MrSMW

And this is where it falls apart for me...
As a 'one & done', a single body with longer of those two zooms is OK...to a point...the 100mm in MF point being not even half the reach I need.
Could I compensate with cropping? Yes, that's why I prefer a high MP camera for stills, but even 100mp is pushing it a bit taking what is an approx 80mm lens in FF terms, to well over double that and f4 for anything low light, (which can be quite a bit of my work), is borderline too slow. I had and used the LUMIX f4 24-105 and it was not the best experience other than outdoor and day time.
And this is the 'weakness' of MF for me, - the sheer physics over 100mm in FF terms, - it just gets too big, too heavy and too slow. For my specific needs.
On the other hand, the 2 body approach could work, but is utterly dependant on each unit being much more compact and light over a single 'one & done', though the combined size & weight of 2 units might be more. 
For a 2 body approach to work, it HAS to be primes only and something no bigger ideally than Sigma's f2 range, so their 20/24/35/50/65 and jumping up to 90mm, f2.8.
On a body ideally no bigger than A7RV or at a push, Z8, a set of 4 would work for me and of course these are native to Sony and almost native adapted to Nikon, but to Fuji GFX, I don't think so?
And even if a workaround could be found, it comes back to the same thing and that is, "then what is the point?" as in you switched from one solution to another that doesn't benefit you in any way so why?
Same as I love the idea of a Hasselblad X2D prime set up, - I would absolutely love it...but I think more with a rose tinted spectacle approach than a real world one. And that is without considering the cost!
So right now, the SL3 for me still remains the single best option all factors except cost considered and that is where it does not and cannot work for me. A pair of those with a 4x prime Sigma set up would be nuts, but nuts beyond my means.
My A7RV to me is my 'poor man's SL3'. And it is a very fabulous poor man's SL3 so until such time as something significant changes, it remains in it's role.

Don't get me thinking about that one!
That's been in and out of my shopping basket numerous times and in some ways, is the ultimate option for stills. My stills needs anyway.
The ONLY thing that has really stopped me has been lenses. Just how do I get a small/light/compact kit that can cover everything from 20-200mm providing nothing slower than f2.8 FF equivalent and no smaller than 24mp at the long end...
With MF Fuji, the body can do it, but the lens/whole system, not quite, or rather the compromises are ones that I am not prepared to make.
Having said that, a pair of the things with a set of 3-4 primes and... aaaaargh, nooooooo. 
Change for me at this point in time has to bring something quantifiably useful because my needs have already been met.
It's interesting looking though and I think sensible to at least look at any and all options because that in itself can sometimes provide a creative aspect not previously considered. So I look and I consider.
 

Not to take his job, but the tl;dr is that less than 50mm focal length has very very few entries which cover without vignetting.  The wider, the fewer.  Above 50mm, it increases quickly.

I took a look, but the immediate migraine made me want to go and have a lie down.
I'll get Emmanuel to translate and give a concise breakdown.

Exactamundo. I know there are a couple of FF primes that work on the GFX due it being 'not quite medium format', but I'd need a range that met my needs and ideally, all one single line.
This is why as things stand, in a few weeks, for my S9, I will be picking up the LUMIX; 18mm f1.8, the 50mm f1.8 and then undecided but either the 85mm f1.8 or the 100mm f2.8, all over the Sigma range.
I prefer the Sigmas, especially for photo, but I'm looking at this as head over heart and those boring looking, but consistent size, weight, filter thread, fast silent focusing dullard LUMIX's have to win in this situation.
Not without the glass, but well, physics.
I'd rather it had 100mp though just for the insane cropping.
Right now, I have a single with 3 zooms and with my Mr Sensible head on, no better option.
However, if his alter ego Captain Sensible (look him up if you don't know) takes charge of the ship, a pair of the things with a set of 4 Sigma primes might just become more attractive...
The Zf would have to go to make room however and I'm not sure about that at this time.

I took a look, but the immediate migraine made me want to go and have a lie down.
I'll get Emmanuel to translate and give a concise breakdown.

I had the debate myself over SL2 vs S1R a few years back but in my case the need was primarily hi res stills and only a secondary need for video and at the time, not log.
The S1R easily won that argument. It was, for stills at least, a better, but 1/2 price SL2, though the Leica beat it on design and badge. Obviously.
But time marches on and though many of us consider the S1R and S1H well overdue and this latest launch is not quite what many hoped for, but cut out all the hysterics and simply ask yourself, "is this a good piece of kit for my needs?" and that is the only bit of info that is actually relevant.
I have warmed to it and could make a case for it, but still wish it had been 60mp+ for my own selfish reasons!

And this is where it falls apart for me...
As a 'one & done', a single body with longer of those two zooms is OK...to a point...the 100mm in MF point being not even half the reach I need.
Could I compensate with cropping? Yes, that's why I prefer a high MP camera for stills, but even 100mp is pushing it a bit taking what is an approx 80mm lens in FF terms, to well over double that and f4 for anything low light, (which can be quite a bit of my work), is borderline too slow. I had and used the LUMIX f4 24-105 and it was not the best experience other than outdoor and day time.
And this is the 'weakness' of MF for me, - the sheer physics over 100mm in FF terms, - it just gets too big, too heavy and too slow. For my specific needs.
On the other hand, the 2 body approach could work, but is utterly dependant on each unit being much more compact and light over a single 'one & done', though the combined size & weight of 2 units might be more. 
For a 2 body approach to work, it HAS to be primes only and something no bigger ideally than Sigma's f2 range, so their 20/24/35/50/65 and jumping up to 90mm, f2.8.
On a body ideally no bigger than A7RV or at a push, Z8, a set of 4 would work for me and of course these are native to Sony and almost native adapted to Nikon, but to Fuji GFX, I don't think so?
And even if a workaround could be found, it comes back to the same thing and that is, "then what is the point?" as in you switched from one solution to another that doesn't benefit you in any way so why?
Same as I love the idea of a Hasselblad X2D prime set up, - I would absolutely love it...but I think more with a rose tinted spectacle approach than a real world one. And that is without considering the cost!
So right now, the SL3 for me still remains the single best option all factors except cost considered and that is where it does not and cannot work for me. A pair of those with a 4x prime Sigma set up would be nuts, but nuts beyond my means.
My A7RV to me is my 'poor man's SL3'. And it is a very fabulous poor man's SL3 so until such time as something significant changes, it remains in it's role.

Don't get me thinking about that one!
That's been in and out of my shopping basket numerous times and in some ways, is the ultimate option for stills. My stills needs anyway.
The ONLY thing that has really stopped me has been lenses. Just how do I get a small/light/compact kit that can cover everything from 20-200mm providing nothing slower than f2.8 FF equivalent and no smaller than 24mp at the long end...
With MF Fuji, the body can do it, but the lens/whole system, not quite, or rather the compromises are ones that I am not prepared to make.
Having said that, a pair of the things with a set of 3-4 primes and... aaaaargh, nooooooo. 
Change for me at this point in time has to bring something quantifiably useful because my needs have already been met.
It's interesting looking though and I think sensible to at least look at any and all options because that in itself can sometimes provide a creative aspect not previously considered. So I look and I consider.
 

It’s called ‘timing’ and ‘progress’ respectively isn’t it as in just a few months back, some of those older cameras might have made sense, but with march of time, increasingly less until such a point as they do not.
I don’t think we are quite at the ‘do not’ stage yet with those models, but launches like the S1Rii start to compete and once the prices drop and firmware upgrades happen, should make even more sense.
The SL2 with zero tilt screen option for one thing would just kill it for me.
But as it does 8k it gets all the chatter. I said it somewhere else above, but IMO they should have launched it as a 6k beast and locked all 8k function for say 3 months and opened that up with firmware.
But then there would probably have been as much furore over that choice!
I suspect so.
Especially once prices dip below 3k.
I’m still not sure I would buy it for my needs because of the way I work and as my principal video unit, the S9 works better (minimal size & weight on a free-standing monopod) despite the S1Rii being a MUCH better camera in hand and full stop.
For stills, Z8 vs A7RV vs S1Rii, I could make a case for any but still favour the Sony, and not just because I have one. 
For video, as things stand, I would pick the Panny with the Z8 a very close second and the day it gets full LUT support is the day I would give the nod to the Nikon.

It’s called ‘timing’ and ‘progress’ respectively isn’t it as in just a few months back, some of those older cameras might have made sense, but with march of time, increasingly less until such a point as they do not.
I don’t think we are quite at the ‘do not’ stage yet with those models, but launches like the S1Rii start to compete and once the prices drop and firmware upgrades happen, should make even more sense.
The SL2 with zero tilt screen option for one thing would just kill it for me.
But as it does 8k it gets all the chatter. I said it somewhere else above, but IMO they should have launched it as a 6k beast and locked all 8k function for say 3 months and opened that up with firmware.
But then there would probably have been as much furore over that choice!
I suspect so.
Especially once prices dip below 3k.
I’m still not sure I would buy it for my needs because of the way I work and as my principal video unit, the S9 works better (minimal size & weight on a free-standing monopod) despite the S1Rii being a MUCH better camera in hand and full stop.
For stills, Z8 vs A7RV vs S1Rii, I could make a case for any but still favour the Sony, and not just because I have one. 
For video, as things stand, I would pick the Panny with the Z8 a very close second and the day it gets full LUT support is the day I would give the nod to the Nikon.

Mine is more like this:

 
 But came with less vegetables.

Yes. I got my fold up off Amazon for under €70 and it has been one of the best purchases of my career for sure.
Instead of 3-4 trips from vehicle to venue, it’s been a single one each way.

I think certainly for stills, at least at ‘ordinary’ viewing levels which for 99.9999999999999% of all viewing these days is on a device and mainly a phone…and with compressed images at that!
The artist/craftsman in me still and always will fight back against that even if I am the only one that sees or even knows about it.
It’s one of the reasons I am chasing more megapixels. It’s not because I think it improves the image in any way as such, but because I can crop ever harder with a lower loss of quality which means I can use smaller and lighter kit which has so many benefits including enjoyment.
Tech for tech sake no. If it’s just data on a spreadsheet, who gives a shit, but when that tech relates to real world quality of life…

Mine is more like this:

 
 But came with less vegetables.

Mine is more like this:

 
 But came with less vegetables.

Yes. I got my fold up off Amazon for under €70 and it has been one of the best purchases of my career for sure.
Instead of 3-4 trips from vehicle to venue, it’s been a single one each way.

I would be very pleased if it was Tamron for their mid range compact & lightweight fast zooms, but I suspect Sigma would veto that.
 

I think certainly for stills, at least at ‘ordinary’ viewing levels which for 99.9999999999999% of all viewing these days is on a device and mainly a phone…and with compressed images at that!
The artist/craftsman in me still and always will fight back against that even if I am the only one that sees or even knows about it.
It’s one of the reasons I am chasing more megapixels. It’s not because I think it improves the image in any way as such, but because I can crop ever harder with a lower loss of quality which means I can use smaller and lighter kit which has so many benefits including enjoyment.
Tech for tech sake no. If it’s just data on a spreadsheet, who gives a shit, but when that tech relates to real world quality of life…

I think certainly for stills, at least at ‘ordinary’ viewing levels which for 99.9999999999999% of all viewing these days is on a device and mainly a phone…and with compressed images at that!
The artist/craftsman in me still and always will fight back against that even if I am the only one that sees or even knows about it.
It’s one of the reasons I am chasing more megapixels. It’s not because I think it improves the image in any way as such, but because I can crop ever harder with a lower loss of quality which means I can use smaller and lighter kit which has so many benefits including enjoyment.
Tech for tech sake no. If it’s just data on a spreadsheet, who gives a shit, but when that tech relates to real world quality of life…

I have the 40mm f2 on my Zf and it’s a perfect match.
Toyed with all kinds of options but nothing so far beats it for me.
But re. the Z8, it was a VERY close call for me choosing the A7RV over it and what won it for Sony was:
Cheaper ‘like new’ used
Smaller & lighter
Bigger sensor
Mech shutter
Best rear LCD on any camera
Native relatively compact Tamron lenses…because there is some distortion adapted with the Megadap.
But I do like the chunk and the build of the Z8 and am so glad I did not buy your Z9 in the end Andrew because I think the size & weight would have become an issue quite quickly. And I work out 🦾
Not a lot between the Z8, S1Rii, R5ii or A7RV and I’d be happy with any of them…except RF glass is still somewhat limited and pricey so the least fave option.
A pair of Z8’s with adapted Sigma f2 primes could be a very nice option though…

I think certainly for stills, at least at ‘ordinary’ viewing levels which for 99.9999999999999% of all viewing these days is on a device and mainly a phone…and with compressed images at that!
The artist/craftsman in me still and always will fight back against that even if I am the only one that sees or even knows about it.
It’s one of the reasons I am chasing more megapixels. It’s not because I think it improves the image in any way as such, but because I can crop ever harder with a lower loss of quality which means I can use smaller and lighter kit which has so many benefits including enjoyment.
Tech for tech sake no. If it’s just data on a spreadsheet, who gives a shit, but when that tech relates to real world quality of life…

Emanuel = part Confucious, part early AI bot.
I literally have no idea what you are talking about...but at the same time, appreciate your efforts!

I can make a case for both such as say; single body with 24-70 vs two bodies, one on each hip, with say a 28 and an 85.
It's certainly more convenient to zoom, but it does mean a larger and heavier unit in your hands which over a typical 12-15 hour day, adds up and just isn't as enjoyable at any point throughout the day.
It's really when we get about 100mm that zooms tend to make more sense to me because we tend to have 85/90/105 and OK 135, but there isn't really much in prime land above 100'ish' compared with below.
At this point in time, I am in the 'one & done' camp, but that does require 3 lens changes albeit, not regularly.
Possibly, but right now I'd pick the S9 for video based on current spec and let's not forget the twist & tilt rear LCD.
I doubt even that would work my friend 😘

I think certainly for stills, at least at ‘ordinary’ viewing levels which for 99.9999999999999% of all viewing these days is on a device and mainly a phone…and with compressed images at that!
The artist/craftsman in me still and always will fight back against that even if I am the only one that sees or even knows about it.
It’s one of the reasons I am chasing more megapixels. It’s not because I think it improves the image in any way as such, but because I can crop ever harder with a lower loss of quality which means I can use smaller and lighter kit which has so many benefits including enjoyment.
Tech for tech sake no. If it’s just data on a spreadsheet, who gives a shit, but when that tech relates to real world quality of life…