You really didn't differentiate, you heavily implied that Panasonic and Sony are in the "video" category while the others are in the "cinema" category. You then mentioned things related to the image they produce, such as color science, to explain why. Honestly the entire statement didn't make sense, and you seemed to be lumping the criticism people level at Sony in with Panasonic. What about Pannyboy's philosophy of adding advanced cinema/video features to even their entry level cameras makes them inferior, our soulless, to those other companies? And what DCI options is Pannyboy missing compared to them? Didn't Pannyboy literally introduce DCI to the mirrorless world?
What does Sony and Panasonic being diversified businesses have to do with being "soulless?" The diversity, and the extra income streams, is what has made their imaging divisions possible.
Re: Panasonic's image. As I said, "I think Panasonic has had the most filmic image out of the major camera manufacturers since the S series was released." The issues with the S5ii, which will eventually get fixed with a firmware update, don't detract from the near universal praise the S series cameras have gotten for the images they produce. You mention the GH5, which is a six-year-old camera: what relevance is that to what I said? And what were any of those companies producing six years ago that came anywhere close to offering the value and image of the GH5 when it came to video?
Almost every other company has caught up to Canon when it comes to colors, and most produce overall a better or just as good image (and have for years.) The days of Canon eating everyone's lunch when it comes to color are over.