Axel

I question a lot about the camera. It's not a big deal to swap batteries every 30 minutes or so (I don't buy one hour), did that with the old Pocket, do it with A6500 (although I could, and I did on one occasion, plug a powerbank to he USB port). But you're right, there are a lot of obstacles. I use AF only on a gimbal (the slightest focus hunting during the unrepeatable bridal kiss would ruin the shot for me), I never use AE, I can shoot handheld up to 85mm fullframe equivalent (with custom rig - although if they're there, I do use IBIS and OIS as well). What bothers me the most right now is that it will take me weeks to rig the BMPCC 4k to my needs, and though I find some pleasure in this kind of problem solving, it comes with frustration too. That's the biggest question about the camera. Too big to be pocketed. Probably not very good without rig. And it needed a big rig too, unless someone will provide a 5" loupe ...

Very good examples of handheld & gimbal work. I am really not a very good camera operator (boring framing, I judge this in the NLE). But one thing seems so important to me that it's the first thing I master with every camera: how to avoid shaky shots (focus, expose, the whole pilot's checklist). No IBIS? Okay, if that's a dealbreaker for anyone, move on! The concept of this camera is image quality through less in-camera corrections. Purer and honester images. The concept of a camera with IBIS, multiple AF programs, a big palette of picture profiles, internal lens corrections asf. is also image quality, but a with fundamentally different approach. This should be understood.

As with Blackmagic Pocket CinemaCamera 4k, DJI doesn't communicate the weight. Because, as I've heard somewhere, the NAB model was aluminum and the final product will be magnesium alloy. Does anyone here know more? Your remark touches two questions, but I consider them as completely unrelated: 1. What is *the* absolute weight limit above which a one-hand-gimbal doesn't make sense anymore? What is *my* weight limit? 2. Do I need a gimbal constantly, for almost every shot?

The Crane 2 is 1300 g, the follow focus above 170 g, the remote for the latter weighs 200 g. But: keep in mind that because you HAVE to see the image and the Zhiyun's roll motor perfectly blocks the Pocket's display, you'd then need an external monitor (but then again, with smallest battery, the smallHD Focus would add just 230 g, which would make the setup 1900 g sans camera). Now the final weight of the BMPCC 4k ist not yet out afaik. Because the pre-production model was made of aluminum and that will be changed to carbon fibre. So the frame itself can be 30-40 % lighter. Let's be optimistic and hope that camera, battery (80 g) and card (20g) are just under 850 g. Now we talk about 2750 g without lens. Add your lens of choice, but don't forget IR cut filter and ND or variND. But don't worry. Saw a tut by Brandon Washington on balancing the Canon 1DX Mark ii on the Crane 2 - needs unscrewing parts of the Zhiyun's cradle because this camera is too high. Must be even heavier. And Brandon puts on the same big Tiffen variND I'd also recommend. He carries that on a skateboard, dolly-filming his little son.

You got me wrong. I know all the tools like the back of my hand. Started with Apples Color, read the whole manual, bought a (Ripple? Lynda?) training, graded. Went on with Color Finesse (as part of AAE, in the short period of a year or so when I was pissed after FCP X launch), then learned Resolve 9, again with van Hurkmans Ripple and (also his) manual. I also entertain myself musing about the best workflows for grading. It's just that the further I tweak the image the less confident I become as to whether what I'm doing makes things better or worse. I'd better just primary color correct, add a tiny bit of "mood" - and leave it alone. This is almost camera-independent.

I am a Resolve user. And I did apply a simple official BM LUT (I think it was labelled "4k" then) on my first Pocket film (short doc about a local hospice for a nursing school) and above that literally didn't change a bit. Was it "better"? It looked okay the way it came out of the camera, skin, shadows, skies, all somewhat analog. Found it okay then, find it better now. "Better", to be exact.

The reviewers all say the Ronin S is definitely quite heavy. Perhaps too heavy. Apart from that, it seems to be too good to be true. Definitely looks absolutely sophisticated and well-thought out. High tech from China. I have the Ronin M. Rarely used because too heavy. Didn't sell it because I wouldn't get enough money back. What is the purpose of a gimbal anyway? To shoot hyperlapses? Don't think so. I have the Zhiyun, er, "one". Very lightweight. Would it hold the Pocket 4k? Needed a baseplate at least (some 20 bucks). And the display is blocked by the roll motor. Needed an external monitor - and have one. With small superclamp to mount it and with smallest NP-F970 accu it adds 230 g. So whether I need the Ronin S remains to be seen.

That describes me. I can't grade. Would the P4k be right for me? Although I just admitted that I can't grade? I like the simplicity of the menu. He had put better between quotation marks:

Mediainfo lists the framerate as "variable", maximum framerate 24, minimum 3, mostly 12, with 24p being the "project frame rate" and 50p the "shooting frame rate". This is a distinction and a naming convention in Apples FCP for "off-speed-frame rates" (term from BM) to generate slomo or timelapse. Since ProRes is an Apple codec, it makes sense that you'd find this metadata tag here. The *actual* data rate was 384 Mb/s, and you are right: not too much for that Sandisk card. But four times that (50p instead of 12p) would have been. With my Sony, I can take stills on a slow card, but once i try and choose 4k video, the camera tells me that I need a faster card. It looks the NAB pre-production P4k tried to record anyway, resulting in this error. ProRes is known to be variable bitrate, not variable framerate.

There are at least two sources here, two stolen clips. The image arant.joseph attached here is not from the 12fps skipped-frame clip I was referring to. I had downloaded that 4-minute clip and analyzed it (posting): ProResHQ, project frame rate 24, shooting frame rate 50, among other oddities. The still that Joseph was grading and that jonpais found "pointilistic" is here first linked to on page 46, by Luke Mason, who claims to surreptitiously have acquired some footage: People asked for original footage, but as far as I can see (took me ten minutes to dig that out, felt like an archaeologist), Luke didn't upload anything but jpeg stills.

You are judging from an 1000 px jpeg. What ISO? We can't tell. The stolen clip was @ ISO 800. You should better ask: what WB? From the stolen clip we know: the backyard is not blue because of daylight at tungsten WB, it really is a blue wall! The colors are off? You mean: not to your taste. Would a GH5 (or GH5S) have handled that better? Well, that remains to be seen. About creamyness: all your linked images have prominent sDoF, they are more or less CUs. A 5DM2 (the classic one) with it's barely 720p (the impression was better) can do this, and as pleasant skin. That's what people see immediately (though subconsciously). The said 5D also had that massive bokeh, because of full frame with big pixels. What I meant by creamy: not baked-in, soft dough. When you say the colors are off, can you nail down what you are actually referring to? Judging from the limes, green is somewhat undersaturated. We can assume that the blue background is really that aggressively lit, but my interpretation would have been that this was supposed to look like a color temperature mix and that the lounge was supposed to feel warm and homey in contrast. With less saturation of the "cold outside" and with more warmth in the foreground. At first glance, the whole image is not very appealing, I agree. Too neutral, too sober. What I see though is that her skin - no matter whether it has *the* right color or not - is composed of many shades and hues, like the many layers in a renaissance oil painting. I do know that this is no given thing with, say, a Sony mirrorless. Anyone who disagrees? Then prove me wrong! Link to your living skin Sony frames. I like to forgo the P4k, so give it to me!

ProRes, recorded in 10-bit, definitely feels creamy. When it's back to H.264 8-bit, you realize how that crumbles. I find (in this possibly not yet finished iteration) that the highlights clip hard. As for the shadows, they can be pushed hard. Indicates that there was room for better roll-off, if 12 stops DR were okay.

Sony color guru Alistair Chapman offers a series of free HLG luts for download, specifically designed for selected (10-bit) Sony cameras to convert Slog2 or Slog3 for either monitoring or grading purposes. He describes HLG as "instant HDR". I don't claim to be the expert on HDR, but I've read quite a lot on the subject. If you exposed to the center (as opposed to ETTR) with LOG (BM calls it's LOG "FILM"), a lut could be applied to make that recording fully compatible HLG-HDR without any need for grading. The acquisition codec can be anything, 8-bit as well. And because HLG is technically "709 plus", there'd be no special color science needed. BM calls it's 709 "VIDEO". That would just be "VIDEO plus". But Chapman points out that for anyone who has as well the time and the equipment to monitor and grade HDR, a HLG recording meant lesser control over the grading. It's comparable to VIDEO, which is "instant SDR".

On the leaked clip you can see RS at the very start, the jerky pan up between 00:00:03:17 and 00:00:05:02. It's there, but it's no problem.

You will see: this will rule out RAW for he majority. Moire traps are everywhere, not just on clothes. Pollution through rainbows.

After some experience with the actual camera, people will adjust their expectations. At first I thought, yes, I want to plug in the actual recording media (SSD) and start editing. Really? Is that a good idea? Had this been a good idea if a fast 2TB SSD cost $10 and I didn't have to re-use it? I think not. All at once the whole flimsy-USB-epoxy-third-party-clamp discussion sounds a bit absurd. And then, my NLE lets me start editing from any source right away anyway. For camera formatted SDHC cards it wisely forces me to make a background-copy. To a big HDD raid, a bottomless pit! But the costs for 4k 60p RAW on CFast cards, and how many I needed for that! But what about 4k 24p? What if I realize I don't need RAW over ProRes? BMs ProRes implementation is very good. Even Phillip Bloom found ProRes LT to be visually indistinguishable from ProResHQ in the classic Pocket. Almost 2 hours UHD @24p would fit on a 256 GB card, roughly an hour in ProResHQ (or ProRes Raw, should that make it into the P4k until fall). Do some vloggers need their faces in front of their carefully lit desktop still-life be recorded with more? There are twerps everywhere, and I guess once a camera offers THE BEST, it'd be infra dig to use any other option.

Well explained by Joseph here: even more than with LOG, you have to ETTR RAW. Usually two stops overexposed*. So yes, I think this constant click-dragging to nowhere is a problem. There needs to be a good Exposure slider. And there is. Guess where: in the taunted Color Board. Tragically underestimated. Also has a better Temperature (= overriding camera WB) slider - hidden in the open because few took the effort to learn this genius "iMovie" tool. (*BTW: 10.4.1 obviously was to feature noise reduction. Was listed in the version history for a few minutes, and some made screenshots) Glad to hear that. Makes me sound like a hater, but I'm not.

Another detail. See 18'37": "... it's a weird Final Cut thing". It indeed is. I call that crap. Can't work with this behavior all day. That's just one example. But don't get me wrong. I just compared the FCP color tools to Resolve. When it comes to editing, I find as many instances where FCP does it much better.

Thanks, kye! Yesterday I saw this, and became so angry that I - almost - downvoted the video, something I'd never done before: This tells me, of course, that I already am a true P4k fanboy . Be it as it may, I also watched a GH5s review (not the first one, not my last one, despite my admitted fixation to BM). It showcased the ergonomics and built quality. The vlogger said: what a pity! It's got everything I asked for, even *very good* lowlight through Dual Native ISO, but the AF sucks and no IS, epic fail! Was again tempted to vote "thumbs down". But how had this been justified? I had bingewatched vlogger's vomit all evening! Last report, this a funny one. About Sony A7iii, and how it smoked, killed and destroyed the whole competition. Yes, it's 'a full frame MONSTER', it has IS, it has AF, but that's the extent of it. Terrible ergonomics (as usual), threadbare 8-bit codecs, he dumb thing smokes itself. I'm allowed to say, as a Sony owner. It's a Phony.

I guess few here had the chance to deal with raw video. Most of us will take raw stills though, but probably not on a regular basis. Some thoughts on what to expect of P4k's raw: Among those who shoot stills in raw rather than jpegs are many who are accustomed to Adobe Camera Raw. There are alternatives to it, I know two from own experience: the free Raw Therapee and Affinity Photo (where all raw photos go into the develop persona). ACR had become so popular that Adobe made it easy to also open jpegs with it (>Top Menu >Filter). Many (including myself) do that, simply because the tools are so powerful and intuitive. Don't expect raw to look the same in the other apps! The obvious choice for CDNGs from the P4k is Resolve. Resolve also has a CAMERA RAW tool, but it isn't as mighty as ACR. It's main advantage for CDNG is realtime playback, obviously. I can't understand why Adobe doesn't make an AMotionCR, would be a guaranteed success (though it is possible to develop CDNG with ACR and export the image sequence with sound through After Effects, it's a cumbersome process. You can only "grade" one frame for the whole clip). You will see a difference between raw and, say, XAVC. You will see a difference between XAVC and ProRes as well. Perhaps. Some feel that ProRes is clearly superior, some say that the difference is either insignificant or even that H.265 is better. Go download the hijacked clip and judge for yourself. What's my own opinion? ProRes will provide better performance on my Mac. As cantsin pointed out, there isn't (yet?) a smooth highlight rolloff, and all in all the DR doesn't look worse on my A6500. But the image is very clean, and the color science clearly is better. We will also have a third ProRes profile (VIDEO, FILM (=log) and HLG), and that's terrific. Many vloggers will bake in a LUT, and why wouldn't they if the results convince? Then there is the old Pocket and it's 1080 raw. The sensor had 1080 x 1920 pixels and (I don't pretend to fully understand the background here) that wasn't enough for full debayering. It's the same situation here. There will be some moire and other resolution related artifacts in raw, and there will be much *less* in ProRes. Because of that situation, many won't use raw after initial tests. I could go on for a page or two, but it already became TLDR. Just one more thought: how will 1080 look? If it's good, many will use 1080 raw.

There are reasons to remain skeptic. If Apple tries to keep PRR just between FCP and Atomos, I predict a still birth. Since December (launch of 10.4) I'm quite disappointed with the direction FCP goes. There is no well thought-out color workflow ... Go to 5'25" to see what I mean. This is ridiculous if you really want to grade in earnest. Not to mention that with PRR *free* EXIF readers show you the camera's metadata like ISO, white balance and so forth, but FCP doesn't! And : they keep adding effing features without addressing some really bad new bugs. And as you know, there are color-related bugs. Apple remains silent, and the usual suspects openly deny that they exist in the first place. Still think FCP is the best NLE, but the other stuff isn't good.

Would you buy the Ninja V despite the fact that it's heavier and more expensive than the smallHD Focus (yeah, I know, only 800 nits, but it works well in bright sunlight) and that you couldn't record anything bigger than 1080 through the Pocket 4k's HDMI (see one of Anacondas Q/A)? I wouldn't. Bought - let me count quickly - 3 external monitors before - won't sell this one! Zacuto built a viewfinder loupe for the old Pocket, I hope they do for this new "Batcam" (your name). You'd need no rig with one - perfect 3-point stabilization (though on the long run it's more comfortable for me if the right grip is in a 45° angle). This time I will not use a shoulder rig.I am already thinking about the right-arm-only "exoskeleton" isometric contractor. Imagine your right arm was in a sling made of rubber (problem with just a sling is that it will slip). To extend the arm to the position in which you can hold the camera, you'd need to use some force. And concentration. Left hand cradles the lens and pulls focus. Should be as lightweight and easy as possible. Any ideas/suggestions? Let's build this together!

The whole philosophy, one could say religion, of the BM cinema camera series is to apply as much internal processing as absolutely necessary and as little as possible. It's a kind of analog-ish purism. No OLPF, only the most basic anti-IR-coating. A "dumb" camera, compared to any modern Sony. In addition, noise reduction is very problematic for 4k, because it smudges texture detail, and texture detail is what distinguishes UHD from HD. You will want to use it with painstaking care, and clearly not in-camera. In many cases you will decide that some grain-like noise was better than NR. Furthermore, Resolve Studio has NR, allegedly also improved. I couldn't tell, I only have the free version.

Thanks webrunner. It's a little beauty, isn't it? And thanks, Anaconda, these are some NFAQ, and good answers too.

I noticed that. Without being an expert, could this have to do with what in Sonys custom PP setting is influenced by "knee" (the point where the gamma curve starts to "fade out") and "slope" (the steepness of he curve from there)? Something that's baked in. As it is now in ProRes. They could address it with a new "PP". But see below. I've never - anywhere - seen compressed video that has so little noise even in completely underexposed parts. The NAB pre-production model that the brave thief used to record the 4 minute clip on was set to ISO 800 ("variable framerate"?): File size : 11.2 GiB Duration : 4 min 9 s Overall bit rate : 384 Mb/s com.blackmagic-design.camera.uuid : fdee50bc-5896-477b-be85-b1a07a8382c5 com.blackmagic-design.camera.projectFPS : 24 com.apple.proapps.shootingRate : 50 com.blackmagic-design.camera.cameraType : Blackmagic URSA Pocket com.blackmagic-design.camera.shutterAngl : 190° com.blackmagic-design.camera.iso : 800 com.blackmagic-design.camera.whiteBalanc : 5450 com.blackmagic-design.camera.whiteBalanc : -20 com.apple.proapps.customgamma : com.blackmagic-design.camera.filmlog com.blackmagic-design.camera.look.LUTNam : Blackmagic 4K Film to Video.cube com.blackmagic-design.camera.guides.aspe : 2.35:1 com.blackmagic-design.camera.guides.safe : 45 com.blackmagic-design.camera.firmware : 5.5 (...) com.blackmagic-design.camera.colorScienc : Blackmagic URSA Pocket, Color Science Gen 4 (...) Format profile : 422 HQ Codec ID : apch Duration : 4 min 9 s Bit rate mode : Constant Bit rate : 369 Mb/s Width : 3 840 pixels Height : 2 160 pixels Display aspect ratio : 16:9 Frame rate mode : Variable Frame rate : 12.507 FPS Minimum frame rate : 3.429 FPS Maximum frame rate : 24.000 FPS Color space : YUV Chroma subsampling : 4:2:2 Scan type : Progressive Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 3.554 Stream size : 10.7 GiB (96%) Writing library : bmd0 Language : English Encoded date : UTC 2018-04-12 01:43:44 Tagged date : UTC 2018-04-12 01:43:44 Color primaries : BT.709 Transfer characteristics : BT.709 Matrix coefficients : BT.709 matrix_coefficients_Original : BT.709 I think I vaguely remember that the upper native ISO was 3200 (where clean shadows and some harshly blown out highlights would be expected, if the A7s' native ISO of 3200 is anything to go by). What was the lower native ISO? 800? Please also note that on the official Blackmagic site, they list 4k 60p as ... An error? You are in an entirely separate universe. The, er, native virtues of BM cameras have nothing to do with intelligent AF or things like that. That's why all BM cameras, no matter how cumbersome they are in terms of usage (ever lifted the classic URSA?), remain classics. If you are tuned into the BM user mindset, you witness parallel efforts of Son, Pan, Can with serenity. So they found another smart gimmick to free you from the burden of having to do something manually? Damn amazing indeed!