Leaderboard

ok, so bmd has had its moment out in the sun again and a couple of more threads have been started, you'll either buy one or you wont . Now cam we get back to the important business at hand ? like creating content and judging said content ?

@Skip77 "Sucks for P4K owners" Why exactly? This is a complementary camera for the P4K, not a replacement. In many ways, the P4K is *better* than the P6K. Here are just a few of the ways the P4K is better than the P6K: The P6K files are more than *double* the size of the P4K files. The P6K is 323 MB/s vs. the P4K at 135 MB/s (at highest recording rates) Many people have trouble with their computers and workflow editing 4K footage. 6K footage is going to crush their dreams The P6K can not record 4K or DCI 4K footage in BRAW, only ProRes. The P4K + Speed booster gives you an extra stop of light and a field of view wider than Super35. The P6K field of view (crop) is less than Super35, despite Blackmagic calling it a "Super35" sensor. The P6K has a diagonal crop of 1.63 vs. 1.39 for Super35 relative to a 36mm x 24mm "full frame" sensor. Based on sensor width, the P6K is 23.10mm vs. 24.89mm for Super35, so the crop based on width is P6K: 1.56 vs. Super35: 1.45. So, based on width, the P6K is close to Super35 size. The P4K + 0.71x Speed booster has a width based crop factor of 1.35, wider than Super35. I will be researching this next week, but I suspect that the P4K + Speed booster will do better in low light than the P6K. Cost: The P4K costs $1295, the P6K costs $2495. The P4K has a better lens selection because most lenses can be adapted to the Micro 4/3 mount used by the P4K, including the EF lenses used on the P6K. I have a P6K that will arrive tomorrow. I have no intention of replacing all of my P4Ks with P6Ks, even though I could easily do so. They will work together and make an excellent team as they should cut perfectly together with each other.

And Ignorance is beautiful. Or it isn't.

It’s a step down for your wallet, that’s indisputable. I would absolutely dispute any claim that it’s an objectively better camera. Both cameras are EXTREMELY similar. There are subjective reasons that someone might prefer either camera. The question potential buyers will be asking is, “are those subjective reasons important enough to me to justify the higher price tag?” For me, it is definitely not. If I want a camera compatible with EF full-frame image circle lenses, I’ll just get a cine speedbooster for the P4K. It really is that simple from my perspective. I actually see the 6K as little more than a spec sheet bragging number. Seriously, for almost all practical work (that I do), 4K is more than enough. Anything more just means bigger files. If you do work that simply MUST have 6K Raw, by all means, nobody is stopping you. Get the P6K. The difference between APSC and Micro 4/3 is honestly pretty negligible. Any claims of it having less noise or better dynamic range due to its sensor are COMPLETE and utter conjecture. I’ll believe it when I see real tests, and according to all the press per BM, the DR is exactly the same. It is 2019. The concept that 6K APSC versus 4K M4/3 is a HUGE deal radical difference (all else being equal) is honestly not only laughable, but potentially bad consumer advice. They’re just different, and both are a steal compared to anything else in the market. I guess I should apologize for voicing my honest opinion on the pros/cons of these two cameras. I didn’t realize this was supposed to be the blind circle-jerk thread.

• A 24mm lens on the P6K... with adapted/native lens = 37mm with the speedbooster = 27mm • A 24mm lens on the P4K... with adapted/native lens = 45mm with .71x speedbooster = 32mm with .64x speedbooster = 29mm But the beauty of the P6K is that you don’t need a speedbooster because it is already S35. I would just spend the money on a fast native prime or an f/2.8 zoom and be happy.

Well, I'm not sure its that depressing considering this is the view from its front door Yes, people live in them but this particular one was a "have a look inside my cave as I'm renovating it and give me a euro to help me with it" place. Lovely cool natural temperature in there considering it was 39C outside. If you ever find yourself in Granada, you can try one out as there are plenty on AirBnB to choose from in the same area with slightly more brighter interiors ! https://www.airbnb.co.uk/rooms/31094926?location=Granada%2C Spain&toddlers=0&adults=2&check_in=2019-11-06&check_out=2019-11-08&source_impression_id=p3_1565545654_LYpFx%2B%2BPbPCOHpGy&s=eXoImwQB

Nice to hear :

Well that's one of them. Currently using the Note 8. I don't have the iPhone handy. Just preordered the Note 10 Plus 5G... but that's not arriving until the 23rd.

Just to clarify I was only kidding about it being in a new EOS-R. It will of course be in the XC-20

The license swap would be awesome. The RF Mount and L-Mount are the two most exciting mounts, and I love what Canon is doing with the RF Mount. Canon can make great glass, that's for sure. And they do make the best workhorse doc cams around (C100 and C300) if they would just lean into that a bit more. The C200's cinema raw lite is the nicest image I've seen that isn't created by Arri or Red (for all the haters on here, Red's image is indeed incredible). But the Canon CRM file sizes are huge compared to RedCode Raw and Black Magic Raw. For most work, the 8:1 and 12:1 raw compressions are the sweet spot for getting 95% of the raw quality and features and still having file sizes smaller than ProRes LT. Hopefully Canon can get by all of the Red patents and do more versions of their CRM (5:1, 8:1, 12:1) - and then we also get Red cameras with new mounts. Winners all around.

I suggest you carefully read my post again - many of your points are arguments against points I didn't make, but you obviously thought that I did. Also, I'm aware that GH5 files aren't 6K RAW, but the logic you're failing to recognise is that a 4K crop is to 6K the same that a 150% crop of 4K is to straight 4K. The argument goes that if you're outputting 4K and are going to crop in by 150% then you need 6K, but what the logic fails to recognise is that you can scale 4K by the same amount and if you add a small amount of sharpening then it's practically indistinguishable from the straight 4K file. Therefore the argument that 6K is required for reframing and keeping similar image quality doesn't really stack up. It's funny when discussing things like this - you and @thephoenix both went to the extreme and then criticised that. That is called a 'straw-man' argument, and although neither of you did it explicitly, you both reacted like I had said things I didn't actually say. Let's examine the title of this thread and break it down: "6K RAW is over-rated. Here's why..." 6K RAW I'm not really talking about compressed 6K. If you're delivering 4K it will likely be compressed. If you're shooting compressed 4K then grading it and then re-compressing it to deliver codec then that's a lot of damage to the image. If you're shooting 4K RAW then you're already miles ahead of compressed 4K. 6K RAW is miles ahead of that and yet apparently it's "argue on the internet" levels of critical, despite that 4K RAW is already miles above the compressed 4K files that the world is awash in. overrated This is a key point - I'm not saying it's useless, I'm saying that it's overrated. To break this down further, I'm saying that there's a rating of some kind (in the direction of shiny-thing mania), and that that level of rating is above what rating it should have. Not that it should be zero, just that it should be below what is has. Here's why This is where the arguments live, and I don't mean people fighting, I mean rational points designed to explore and explain thinking. In terms of context, yes, it depends on what you're shooting and what it's for, but if I was a betting man I'd bet a serious amount of money that you're not delivering anything in 6K and couldn't tell a 2.5K crop upscaled to 4K from a 4K source in a blind test.

OK, so I'm not massively keen to get too involved in this at all while I've got so much other stuff going on but..... Just having a look at this with my GX80 and you can forget the 709Like colour profile but something is going on with that higher bitrate command switching it into the extended mode. I thought that people had exhausted all of the permutations but if you do use that FZ2000 command that puts it into the editable formats mode ([MP4 (LPCM)] as Panasonic refer to it) then something does happen on the GX80. Namely, it displays the codec on the rear screen as being FHD50P but as AVCHD rather than MP4. It also blanks out the other recording options in the menu (though it does display it at 28Mbps) until you switch to and from MP4 and when you try and record then sometimes it will and sometimes it won't or stops quite quickly. If it does record properly though, it puts the file in the AVCHD collection file. For the GX80, I don't think this is a rabbit hole that is particularly worth going too deeply down (and I certainly won't be) but for anyone who does want to then you may (though probably may not) find something using a combination of http://192.168.54.1/cam.cgi?mode=setsetting&type=videoformat&value=mp4ed to place it into what would be the MP4 LPCM mode and then using variations on this command http://192.168.54.1/cam.cgi?mode=setsetting&type=videoquality&value=mov_50p_100mbps changing the value of "mov_50p_100mbps" for those of different formats extracted from previous capture sessions of the GH5 etc on previous pages. If your menus for the formats disappear then you can get back to them with a "safe" command of a valid format by sending this : http://192.168.54.1/cam.cgi?mode=setsetting&type=videoquality&value=mp4_24p_100mbps_4k As I say, I don't think there is much mileage for the GX80 so its not something I'm going to be spending any time on myself but based on the change of sensor in the GX9 offering newer possibilities then I definitely think that anyone with an LX100 Mark 2 might well benefit from a bit of digging with this.

The GH5s has better lowlight because it is a lower MP sensor than the GH5 and it has dual iso. But to be fair, if all things were equal, including lens speed, the larger sensor would probably be better in lowlight.

No, A larger sensor doesn't give you better low light performance... but I don't think its worth arguing with you. And untrue: I don't think P6K is a step down. If I didn't already have a camera, it might be the one I would choose

WOW! ? gorgeous omg. actually i only want to live in remote areas from now on, and im moving from my current mtn to a snowier, crappier, more remote one 500 miles away THEn im going to transition to miles of property when im rich (a sq mile is 640 acres btw) so im REALLY isolated then ill be happy. with my wifi

This is incorrect. A larger sensor doesn't mean better low light. There is no such thing as the full frame look.

You can always tell who lives in a bubble and who doesn't by threads like this. Most people I know don't even have room for an 85 inch TV. The vast majority of people will never own a television that can benefit from 8k. Hell, I don't know that most will ever own a TV that displays the benefits of 4K.

Explanation: Bolt this to a P4K cage: https://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BTB Fullframe EF Cine Mount camera. Better than a normal EF mount. End of story. It just is. The LucAdapter will be the closest thing for the P6K by making it fullframe, but it still doesn’t give you a locking cinema mount. You’re stuck with the bog-standard EF mount on that camera thanks to BlackMagic.

Only 1 hour driving from my house! I've been so many times in Granada, but never in a cave. But few years ago I stay in a similar house in Las Palmas (canary islands)

I would argue that with a proper cage that has support for hard mounting a booster, the cine locking EF (or PL I suppose) booster actually makes the P4K MORE of a cinema camera than the P6K would ever be. I don’t care how well-machined a standard SLR bayonet is, a positive locking cine mount is infinitely superior for any real cinema camera work with follow focus units. The Metabones optics are already fantastic, and now they have versions specifically for the thinner sensor stack of the P4K. There are a million things to worry about when doing cinema work other than 6K resolution. Sure, the oversample is a nice perk, but 4K is plenty. Again, I feel like an SLR mount on a mirrorless camera is low-key stupidity. Let me put on a dummy EF adapter! Maybe even one with ND or a booster... but I digress. I prefer the form factor of the ZCam stuff for sure, but their pricing I think is awful ambitious for a new company, no matter how good the cameras are. At the very least, the P6K will change the market’s price tiers for the better

This may not work for everyone, but I have bought more than one Metabones adapter on eBay for around $400-500. Much of the money that you spend on a Metabones can be recovered when you move on from needing it. I certainly am a fan of not messing with a speed booster, but there is no denying that the P4K + the Metabones (and other) adapters are a great combination. You gain around a stop of light and your field of view gets wider, even wider than Super35. I think that Super35 is the sweet spot for video, not "full frame" sensors. The larger the sensor, the less depth of field, which causes lots of problems with video, particularly run/gun and corporate type work. I want to separate the subject from the background, I don't need to obliterate it @Kisaha I agree. We also shoot tv shows, commercials, music videos, etc. using M43 sensor cameras (P4K, GH5, GH5s, etc.) without concern about the sensor size. People seem to forget that the camera is a *small* part of the overall gear budget. Skip, if people are so price conscious where the Metabones is a problem, they should probably not buy the P4K, P6K, any of the Z-Cams, etc. anyway. With all of those cameras you will be spending an amount probably equal to the cost of the camera just to equip it where you can use it on a production (cages, batteries, etc.). If someone is price conscious and they are asking me for a camera recommendation, I usually suggest that they pick up a GH5, Fuji XT3, or one of the Sony cams, like the 6400. Those will get you shooting video basically right out of the box, with minimal extra expenditures. I believe that the point that @Kisaha was trying to make (and I agree) is that the cost of the camera is small relative to the rest of the gear necessary to do more professional work (sound & lighting can be expensive too, Skypanels are almost $6K each...). I have a silly amount of money tied up in gear to do what we do, and I am not running around with crazy expensive cameras like some of the bigger budget productions use (movies). I think that we are all looking for gear that gives us great quality images at affordable prices.

My friend, it took you one year after I started this beautiful thread to ask me that question. I love the idea of 3ccd 10bit raw with a beautiful stabilized zoom lens and the classic ergos of this camera. So, cannot wait to see what shortfilms @tktagmedia is gonna shoot with it. I already loved the SD DV cam DX1 from Panny, 3 ccd beauty in colors but interlaced and DV compression. So call me anyone.:) No, Cine, you and me are already two, if I may suggest, that´s what you are talking about.:) the dvx is fully capable of 24p output. Never had one, but that´s what this cam was famous for back then. David Lynch shot Inland Empire with it I think. Now, render that beautiful footage of yours, please.:) You got the only legit digital super8 camera in your hands!

Its interesting that newer stuff works on the GX9. Which has me thinking, did anyone one here actually ever buy an LX100 Mark 2 and try my initial hack? My testing of it on the Mark 1 put it into a different mode but one which wasn't cinelike D but I'm just wondering now whether based on this information from the GX9 whether the same change of sensor that the LX100 Mark 2 has had may have changed the game there as well.

Yeah, sure if that’s important to you. Yup and the straight adapters are thin and tiny for EF. Or if you want FF Raw, you can wait for the Sigma FP and if Kipon makes a MF speedbooster for the L Mount you can use MF lenses on the FP... of course you’ll have to settle for shitty 4K instead of 6K...

I managed to set the color profile to 709like and save it to custom, I'll throw off the finished file later

Plus you don’t have to use the new P4K Metabones speedbooster... there’s the original Metabones, the Lens Turbo, the Viltrox or you can always use native M4/3 lenses. And with the new S16 mode on the P4K, a whole new slew of fast, wide angle, c-mount lenses become an option.

I mean by using a higher resolution the Braw induced issues are basically irrelevant now. The image has lots of texture, low freq detail, no visible sharpening, fine grain etc. after the image has been downscaled to 4K. Am pretty happy about it.

This. Unless you are shooting 6K BRAW exclusively (the Pocket6K doesn't do 6k in ProRes) then the Pocket4K at half the price is the better buy IMO. Also, with the SpeedBooster on the P4K, all my full frame lenses are closer to their proper FOV than what they will be on the P6K.

I'm editing CRM on a mid-2014 MBP (16GB ram, i7). I don't know about multi-cam, but I can edit the CRM files natively within FCPX without any LUTS applied. As soon as I apply any LUTS, or colour correction, the whole thing falls apart. It's not a massive issue though, just create proxy files and you should have no problem.

Have no clue, just copied the BM nunbers. There are proper tables and all in this article. https://www.newsshooter.com/2019/08/09/blackmagic-design-releases-pocket-cinema-camera-6k-with-ef-mount/#disqus_thread All these crop factors do not make our life easy, for sure. Also no 4K in Braw, and the full sensor is only for 6K. The P6K seems less and less appealing by the day..

Quick question in regards to 24PA output rendering: should I preserve the 29.97 fps frame rate or is it now safe for me to render out to a proper 23.976 fps file?

The guru of FD to EF conversions appears to be Eddie Houston. You'll pay, but the quality is reckoned to really good, and I understand he was a Canon engineer back in the day. http://thelensdoctor.co.uk/page5.html

Thanks for the summary. I hope BM is able to fix any outstanding P4K bugs as well.

@mercer Here's everything Grant mentioned regarding the P4K update v6.6 expected 'in a month or two'. 1. Many more HUD languages 2. One screen level, using built in gyrochip. 3. Gimbal support to allow start stop and focus on popular gimbals. (No mention of what those are) 4. 4k 2.4:1 - s16 - 1.33x anamorphic desqueeze & 16x9 preview - 4:3 anamorphic 2x desqueeze preview 5. Hopefully a few other little surprises

Oops, you are right about the crop. I was thinking the M4/3 crop as 2, not the crop factor of 1.9 from the P4K (based on relative sensor width). Super35 is normally a 1.39 crop, not the APS-C size of 1.5-1.6, so the P4K with a speedbooster is 1.9x0.71 = 1.349 is slightly wider than Super35 and the 0.64x booster is even wider. As to image quality, I am very curious about this as well. I am going to be comparing the P6K vs. the P4K with my 0.71x speedbooster next week. I suspect that there will be little to no difference. I also think that the P4K + booster will be better in low light. I can't imagine that the P6K is one stop better than the P4K, given that the P6K has smaller photosites. If BM had used a "true" Super35 sized sensor (~1.39 crop), then maybe the P6K would be >=, but they used an APS-C sized sensor (which they are calling Super35...)

Yeah, I was careful not to add the "but you probably wouldn't want to" so that I could retain the technical win

all ISO400 ======FHD50P28mbps.MP4======= FHD50P28mbps.MP4 ======FHD50PLACP100mbps.MP4======= FHD50PLACP100mbps.MP4 ======HLG50P.MTS======= HLG50P.MTS

Anyway, I just watched some of the P6K videos and they look pretty good. The wedding video looks great. Of course, with the data rates, I don’t know if this camera is the best option for a wedding, but for a fake, promo wedding... I do...

Well can we just stay in one topic or merge those two ? My dear admins ? ?

Think of all the great movies everyone can make with those extras Ks! Two things for sure - The battery life will still suck and the OG pocket will still have a nicer looking image.

@IronFilm My reasoning is that I'm a collector rare oddities, and this reins high on my list. Is this up to modern standards? No, especially with all of the concessions you have to take to capture this level of fidelity. But is it an amazing relic? Absolutely!

I thought it was just me, but indeed.

I look at that and it boggles my mind as to why anyone would want a DVX100 in 2019! For anything but sentimental reasons / curiosity / shits & giggles

Sample footage is coming soon, along with photos of my set up, I promise! Just been busy with my day job and life in general as of late. Anyone else out there with Andromedas still have any old footage laying around? I found this short that was made using the mod here:

A shadow is always the color opposite of the light on the color wheel. Late in the day when the sunlight is orange the shadow is blue. That's not a grade, it's real life determined by the laws of physics.

Hallo friends, here is my contribution. I hope you like my final film. Looking forward to the great pleasure of exchanging experiences and technical odditities and tricks once Andrew gives the signal for releasing info next week. Thank you for your beautiful films, discussion and the awesome spirit. Thanks Andrew and everyone for inspiring us to film something personal. Here is my labour of love, shot last week and edited over night until just now cheers! Thank you very much!

This is what you get when you treat your customers like crap, severely cripple your cameras, and don't give the buyer good value for $$$. They've been living on their laurels for some time now, and have failed to see the hand writing on the wall. They can't say the weren't warned. STOP RIPPING YOUR CUSTOMERS OFF, OVER CHARGING THEM, AND THEN STABBING THEM IN THE BACK! BAD COMPANY

Almost all ENG cameras, even today, use a Monochrome eyepiece. It just has more distinction than Color does. Way easier to focus.

Thought others here might find this interesting, although it was shot in NZ.... it was actually done a long way away from myself! Down in NZ's South Island.