TheDudeAbides

This was posted already, but this is the Vimeo version, which looks better to me on screens larger than a phone.
I really think this thing is a winner. I do wish it either had that home run feature like internal nd's, or near top of class autofocus, but all in all Panasonic has done an amazing job with this camera. 
 

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.

This was posted already, but this is the Vimeo version, which looks better to me on screens larger than a phone.
I really think this thing is a winner. I do wish it either had that home run feature like internal nd's, or near top of class autofocus, but all in all Panasonic has done an amazing job with this camera. 
 

This was posted already, but this is the Vimeo version, which looks better to me on screens larger than a phone.
I really think this thing is a winner. I do wish it either had that home run feature like internal nd's, or near top of class autofocus, but all in all Panasonic has done an amazing job with this camera. 
 

Yes.

Yes.

Is it not f2 MFT = f2.8 S35mm DOF?

There is only some truth to this Mr Runner, and I respectfully make my case. 
I have yet to watch a singular spectacular movie or short film or documentary and then thought to myself, that is so good because of the sensor size. And I'm certain not a singular typical nontechnical layman movie goer has ever thought that either. I do realize that as technicians, we may make decisions based on the tech, but I propose that the size of the sensor is far less important than we often make it.
Consider that all of the best movies we've ever seen were shot with s35 (with a few admitted outliers). Consider that many great pieces have been shot on s16. M4/3 is already larger than s16, and speed boosted is at least similar/same as s35. I personally consider the sensor size one of the features of m4/3. The horizon of lenses that are open to me at m4/3 is unequivocal at any larger sensor size, including factors such as physical size, focal range, and anamorphics.
I concede that there are definitely other factors where sensor size does in fact play a critical role, but if we were genuinely honest with ourselves, it is not nearly as often as we pretend.
Where the GH6 is once again a failure is autofocus. This is not to say that it's autofocus is bad, because it isn't. But it is not good enough. I would actually propose that this issue is also a bit more trivial than we make it, but because of it's inability to lock rock steady and hold, it will be a pass for many, and I'm afraid too many.
If there ever is an official death of m4/3, I suppose it will be blamed on sensor size, when in reality it is because the GH-frickin-6 didn't nail autofocus.
Make no mistake, I may still buy one. For me, the advantages are far too great to overlook. And quite honestly, even it's current autofocus design will work near flawlessly for roughly all of my purposes. 
But cheesy crust, Panasonic please figure out a firmware solution that ends this issue, or I'll be one of far too few buying your dinosaur gone extinct for none of the suspected reasons. 

There is only some truth to this Mr Runner, and I respectfully make my case. 
I have yet to watch a singular spectacular movie or short film or documentary and then thought to myself, that is so good because of the sensor size. And I'm certain not a singular typical nontechnical layman movie goer has ever thought that either. I do realize that as technicians, we may make decisions based on the tech, but I propose that the size of the sensor is far less important than we often make it.
Consider that all of the best movies we've ever seen were shot with s35 (with a few admitted outliers). Consider that many great pieces have been shot on s16. M4/3 is already larger than s16, and speed boosted is at least similar/same as s35. I personally consider the sensor size one of the features of m4/3. The horizon of lenses that are open to me at m4/3 is unequivocal at any larger sensor size, including factors such as physical size, focal range, and anamorphics.
I concede that there are definitely other factors where sensor size does in fact play a critical role, but if we were genuinely honest with ourselves, it is not nearly as often as we pretend.
Where the GH6 is once again a failure is autofocus. This is not to say that it's autofocus is bad, because it isn't. But it is not good enough. I would actually propose that this issue is also a bit more trivial than we make it, but because of it's inability to lock rock steady and hold, it will be a pass for many, and I'm afraid too many.
If there ever is an official death of m4/3, I suppose it will be blamed on sensor size, when in reality it is because the GH-frickin-6 didn't nail autofocus.
Make no mistake, I may still buy one. For me, the advantages are far too great to overlook. And quite honestly, even it's current autofocus design will work near flawlessly for roughly all of my purposes. 
But cheesy crust, Panasonic please figure out a firmware solution that ends this issue, or I'll be one of far too few buying your dinosaur gone extinct for none of the suspected reasons. 

There is only some truth to this Mr Runner, and I respectfully make my case. 
I have yet to watch a singular spectacular movie or short film or documentary and then thought to myself, that is so good because of the sensor size. And I'm certain not a singular typical nontechnical layman movie goer has ever thought that either. I do realize that as technicians, we may make decisions based on the tech, but I propose that the size of the sensor is far less important than we often make it.
Consider that all of the best movies we've ever seen were shot with s35 (with a few admitted outliers). Consider that many great pieces have been shot on s16. M4/3 is already larger than s16, and speed boosted is at least similar/same as s35. I personally consider the sensor size one of the features of m4/3. The horizon of lenses that are open to me at m4/3 is unequivocal at any larger sensor size, including factors such as physical size, focal range, and anamorphics.
I concede that there are definitely other factors where sensor size does in fact play a critical role, but if we were genuinely honest with ourselves, it is not nearly as often as we pretend.
Where the GH6 is once again a failure is autofocus. This is not to say that it's autofocus is bad, because it isn't. But it is not good enough. I would actually propose that this issue is also a bit more trivial than we make it, but because of it's inability to lock rock steady and hold, it will be a pass for many, and I'm afraid too many.
If there ever is an official death of m4/3, I suppose it will be blamed on sensor size, when in reality it is because the GH-frickin-6 didn't nail autofocus.
Make no mistake, I may still buy one. For me, the advantages are far too great to overlook. And quite honestly, even it's current autofocus design will work near flawlessly for roughly all of my purposes. 
But cheesy crust, Panasonic please figure out a firmware solution that ends this issue, or I'll be one of far too few buying your dinosaur gone extinct for none of the suspected reasons. 

There is only some truth to this Mr Runner, and I respectfully make my case. 
I have yet to watch a singular spectacular movie or short film or documentary and then thought to myself, that is so good because of the sensor size. And I'm certain not a singular typical nontechnical layman movie goer has ever thought that either. I do realize that as technicians, we may make decisions based on the tech, but I propose that the size of the sensor is far less important than we often make it.
Consider that all of the best movies we've ever seen were shot with s35 (with a few admitted outliers). Consider that many great pieces have been shot on s16. M4/3 is already larger than s16, and speed boosted is at least similar/same as s35. I personally consider the sensor size one of the features of m4/3. The horizon of lenses that are open to me at m4/3 is unequivocal at any larger sensor size, including factors such as physical size, focal range, and anamorphics.
I concede that there are definitely other factors where sensor size does in fact play a critical role, but if we were genuinely honest with ourselves, it is not nearly as often as we pretend.
Where the GH6 is once again a failure is autofocus. This is not to say that it's autofocus is bad, because it isn't. But it is not good enough. I would actually propose that this issue is also a bit more trivial than we make it, but because of it's inability to lock rock steady and hold, it will be a pass for many, and I'm afraid too many.
If there ever is an official death of m4/3, I suppose it will be blamed on sensor size, when in reality it is because the GH-frickin-6 didn't nail autofocus.
Make no mistake, I may still buy one. For me, the advantages are far too great to overlook. And quite honestly, even it's current autofocus design will work near flawlessly for roughly all of my purposes. 
But cheesy crust, Panasonic please figure out a firmware solution that ends this issue, or I'll be one of far too few buying your dinosaur gone extinct for none of the suspected reasons. 

(bolding mine)
That's not healthy at all! 
What are going to be health consequences due to many people being short of Vitamin D? 
And because they've got less physical exercise due to not going outdoors as much?
The mental health consequences due to being lockdown for months on end?

The MSM/politicians/"experts" will have a lot to answer for due to their feeding of this paranoid hysteria. 

Its like saying poor people in developed countries shouldn't call themselves poor, because some kids somewhere in India are dying because there is no enough food.
Slavery is about a situation where a person or a group of people, commonly known as master, decides how you should live. Some people have legitimately concluded that they're in that situation right now. The mathematical measurements of misery is not the subject. 

I thought we were talking about closing down businesses and lock downs and mandating stay at home policies - which I do consider a form of slavery.
Who said anything about masks?

1,000/day relocating to Florida tells me that many are not embarrassed by Florida. 
I am saddened for the mental and emotional destructiveness the paranoia has caused. To me that's worse than the cause. Personally I would rather die free than survive as a slave. That's just me. I know many would disagree. 
Cheers. 

I thought we were talking about closing down businesses and lock downs and mandating stay at home policies - which I do consider a form of slavery.
Who said anything about masks?

1,000/day relocating to Florida tells me that many are not embarrassed by Florida. 
I am saddened for the mental and emotional destructiveness the paranoia has caused. To me that's worse than the cause. Personally I would rather die free than survive as a slave. That's just me. I know many would disagree. 
Cheers. 

So I'm wondering if you can help me here.
The OP asked how we were all fairing. I understood it to mean that some were having a very difficult time. Some not as much. So let's hear about how everyone's doing. That's what I thought I understood. It was an honest question. At least I thought. 
So I responded that here in Florida we have been basically open since May, that I know people who were diagnosed with covid, but I don't personally know anyone who has died. All true. 
Also, my greatest impact from covid was on my dad, who fell in July and suffered severe brain damage that was made enormously worse by the covid rules in California hospitals which didn't allow anyone to see him. This made his recovery nearly impossible because, if you've ever known anyone who has experienced tremendous brain trauma, surrounding them with familiar faces and places is critical to help them stay grounded and to recall familiar things. He also has tremendous ptsd from staying in a hospital for 2 months alone. It's been devastating to us and him and he is still not close to recovering from either the fall or the hospital stay.
I was then told Florida was an embarrassment. 
Well, a statistic I heard a month ago said that 1,000 people/day are moving here. Clearly not everyone is embarrassed by Florida. Is this offensive? Inappropriate? Whether or not you agree, isn't this in line with the OP's original question? How are we all fairing and who's doing what?
Then I empathized with those who have been negatively affected by the paranoia, as opposed to the disease itself -- like my family. I literally don't know a single person who has died from covid, but the fear of it destroyed my dad's chances of recovery. Is that offensive? Inappropriate? Again, isn't this a relevant addition to the conversation? I haven't suggested new policy. Only expressed my experiences.
I then mentioned how I would prefer to die free, than live as a slave. Is this such an offensive sentiment? Maybe the word "slave" is touchy? If so, I apologize. I didn't mean it in with any of the historical stigma.
I delivered to a lady a couple months ago who hadn't been outside since March 2020. I couldn't do that. In other words, to hell with the paranoia, I would rather die free than be enslaved to my house. Said differently, I would rather live and risk dying, than survive and risk never living. As I said before, and politely I might add, that's me. Not everyone will agree.
Then I was accused of not wearing a mask and not social distancing. Listen, I wear a mask every time I'm out in public and keep my distance. Not for my sake, but for those who are concerned. Isn't this what has been asked of us? 
Was the only acceptable answer how miserable I am and it's all so and so's fault? If so, I can't answer that way. Over here in my circle of family and friends we are happy and healthy and working and free and the most devastating experience from covid was the fear, not the virus itself.
I meant no disrespect to those that have lost friends and family. And if you are in favor of locking everyone in, well, I disagree, but I respect your opinion. I'm simply offering mine. 
Again, I thought we were supposed to express our experiences thus far. Those are mine. Maybe this forum isn't for honest answers. Change my mind. 

1,000/day relocating to Florida tells me that many are not embarrassed by Florida. 
I am saddened for the mental and emotional destructiveness the paranoia has caused. To me that's worse than the cause. Personally I would rather die free than survive as a slave. That's just me. I know many would disagree. 
Cheers. 

So I'm wondering if you can help me here.
The OP asked how we were all fairing. I understood it to mean that some were having a very difficult time. Some not as much. So let's hear about how everyone's doing. That's what I thought I understood. It was an honest question. At least I thought. 
So I responded that here in Florida we have been basically open since May, that I know people who were diagnosed with covid, but I don't personally know anyone who has died. All true. 
Also, my greatest impact from covid was on my dad, who fell in July and suffered severe brain damage that was made enormously worse by the covid rules in California hospitals which didn't allow anyone to see him. This made his recovery nearly impossible because, if you've ever known anyone who has experienced tremendous brain trauma, surrounding them with familiar faces and places is critical to help them stay grounded and to recall familiar things. He also has tremendous ptsd from staying in a hospital for 2 months alone. It's been devastating to us and him and he is still not close to recovering from either the fall or the hospital stay.
I was then told Florida was an embarrassment. 
Well, a statistic I heard a month ago said that 1,000 people/day are moving here. Clearly not everyone is embarrassed by Florida. Is this offensive? Inappropriate? Whether or not you agree, isn't this in line with the OP's original question? How are we all fairing and who's doing what?
Then I empathized with those who have been negatively affected by the paranoia, as opposed to the disease itself -- like my family. I literally don't know a single person who has died from covid, but the fear of it destroyed my dad's chances of recovery. Is that offensive? Inappropriate? Again, isn't this a relevant addition to the conversation? I haven't suggested new policy. Only expressed my experiences.
I then mentioned how I would prefer to die free, than live as a slave. Is this such an offensive sentiment? Maybe the word "slave" is touchy? If so, I apologize. I didn't mean it in with any of the historical stigma.
I delivered to a lady a couple months ago who hadn't been outside since March 2020. I couldn't do that. In other words, to hell with the paranoia, I would rather die free than be enslaved to my house. Said differently, I would rather live and risk dying, than survive and risk never living. As I said before, and politely I might add, that's me. Not everyone will agree.
Then I was accused of not wearing a mask and not social distancing. Listen, I wear a mask every time I'm out in public and keep my distance. Not for my sake, but for those who are concerned. Isn't this what has been asked of us? 
Was the only acceptable answer how miserable I am and it's all so and so's fault? If so, I can't answer that way. Over here in my circle of family and friends we are happy and healthy and working and free and the most devastating experience from covid was the fear, not the virus itself.
I meant no disrespect to those that have lost friends and family. And if you are in favor of locking everyone in, well, I disagree, but I respect your opinion. I'm simply offering mine. 
Again, I thought we were supposed to express our experiences thus far. Those are mine. Maybe this forum isn't for honest answers. Change my mind. 

I thought we were talking about closing down businesses and lock downs and mandating stay at home policies - which I do consider a form of slavery.
Who said anything about masks?

1,000/day relocating to Florida tells me that many are not embarrassed by Florida. 
I am saddened for the mental and emotional destructiveness the paranoia has caused. To me that's worse than the cause. Personally I would rather die free than survive as a slave. That's just me. I know many would disagree. 
Cheers. 

I'm in Florida.
We've been back to normal since May.
I know lot's who have been diagnosed with covid, but I know no one who's died. 
My dad fell from a high latter in July (in California) and suffered SEVERE brain damage. Also PTSD from staying in a hospital for 2 months with next to no visitors. He is still not even close to recovered.

I thought we were talking about closing down businesses and lock downs and mandating stay at home policies - which I do consider a form of slavery.
Who said anything about masks?

1,000/day relocating to Florida tells me that many are not embarrassed by Florida. 
I am saddened for the mental and emotional destructiveness the paranoia has caused. To me that's worse than the cause. Personally I would rather die free than survive as a slave. That's just me. I know many would disagree. 
Cheers.