan.  
I'm super happy with it as it's not too much larger and it's not larger from the front, which is what matters from the perspective of shooting in public and not gathering too much attention.  By the time you put a lens on a camera, then depth of it is huge so a few extra mm isn't a big deal.
My suggestion is to start with how and where you shoot and work backwards.  For events you'll probably be valuing flexibility over other performance, so you're probably talking about zooms.
Then the question comes of how much you care about having a long zoom range vs having a faster aperture.  At one extreme you've got the 12-35mm F2.8 which is the fastest but shortest zoom, then things like the 12-60mm F2.8-4, then all the way to 12-100mm F4 and even the 12-200mm F3.5-6.3.
I don't shoot events but my understanding is that mostly there is decent light, and many here have commented that the longer zooms work best because you're always just a zoom adjustment away from the shot.  Especially with the improved low-light from the GH6.

I guess it's official in Europe. OMDS is no longer accepting pre-orders for the OM-1 due to high demand. It's funny because some people thought it wasn't worth the price tag, but the evidence shows otherwise.

It could be a Fairchild sensor. 

ISO 12,800 gives you the opportunity to shoot at higher f-stops in lowlight, which was traditionally impossible without a lot of artificial light.

But anyways the GH6 looks like a solid low light performer and just a good all around performer.

yes, but the discussions here are, way more civil when we disagree on things... (I have yet to receive death threats on this forum)... 

I'm starting to get used to no IBIS, I don't trust the digital stabilization at all, I feel it could burn in some warping or artifacts that I can't get rid of later, so instead I just shoot handheld while trying even harder to keep it steady then I rely on DR's stabilization in post. I do have new respect for DR's stabilization, it is pretty amazing actually and the nice thing about it is you can always just turn it off or try a different type if the one you pick warps the footage.

I've had my eyes on this lens as well. Since it's closer in age to my FD 50mm 1.2 L, I thought it could be a good carry around lens to match. 

The Canon L 20-35 F3.5 should be a hell of a lens by your account. It´s one I have had my eyes on for a while. @kye
The 35-105 could have been a dream zoom lens for a full frame video camera. But the plasticy quality but foremost the problem with the bearings keep me from trying another one. Maybe I should keep my sample to start practicing some lens doctoring. But I think I am to nervous for stuff like that.:)

A key point that I feel is worth mentioning here is that you can't expect a LUT to grade your film for you.
What I mean by this is that you should be adjusting the image before putting it through the LUT (grading "under" the LUT) and potentially adjusting the overall levels after the LUT too, for more overall adjustments.
Grading under the LUT is simply adjusting the images exposure, WB, contrast, and other attributes, which is the same as adjusting the lighting ratios on set, the exposure of the camera and WB of the scene while shooting on film.
If you don't like the amount of contrast in a LUT, lower the contrast after you apply the LUT and adjust to taste prior to the LUT.  If you want a stronger look then increase the contrast before the LUT and lower it afterwards and you'll get a more pronounced look, or do the opposite.
These are creative tools, not one-click grading machines 🙂 

@PannySVHS I read somewhere that early on Canon were much pickier about which lenses got the 'L' designation and there are a number of non-L lenses that would have been given the L status if released decades later.
In that sense it's really down to reading the reviews and looking at sample images.

A key point that I feel is worth mentioning here is that you can't expect a LUT to grade your film for you.
What I mean by this is that you should be adjusting the image before putting it through the LUT (grading "under" the LUT) and potentially adjusting the overall levels after the LUT too, for more overall adjustments.
Grading under the LUT is simply adjusting the images exposure, WB, contrast, and other attributes, which is the same as adjusting the lighting ratios on set, the exposure of the camera and WB of the scene while shooting on film.
If you don't like the amount of contrast in a LUT, lower the contrast after you apply the LUT and adjust to taste prior to the LUT.  If you want a stronger look then increase the contrast before the LUT and lower it afterwards and you'll get a more pronounced look, or do the opposite.
These are creative tools, not one-click grading machines 🙂 

A key point that I feel is worth mentioning here is that you can't expect a LUT to grade your film for you.
What I mean by this is that you should be adjusting the image before putting it through the LUT (grading "under" the LUT) and potentially adjusting the overall levels after the LUT too, for more overall adjustments.
Grading under the LUT is simply adjusting the images exposure, WB, contrast, and other attributes, which is the same as adjusting the lighting ratios on set, the exposure of the camera and WB of the scene while shooting on film.
If you don't like the amount of contrast in a LUT, lower the contrast after you apply the LUT and adjust to taste prior to the LUT.  If you want a stronger look then increase the contrast before the LUT and lower it afterwards and you'll get a more pronounced look, or do the opposite.
These are creative tools, not one-click grading machines 🙂 

Yeah, and if you lift them 5 stops you get green lines for free! Sorry, couldn’t resist! 😆

I can make a jpeg look identical to 14 bit raw, but "visual" quality is not the point of raw. Lift shadows 3 or 4 stops and then compare again.