So, my search has been clarified with a little research, a little more retrospection and a re-defining of “the question”.

The question is realistically; Do I want to go down a true videographer pathway, or simply add depth to my existing stills kit, but in a video capable frame of mind.

The three realistic options now are;

Another Olymous EM1x in the sales, with room still for a Ninja V, but the whole Pro-res to DaVinci work flow is not really appealing. The EM1x is my preferred stills option, and depending on my future direction, possibly the only real option, but leaves the door open for better video if needed. In sales, they come in at $2000au, which is basically an EM1 mk3, with a built in grip, second charger and second battery for less than an EM1 mk3 body. I may even be able to score a good lens kit.

Gut choice; Increased depth, with a strong lean towards stills before possible further video upgrades. Realistically, I am a stills shooter with video as an option. This may be limited thinking, but if I loose an EM1 to long term use or bad luck, I would feel the gap. Video is limited to 4k, then downsized, which is an unneccesary drain on resources.

*

Another Panasonic G9, because to be honest, this is still the best value M43 camera on the market. As a stills camera it bests the EM5 MK3, EM1 Mk2, G95 etc on price and overall performance. It is also a good option to pick up a cheap standard lens (12-60 kit, or Leica, both great options, although the Leica for some reason is more often than not dearer in a kit than on its own?!). For $1500au or less (with kit lens), I could add a second G9, making an ideal second angle camera and have one that can be better set up as a decent stills option, something I would like to explore further.

Having two would also allow me to happily upgrade one or both to VLOG-L and get a cheaper off board recorder just for continuous recording if needed or even tag-team them. The EM1x could then be re-assigned back to mostly stills, cleaning up my processes and improving consistency. I can even rebuild my EM1x cage to fit it in a different configuration to the first one.

Heart choice: Logical depth for both formats, but especially video. I feel that embracing the G9 would pay off in video, where relegating it to a second camera role may dilute it’s usefulness overall. Another G9 cannot ever be a bad thing (I rate them above the EM1 mk2’s, closer to the EM1 mk3 in many ways and they are comparable to the BM in many real world scenarios-possibly even with nicer skin tones-YMMV). Even with a more than decent kit lens, it is still the cheapest option. Only the GH6 beats it overall, and in real terms only just at more than three times the price.

*

The BMCC4k. This one would be a massive boost to my video cabilities, opening the door to various RAW formats, but effectievly nothing is added for stills. It could however semi-free up my other cameras as stills cameras, or would it? The things it offers have to be balanced against what it does not do, meaning my existing options could still have their uses, but would I use them if there is a noticeable, unacceptable difference in quality? Realistically, would I mix a jpeg only stills camera into a RAW workflow?

Head choice; A strong, clean and logical video upgrade. An even stronger commitment to video in general, but a shift in balance and thinking. The nagging suspicion that the second I get it, it will be pressed into service is lingering and the “be taken more seriously” vibe also.

Ok.

The top two options do not unbalance my current video kit, but limit it to a certain level, a “pro-am” level. If 4k, 422, 10 bit Cine-D/Natural (opt. VLOG-L upgrade) from the G9, C4k, 8 bit, All-i, Flat profile from the EM1x/EM1 mk2’s and the OSMO’s 4k Cine-D are enough, then balance and relevance are retained. If not, then I am effectively starting again with the BMCC4k ans everything I have built up is wasted.

The BMCC4k on the other hand, as good as it would be, especially for the money, would rise above the others for quality. I fear it would hog my video thinking, pushing the other cameras aside, then fall short in areas the others excel at.

But!

lf actually having a nobody-will-help-you-but-yourself video camera, a camera that will give me pro results (assuming that these are outside of the realm of my existing cameras), but better only if extra effort and skill are applied, then maybe it is a step in the right direction.

After using B-RAW/Pro-res in a variety of formats and a purely video-centric camera, would I pay even passing notice to the G9 and others? On the other hand, would a camera that cannot handle the weather, stabilise, or offer workable AF and is a video only-huge bag hog, be anything more than a part time option for a stills heavy hybrid shooter?

If an unbalanced kit is a risk, then more thought needs to be applied.

Have I said before how important balance is to my overly ordered mind?

The new dynamic would be a very simple BMCC4k primary, OSMO as gimbal camera and G9 as “B” camera, likely with the VLOG-L upgrade, so it has a decent chance of keeping up. A pair of specialist video cameras, effectively opposites to compliment each other and a decent support camera.

So, back to the question; Video aiming for pro level results or stills with video as a side line?

AAARRGGHH!