Imaging resource samples: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-g9/panasonic-g9A7.HTM

From what I see, the JPG's look better compared to the GH5.

@Eno I don't know I looked at 800 ISO because my camera spends more time there than I'd like and I don't see any credible difference virtually identical. Perhaps you saw something at a different ISO. With the marketing could it be a case of the emperors new clothes. If that's the case I will have to admit to being to incompetent to see the difference.

@Eno More organic jpegs (assuming this is true) sounds like something that could be tweaked in a future Gh5 firmware, Panasonic willing of course.

@DrDave. Agree!

But compared to the competition the G9 has better video specs than any other camera manufacturer has offered and it does exactly what I need it to do (6k, 4K and FHD video, with resizing from the full senor length) + it has better specs compared to the GH5 on the photo side of things ( which I really do appreciate cause we do 50/50 photo and video work). I really don't have much use for the V-LOG, LOG GAMA, 10 bits and 4:2:2, ALL-I codecs etc. The only feature I'll probably miss from the GH5 is the unlimited recording time but if I could live without it until now I'll probably manage. I need several cameras so for me the price will be the most definite part of the equation. If the GH5 gets a nice discount for the BF sells and will be priced lower than the G9 I may get it instead, if not I will get the G9 (especially if they offer a free grip for preorders)... Whatever offer it's better. :)

@Eno

I really don't have much use for the V-LOG, LOG GAMA, 10 bits and 4:2:2, ALL-I codecs etc.

Yet all this is just disabled software features :-) Thing I hate in capitalists the most. Behavior that is unnatural to any normal human being.

I was able to convert the G9 raw files with RawTherapee and although the tonal curve is off, the noise measurement can be sassed correctly compared to the GH5

Before visual comparison of noise you need to perfectly match all other stuff. In this sample it is not such.

better AF in video!! Cant wait to see. But HD only 28 Mbps thats a deal breaker, and no .mov

The Blu-Ray standard for 24p is 24 Mb/sec in h.264. Panasonic uses very good h.264 & h.265 codecs, I see no problem here.

Encoders used for BR are much better and footage usually also better compressed. Panasonic encoders are not so bad as they used to be, but they are still far from good x264 or x265 settings. Actually for complex detailed and moving footage you still need around 2x-3x more bitrate for same resulting picture.

There is absolutely no reason to be limited to 24Mb/s in a camera to be released in 2018. These are 2012 bit rates. There are a few reasons I can think that someone may not want to record in 4k, so we should have the option for decent footage in 1080p. Just stupid marketing bullshit.

Yet it is perfect reason to have in camera 15-20Mbit HEVC or even H.264 with much better codec. As If you want to transfer lot of footage fast afar you won't be fan of 200Mbit.

My G85's 1080p (which is also 28mbps) is pretty good- so long as there isn't a ton of motion, and you don't try to grade the footage much. It really should be higher though, even on the G85. 50mbps or 75mbps would help a lot with those issues and IMO would still leave plenty of distance between these cams and the GH5.

The idea of the M4/3 format when it was born were small cameras with great image quality, now we have bigger cameras than the FF and with similar price. Lol.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev I dont have small hands (normal) and I love small cameras, I love the size of Nex-5N, the GX7 size is good, are people who like to show off a big gear.

In the menus at minute 4:26 I clearly see 24p, 25p, 30p, 50p and 60p so where's the region looking on this camera?

My post was early on based on published specs that somehow did not have PAL framerates.