DBounce

You can record the output in any number of available flavors on the Atomos Ninja V. Select the option to desqueeze to 1.33x. Assuming you have shot the footage in 16x9 aspect ratio this should correct the image. This also makes the assumption that your anamorphic lens can cover the entire sensor.

Only GH cameras are not APSC sized. They are M43... which is half the size of APSC. I believe Kinefinity makes something that fits the bill in their Mavo line. Or you can use a Fuji X-T3 with a Atomos Ninja V for desqeezing the image and recording the 10 Bit signal.

The Red Weapon fits this description and has anamorphic modes. As does the Arri Alexa and others. You said the best.

This iso talk is interesting. I think I'll do a test comparing ISO for both cameras. From my initial experience I'm leaning towards thinking ISO performance is similar on the X-T3 and GH5S. I can tell you audio quality of the X-T3 is good. Built in microphones are better than the Panasonic. The audio expansion is useful on the GH cameras. Though I have a Sound Devices external recorder... so I never use the expander. I'll post what I find. Image quality is on par. Color science is "different". Both can be tweaked a fair amount. The X-T3 is usable straight out of camera.

They would have been off by a reasonable margin.

@webrunner5 I can't imagine that the Canon execs are sitting around sweating bullets about anything that BMD is releasing. However, Fuji may have gotten their attention as they certainly seemed to have gotten Sony's.

Perhaps, but if Canon really wants to boost their revenue all they need to do is start producing smartphone sensors. They will sell them like hot cakes.

I got the X-T3 as a hybrid. I don’t consider the GH5S a hybrid. It’s too video centric while having inadequate resolution for stills.

I’m feeling rather unconvinced of the P4K. The image is not bad. Indeed it’s pretty good. But for my taste it just doesn’t wow me. I would be more excited if the picture didn’t feel as much like the GH cameras. If it felt more unique and less generic. With that said, I’m holding off from buying... pending other footage. If you do not already own a GH5/S the P4K is an interesting option. But it’s no hybrid. It simply lacks the chops to be taken seriously as a stills camera. For those duties I think the most competent choice within the sub $3000 price range is the Fuji. IMO it best the Panasonic, Sony, Nikon and Canon at this price point. It’s solely my opinion and tbh, I have not looked hard at the Nikon offerings. I just don’t care for the colors, so lost interest. Ymmv... when it comes to color science it’s very subjective.

I think in being fair to the smaller sensor cameras, we must by default be equally unfair to the larger sensor cameras. A truly even test let’s the cameras stand on their own merit. To be certain... manufacturers have been short changing us on DOF in M43. The numbers sound the same, and so we forget they are in fact not equal to their FF equivalents of the same F stop designation. The truth is, to get the same performance, build quality, optical quality and speed, it is far more costly to pull off in a smaller package. A 12-35mm f2.8 M43 lens would need to be closer to F1.4 to match its FF counterparts. I suspect such a lens would retail for well in excess of $2k and perhaps as high as $3k. To my knowledge, nothing like this is currently available at any price. In all honesty, I did not conduct this test with DOF in mind. Rather, I merely wanted to understand how close the cameras could match up to one another. And also understand the overall image quality of the various models. I think FCPX made the 1DXMK2 look badly in the solo scene. But the side by sides are acutely representing its image. AF: This played out as I thought. The 1DXMK2 nails auto focus. I was rocking back and forth to highlight this point. The Panasonic does not have AF in video... so I could not test it. At least that’s what the manual should say. Suggesting it’s not great would be kind. Once locked you just have to try to stay very still. AF has tricks in the C200. It can hold focus until it Re-acquires you. It’s very good, though the edge goes to the 1DXMK2. Fuji X-T3: it’s good. I changed position and it found me with little delay. And once found, it sticks pretty darn good. With the lens I was using I did notice some focus breathing. It can be distracting depending on the scene. But that’s the lens... and it’s on you to work around.

I slowed down the other lenses to f4... none were wide open, save for the M43 camera. Consider the following: GH5S = $2500 - body only + $1000 lens. Fuji X-T3 = $1500 body only + $350 lens. Tell me, how much should I cripple the much less costly Fuji so that the Panasonic can be competitive? At some point it becomes unfair to handicap the other cameras. By right handicapping should not even happen, as I know of no one that purposely slows down their lenses out of respect for those with m43 sensors.

Here is the lens breakdown: Canon C200 - 24-70mm F2.8 ii @ 35mm F4 Canon 1DXMk2 - 16-35 F4 @ 35mm F4 Fjifilm X-T3 - 23mm F2 @ F2.6 (35mm FF equivalent) Panasonic GH5S - 12-35mm F2.8 @ 18mm F2.8 (36mm FF equivalent) About: I tried to get everything as close to the M43 configuration as possible as I figured it would be at a disadvantage given the smaller sensor. DOF looks different on the GH5S, because... DOF is different on the M43. I was running a $1000 lens on the GH5S that was rated at F2.8. To get shallower I would have needed to use the Leica 42.5mm, but did not have enough equivalent lenses to this focal length to accommodate all the other cameras. So 35mm was choosen. Setup: In some cases physical proximity to the cameras was different. Because there's was only so much space to set everything up. Honestly, I was surprised when comparing these cameras side by side how much less shallow the M43 image appeared. With the S35 sensor the Fuji looked pretty similar to the Canons. Colors: Color wise the C200 was easiest to work with. It requires next to nothing to look good. Shoot at base ISO for the log profile you intend to add and you are done. It looks great all day long. The Fuji was shoot in Eterna... reflecting back perhaps Flog would have been easier to tweak? The 1DXMk2 was shoot in neutral picture profile. The GH5S was shot in VLogL. The standard Panasonic LUT was then applied. FCPX: The project was set to wide color gamut. I had read that this is desirable when editing Raw footage. But doing this seemed to cause issues with the 1DXMK2 image. It looked fine in the editor, but rendered with blown highlights. I believe FCPX did not know how to handle its 8 bit image with the WCG project setting. The other cameras were all shot at 10 bit or higher. I tried several approaches to try to regain the highlight detail of the 1DXMk2, but nothing seemed to work. It continually looked great in the editor, only to render blown out and harsh. I believe davinci is the better editor when dealing with a mix of 8 bit and higher. Unfortunately, my free version of resolve does not output 4k DCI... so that was out of the picture. Fruity chocolate: I don't think it's Apple's to (insert here) as they say. I used the lenses I own. This is a real world test. Question: Does Panasonic make a M43 equivalent to the Canon 24-70mm? Well, Panasonic would tell you, "yes... it's the 12-35mm". So that is what I used. And frankly I'm not alone in this thinking. While anything can be jerryrigged together, that leaves you compensating for something the cameras lacks. This of course applies to all M43 cameras, not just the GH5S. You are at a disadvantage regarding DOF. It's a limitation you get used to... or choose to find workarounds for. While I have a MSB, I seldom use it. My Canon glass runs better natively... so why use it on an M43 body? Also doing so negates any size advantage. I wanted to get the lenses close to each other. So everything was set to match the smallest sensor. The full frame cameras running at F4 while the X-T3 was at F2.6 IIRC.

Here is a quick shootout of the Fuji X-T3, Canon 1DXMk2, Canon C200 and Panasonic GH5S. Granted FCPX refused to not blowout some of the footage of camera B. It's displayed correctly in some of the head to head comparisons. I think it might have been caused by a software bug in FCPX. In any case all four cameras were filming in base ISO in controlled lighting. Opinions welcomed.

Here is a quick shootout of the Fuji X-T3, Canon 1DXMk2, Canon C200 and Panasonic GH5S. Granted FCPX refused to not blowout some of the footage of camera B. It's displayed correctly in some of the head to head comparisons. I think it might have been caused by a software bug in FCPX. In any case all four cameras were filming in base ISO in controlled lighting. Opinions welcomed.

GH5 series is something of a standard. I think Panasonic earned this honor. But my goodness, does the X-T3 throw a monkey into the wrench. Either if epic. But I can tell you from owning both, the Fuji is easier to match with Canons. And straight out of camera colors on the Fuji are quite lovely.

The GH5S has an option for XLR inputs with phantom power and they sound clean. It also supports timecode. Let’s not forget it’s not made of plastic, is weather sealed, has great battery life, supports anamorphic modes and has an EVF. There’s more... but you get the idea.

Not sure what I’m hoping to learn by this test, but damit, I’m gonna learn it?

Exposure looks different in those shots also. So there is that. Honestly, with a little care they would look pretty dam well indistinguishable.

I agree with you it is not bad for the price. But isn't it $1300? I don't think there is a package that does not include the software. As for timecode, I think most cameras can input a timecode signal to an audio channel? For me, I would be more excited if the new camera had an updated version of the original pocket's sensor. The old camera felt more unique. Am I alone in this thinking?

Doesn’t the Ursa come with full Davinci Resolve?

I recall when I first saw footage from the OG pocket... I thought, "it has mojo". I don't really get this vibe from the new camera. It feels like something I have seen before... not something original. It feels well, sort of Panasonic. Maybe my opinion will change, once more footage gets out there.But for now, there is nothing to make this stand out from the crowd. Yes it shoots raw... which is important... if you fukc'd up the exposure. Other than that....?

I have to agree that expectations need to be kept in check. The P4k makes a good niche use camera. Similar in principle to the spirit of the GH5S. But no EVF? That’s a big miss. No battery grip option? Yeah, just rig it out and strap a VMount to it. At that point I think my C200 makes a tad bit more sense. The P4k would be a horrible choice as a primary camera. Too many compromises from this hybrid poser. The Fujifilm X-T3 is perhaps the best balanced hybrid available today. Good resolution for stills... and a competent shooter. Powerful video capture device with great out of camera colors coupled with the flexibility of FLog. I would argue that the Fuji is the superior video camera. It has a great AF system, which is useful whenever mounted to a gimbal. Weather sealed body and lenses. And a healthy selection of sensibly priced high quality glass. If you purchase the P4k expecting the formers level of flexibility, then you are setting yourself up for a disappointment. So who is the P4k for? Well honestly, after looking at the footage I see nothing that could not have come from a GH5S. Really! The OG Pocket had a very organic vibe... and frankly, that’s why we put up with it’s limitations. This new camera’s footage feels like GH series footage. However, it forgoes the bulletproof Panasonic body. So back to the question... who is it for? Those that must have raw... and need it at the expense of everything else mentioned. I once saw a guy play Beethoven’s Fifth on Coke bottles?

And only $3000 for the 28-70mm?

I think a better comparison is the GH5S... which honestly there is not a lot of difference. Of course you lose the much better battery life, weather sealing, better build quality, options like battery grip, remote function through app etc... The GH5 is a usable stills camera, whereas the P4k is really only a video camera. Yes I know it has an shutter button... but come on 8MP stills? Is this 2006?