currensheldon

I think my problem is I have yet to work with a camera that has reliable AF when shooting video. I hear about all of these great new AF systems but I'm still shooting on the GH5 using 100% manual lenses so no AF even if the GH5 had any, the C200 which is typically locked down on a tripod or hand held so I prefer using MF there too, and my 5DIV which puts a big box in the middle of the screen and you better hope that box is on your subject.
Speaking of the C200 it supposedly has good AF, but the few times I've tried it, it always seems to be a scenario where it doesn't work; like if the talent is wearing a hat or wears glasses then the face AF doesn't work, if you've added haze to the scene the AF doesn't work, if the ND filters are too strong, the AF doesn't work. If I ever end up with a camera that actually has reliable AF I'd be the first one to jump on the AF bandwagon.

It's really true. Or just charge an extra $1000 and put in a fan and have unlimited recording times. People would have bought it. I would have bought it and then probably would have bought a Canon cinema camera (the ones they are trying to protect) to go along with it once the RF versions are released.
Instead, I think I'll stick with Panasonic for awhile. 
 

I have a GH5 and have always manually focused but there is one simple scenario where I would definitely use AF...on a gimbal. I don't trust AF in 95% of the situations I encounter yet I will not replace my GH5 with a camera that does not have a better AF system. I am typically a one man band run and gun shooter shooting everything from music videos to interviews, the main time I would like AF is in certain situations when doing gimbal work.
My GH5 is good enough for most of the situations that I encounter that I don't see a reason to replace it if I cannot use the replacement for both photography as well as video and if the AF is no better than what is in the GH5. If I had a focus puller or had any way to manually pull focus while the camera is on a gimbal it would not be that important to me.
It is pretty funny though, just the other day I was shooting a music video and I had just filled the room with smoke and set the lighting and was shooting on the C200; I decided for one of the takes to use AF.....well guess what, the C200 could not focus at all on any of the talent due to the smoke, so back to MF I went.
 
But back to the topic of the S5...it is DOA for me, if this camera is why there is no GH6 then I will be sorely disappointed. I have all the MFT glass I want and my GH5 already has no recording time limits, never overheats, does dual card slot recording, etc. I have a feeling the S5 will have a recording time limit like the S1, may not work with the XLR audio module, and will require me to invest in L mount lenses. It also does not do 4K120FPS, and I still would prefer my Canon 5DIV for photography.

Yeah, that's my thing too. 
Give me a person manually hunting for focus if need be.  It's actually a pleasant aesthetic, I think.  I'm not knocking anyone that uses AF.  My wife does, for example, (she's stills oriented) but I'm just not that into it for motion pictures...and when I see many cool hybrid cameras passionately dismissed because they lack high-end AF capabilities, I'm curious about that rationale.
An affordable FF camera like this S5 --made affordable because it's without all the bells and whistles sounds pretty great to me.

Been on a lot of doc shoots, some small, some big. I’ve never seen AF used and it has failed me so many times during personal projects or tests that I would never use it on a shoot someone was paying me for.
 
A shot slightly out of focus and then finding focus (like manual focusing) looks totally fine. A shot where the focus suddenly goes to the background or kicks off and starts searching is 100% totally ruined - this “unnatural” AF behavior is too common still. That has happened with Canon and Sony AF too often. I’d rather just hit it myself manually which, honestly, isn’t that difficult. 

Then there are some like Brandon Li that make their living with one or two cameras on gimbals with heavy use of AF. To each their own. I would rather have AF and hit the MF switch when I want to.

It's really true. Or just charge an extra $1000 and put in a fan and have unlimited recording times. People would have bought it. I would have bought it and then probably would have bought a Canon cinema camera (the ones they are trying to protect) to go along with it once the RF versions are released.
Instead, I think I'll stick with Panasonic for awhile. 
 

People keep saying it can be easily corrected but I keep seeing that zombie yellow and that clinical radioactive green everywhere unless it's that overcorrected atrocious orange and teal that's become synonymous with sony and I say this as someone who has one of their cameras.

As I look across the room at my Canon bodies and absolute treasure of Canon glass, I'm feeling kind of embarrassed at being a Canon fanboy for so many years. If this kind of behavior is the reward for decades of loyalty then Canon does not understand the lifetime value of a customer!
F*ck them. If this test gets confirmed elsewhere I am cancelling my pre-order and getting a Lumix S1H and S1R.

Absolutely.
Sigma and Panasonic are my top picks

The R300 looks amazing and, with those specs, is a great buy, especially if Canon also puts out a dedicated speedbooster. All you lose is raw internal (and even that may be included at a later date) from the C300 III? 
The R200 on the other hand is CLOSE, but has to have a 10-bit codec at least up to 30p to be useful. Too many people ask for 10-bit now to spend any true money on an 8-bit camera in 2020. All the new mid-tier and higher-end mirrorless cameras have 10-bit internal now, so it would seem a bit crazy to have a $3500 VIDEO camera that doesn't.

I don't know how much a used Panasonic S1 goes for in your neck of the woods, but it would be ideal for that kind of a situation. (I am assuming you wouldn't need AF-C in those situations but I could be wrong.)

Some of these comments are just hard to fathom. These comparison on spec sheet vs spec sheet are getting a little out of control. The C300 absolutely destroys the A7s3. One is a cinema camera, the other is a small mirrorless. The R300 at $6,299 Is a steal. I’m assuming people here have never used a canon cinema camera, because visually and ergonomically, it’s night and day. Add XLR, ND filter, better color, better actual DR (not spec sheet DR), a cooling fan, etc. On top of that the new sensor in the c300 is absolutely fantastic. Not everything can be compared in a spec sheet. There are phones that do 4K 60 and they still look like a phone shot the footage. An A7s3 is great for what it is, but it is not a cinema camera 

I want Blackmagic Design and Fujifilm to steal this design.

The new C300 has 16 stops of dynamic range, to go with that raw internal, so I think it will hold its place with the folks that it is targeted at. I thought the R5 sounded too good to be true as a hybrid shooter, but it ended up living up to the hype for me. Yeah I know, overheat gate - but that does not affect me as I only shoot in bursts for video and when I need longer I can do regular 4K or 4K HQ unlimited to an Atomos Ninja. But if this new camera has killer DR it would be awesome to pair with an R5, especially with no need to buy new lenses or batteries. If its similar quality video and just longer record times with no overheating, I will stick to the R5 as again I can just record as long as I want in HQ 4K with an atomos or bursts internal. 

Sony's IQ continues to struggle, in my opinion. The FX9 looks better than anything else they've done (outside of the Venice), but from samples, the A7sIII seems to look similar to the A7sII, FS5, etc. Skintones are meh, image feels thin, and in general just doesn't have a very pleasing look. 
Also, this will have internal NDs, won't overheat, has two XLRs, etc - so not sure how it won't be much more usable than the A7sIII. 

These specs do seem to be too good to be true. But then again, so did the C500 II and C300 III (as well as 1DX III and R5, but those did sort of turn out to be too good to be true, functional-wise). 
Don't know how this wouldn't severely undercut C300 III sales if the only thing missing was raw internal (especially if this camera can do raw output). I guess other things like full XLRs, timecode, and a few other professional tools would differentiate the two, but there are definitely work-arounds for a camera that is 1/3 or 1/2 the cost.
Hoping this is true, but we'll see. 

Sony's IQ continues to struggle, in my opinion. The FX9 looks better than anything else they've done (outside of the Venice), but from samples, the A7sIII seems to look similar to the A7sII, FS5, etc. Skintones are meh, image feels thin, and in general just doesn't have a very pleasing look. 
Also, this will have internal NDs, won't overheat, has two XLRs, etc - so not sure how it won't be much more usable than the A7sIII. 

Sony's IQ continues to struggle, in my opinion. The FX9 looks better than anything else they've done (outside of the Venice), but from samples, the A7sIII seems to look similar to the A7sII, FS5, etc. Skintones are meh, image feels thin, and in general just doesn't have a very pleasing look. 
Also, this will have internal NDs, won't overheat, has two XLRs, etc - so not sure how it won't be much more usable than the A7sIII. 

Can someone please point me to some A7SIII S Log graded footage where plants are nor radioactive green and people skin doesn't look like wax? Could not find one. Thanks

I agree, I love my GH5's layout, the menu system took a little getting used to mainly because there are so many options, but once I set up my favorites menu it is great. The GH5 feels good to hold, has never let me down due to overheating or any other issues. I never thought I'd like another camera as much as my 5DIV until the GH5 came along.

Lame AF is showstopper for Alexa then too.

Buy an S1H.
It's actually a bummer to see so many youtubers/bloggers/influences/blah supporting Canon and Sony as they continue to under-deliver. And here is Panasonic, who for 4-5 years now has been on an absolute roll (GH5 > GH5s > EVA-1 > S1 > S1H), giving us super reliable products with the best IQ and specs on the market with things we ask for (dual XRL, timecode, video tools).
Please, everyone buy Panasonic. I don't want to use a Sony in the future. And while I love the C200/C300III/C500II, I don't want a mirrorless camera that craps out after a few minutes. 

Buy an S1H.
It's actually a bummer to see so many youtubers/bloggers/influences/blah supporting Canon and Sony as they continue to under-deliver. And here is Panasonic, who for 4-5 years now has been on an absolute roll (GH5 > GH5s > EVA-1 > S1 > S1H), giving us super reliable products with the best IQ and specs on the market with things we ask for (dual XRL, timecode, video tools).
Please, everyone buy Panasonic. I don't want to use a Sony in the future. And while I love the C200/C300III/C500II, I don't want a mirrorless camera that craps out after a few minutes. 

Buy an S1H.
It's actually a bummer to see so many youtubers/bloggers/influences/blah supporting Canon and Sony as they continue to under-deliver. And here is Panasonic, who for 4-5 years now has been on an absolute roll (GH5 > GH5s > EVA-1 > S1 > S1H), giving us super reliable products with the best IQ and specs on the market with things we ask for (dual XRL, timecode, video tools).
Please, everyone buy Panasonic. I don't want to use a Sony in the future. And while I love the C200/C300III/C500II, I don't want a mirrorless camera that craps out after a few minutes.