Shield3

Let's call it a Tarantino mode then - every camera needs one - something that's fun, addictive, imperfect, stylish and to be honest slightly ridiculous. If a camera is too well educated and too much in a straight jacket it fails at being fun to shoot with. That is a Sony. I have only really ever enjoyed the RX1R II, and the rest stays in the bag.
Whenever I talk about that elusive "camera-personality" I always seem to bring up imperfections a lot, so maybe Sony is just too good. I always seem to talk about grain or the Digital Bolex, but it's really more about how high image quality expresses itself - emotionally, rather than the numbers, and it is the same with ergonomics and functionality - less about specs - more about personality.
The X-H1 I have as well, and I like it a lot. There is however a very slightly clinical soul to it because of how damn sharp the 4K is and how utilitarian the body is. It could actually be too perfect? IBIS too stable. Image too detailed. Just too...... good?
Whereas the EOS R has serious limitations and deserves a lot of criticism for what it "could have been", it feels in-hand the closest to a full frame GH5 I've yet known, and when you put your palm out under the articulated screen offset to the side of the body, it's almost as if a C200 or 1D C image is unfolding in the palm of your hand like magic, and everything feels in the right place, and you know it "just works" and is in focus... And you know it can transform into a mirrorless 5D Mark IV at any moment for stills shooting.
Then you remember the specs - slow 30ms sensor readout with rolling shutter skew, no 10bit internal, 1.8x crop, so on... And it doesn't make a damn difference to the shoot which is unfolding on that screen or in the EVF. Reality is almost divorced from the specs sheets. It's very weird.
The colour. Canon have it very close to Kodak film, or a Leica M9 with the Kodak CCD. The way it handles two extremes of light temperature in the same frame is uncannily like film. There is no tricky wire-act between green and magenta. Warm tones and wood don't have a magenta cast, as if the camera is trying to avoid a green cast. It seems to have a wider bandwidth of colour temperature, in which it sits almost perfectly in the middle - neither too far one way or the other - just beautiful. Same with the 1D C, yet now we have the choice to drop to 120Mbit instead of 500Mbit MJPEG, but the colour magic is still there.
Also in handling the blacks, they never seem to completely crush. There is always a creamy, milky look to a dark window at night on the EOS R and 1D C, whereas on other cameras with superior specs, you might see sharp edges or noise or too much detail or too much absolute black.
Talking about defying the specs sheet - the Leica M9. Now it's 10 years old yet still has a more filmic nature and addictive shooting quality than most top of the range 2018 cameras. It does not have the perfect plastic still-life feel of a CMOS camera, it has a silk-like grittiness... a contradiction but it's true.
Now we have the Nikon Z7 which I am getting on with quite well, but again something is lacking. The outright paper specs are the best on this camera of all that I own (full frame mirrorless wise). But it feels a bit like a consumer gadget, with again a clinically perfect modern image. I can't wait to rough it up with some older lenses via an adapter. The 35mm F1.8 Z is amazing but it's so cut-glass posh. It's like a perfect blonde super model, when you know you'd have more fun with Emma Watson. I need to add some things to my Z7, to get it to show some personality. Maybe a cage, a lens adapter, and turn the IBIS off... Add some imperfections into the shooting process. Otherwise it's just too seamless. Where's the challenge?

Won't the card write speed ultimately be the shortcoming here?
 

The pocket has a M43 sensor. Why would I need to carry something in my pocket btw? 
You can do a shallow DOF in post for video? Not easily. I can create dragons flying of my mouth in post to, technically. 

The whole well rec 709 is only 5 stops argument is kind of silly. With wide dynamic range you can manipulate the image easily in post and decide where you want that dynamic range to go. 

More power to you if you can deal with poor iso performance, no dof, small sensors and be happy with it. 

If you don't like these discussions just start your own thread on what you want to talk about. Who is forcing you to talk about camera specs? You are the one going on about how you think cell phones are better then micro four thirds cameras. If you genuinely don't care about specs why argue about it. 

I do care about specs. I love cameras, playing with cameras, reading about cameras, buying cameras. Its what interests me.

Also I do shoot stuff, was up until 2am filming a short film last night. I don't usually post on here because who wants to watch my shorts? Usually no one. Easier for people to read a 10 second comment and reply on their phone while doing something else. Videos require attention. 

This is not 2008 anymore. 4K is 4K, I don't care what the hell it is shot on. The average person doesn't even know what the hell DR even is. 3/4 the people on here acts like Netflix is going to pick them up. Good luck with that happening. Shoot something, anything with anything and be happy.  You have in your pants pocket 90% of what you ever need camera wise. Made it so. Jesus like a bunch of little kids on here. OHH I'm going to buy this, no I am going to buy that. Ohh I will wait until next year when the Panasonic FF comes out, Yeah right. They haven't made a camera in the last 6 years you can't make a feature movie with, including a Smartphone. Make it so. You can buy Cine cameras you could only dream of for less money now than most of there new Mirrorless stuff is. Make it so. This whole forum is turned into a QVC shopping channel.  Shoot something, Christ.

Let's agree to disagree.
I do. All the time. Its part of my job. But I rather not use a smartphone.

Yeah who need FF and those fancy new camera if you just can do everything on a phone, you shouldnt be even this forum apparently phone is good enough for you, stick to GSMArena mate!

Show me a phone with dof thing on VIDEO, I don’t care about DOF effect on photos, I want it on VIDEO

That looks bad ass.

Sounded so good, i got one . Pocket Rocket . 
 
 
 

And you could get walk around with easy manual focus / peaking with that sweet Nokton 25mm F/0.95 with 5 axis stabilization.  I still have some GH2 footage I shot wide open with that lens from 2011 and it holds up pretty well 7 years later.
  It's not the worst idea I've seen on here and I love the price.
Some people shoot things far away....like sports, wildlife.  What 300 2.8 amI going to put on my iphone 8 plus and shoot my son playing travel baseball from beyond center field?  What 600-1200mm equivalent can I shoot the moon with and get any detail on my phone?  No offense, but for YOU perhaps it doesn't make sense, but you don't speak for everyone else.  All tiny sensor phones SUCK in low light.
So yeah - shooting casual video of things up close and in good light - you may not see that big of a difference.  Throw a bright lens on a micro 4/3rds in difficult light and it sings.

It's $500!

This thread has it all - not released yet; but "beat every full frame camera ever, past present and future" (despite all the lack of info we have right now) to "camera sucks".  Only on EOSHD can you get such a wide range of speculation!
The crop monkey is not pleased.
 

This thread has it all - not released yet; but "beat every full frame camera ever, past present and future" (despite all the lack of info we have right now) to "camera sucks".  Only on EOSHD can you get such a wide range of speculation!
The crop monkey is not pleased.
 

I usually get these messages in my spam email. 

This thread has it all - not released yet; but "beat every full frame camera ever, past present and future" (despite all the lack of info we have right now) to "camera sucks".  Only on EOSHD can you get such a wide range of speculation!
The crop monkey is not pleased.
 

What is more plausible? That the new Panasonic cameras will have world class AF, or that Panasonic will produce yet another series of cameras with the same poorly performing AF as all the other cameras they have made up to this point? 
My guess... if you want usable AF do not look to Panasonic.
No doubt the video specs will be great. Colors the same as the GH series. It will shoot 4K @ 24 and 60 FPS. It will record 10 bit 422 internal. Maybe compressed raw? Rolling shutter will not be great. There will be a cropped mode. 
Where is the organic sensor they spoke of a few years ago? I would buy it for that one feature. 
A mixed bag in the making me thinks.

You might be right about CDAF being best for fine-tuning the focus, but PDAF not only knows something is out of focus but which way the focus is to be found.
After watching dozens or hundreds of beautiful moments pass while the focus mechanism has charged off in the wrong direction and the moment concludes and the shot is lost while the camera is still wondering why the entire frame is a complete blur, I will always be deeply deeply skeptical of CDAF-only cameras.

Yet in every example/comparison I have ever seen, PDAF has proven to be vastly superior to CDAF, particularly with respect to continuous AF video performance.  

Static shots, yes.   But still have to get the camera into tight spots in the studio around drummers and whatnot.  A monitor needs cabling & power.  That's extra work.   
Dealt with a Sony A7s for three years and various "solutions."   ..all of which required extra work.   Got a GH5 last year & wondered how the hell I managed without it.   Mainly because of the flip out screen!
Never switching back to a non-flipping screen, I don't care what the specs say.  Practicality trumps specs.
 

WOW ... no PDAF, yet again!
CDAF is barely adequate on a m4/3 size sensor that is aided by a deep depth of field. 
On a full frame sensor, with a narrow depth of field, CDAF will be a disaster. 
 

No articulating screen?  PASS!
Specs are meaningless if the body isn't practical.   I've had enough of dicking around with "solutions" that just add complexity.   If I can't flip the screen around the camera is useless.
I do over a million views a month on Youtube and need to get shit done.
www.youtube.com/spectresoundstudios

I think that Sony come out with a a9s.. 
 
12 megapixel 
No meccanical shutter 
4k 60p 10 bit without crop 
40 fps 

I read this for a second: "Fully articulating screen would be ok by me, but a better experience with the playmates..."!!! Fuck the articulating screen, gimme da playmates!!! ;-DD

Really?
Most cameras today are absolutely superb. Compromises, yes but there is so much choice out there that one can find the compromise which suits every need.

I am almost 60 years old. Been shooting since I was 15. 45 years - holy crap that is almost 1/2 a century. I have seen many leaps in technology.  Today I still work full-time creating videos using Sony RX10 IV's. Still shoot stills with Nikon. Been with Nikon since the beginning.I have tried Canon & Panasonic. I liked Canon to a point but always went back to the Nikon because of the lenses. However I had a brand new 10-24 Nikkor that needed warranty repair. That was a first for me. They just don't make them like they use too.  Anyway I saw Andrews post about sticking a camera up an arse? That sounds painful. Point being - no camera will ever be the end all.....and especially now it will just keep getting crazier. You want to know what is crazy? My first BetaCam cost $35,000. Shot standard def video on tape. Man what I would not have gave back in 1985 to have a camera like the Sony RX10 IV. 4K video shot on memory card? The Sony is not perfect either. No camera is. For awhile I chased every new camera. First the RED - which I had on order but passed. Before that I was ready to purchase a $60,000 Panasonic VariCam that shot 720p. Whew - glad I did not go that route. In 2006 I finally got into HD (sort of) with the Panasonic HVX. It shot great 720p video but the 1080 sucked. I met Barry Green at some local show and in 2007 I worked the Panasonic Booth at NAB. It was a great experience but they never called me back. I did purchase the Panasonic GH2. Awesome video for the day. But the photo side sucked. Then I added the Blackmagic BMPC I think it was called? Again awesome video but the ergonomics sucked. I rushed to buy the Blackmagic pocket camera. Very disappointing. I sold the HVX, GH2 and the Blackmagics and settled on the Sony RX10. I used that camera for quite a while. All along I kept my eye on the trends and passed on the other Sony RX10 upgrades. Then I shut down my video business in 2015 and took a full time job which offered a great salary and healthcare. Something I could not afford anymore because of ObamaCare.  At my new job I was able to set-up a video/photo department. We have 2 Sony RX10 IV's and we use Nikon D5600's for photo work. And the best part is I don't have to pay for anything any longer! It's a lot more fun to do video/photo work without worrying about where the next paycheck is coming from. As it so happens I was in Las Vegas in April on a family trip and managed to go to the NAB show on opening day. I have not been to one since I worked the 2007 show. It was the same except the technology has changed. Still crowded. Most of the people working the booths had no idea what they were talking about. Saw Barry Green doing a "live show" which was pretty bad. You would have thought that Panasonic would have had a better presentation by now? I could go on - but the point being - technology will always improve - maybe get cheaper and I wish I was 20 again!   Ha