Nathan Gabriel

I don't own a bmpcc 4k, but I would definitely contribute to this Kickstarter (1) in hopes that the tech eventually makes it's way over to Panasonic cameras and (2) even if it doesn't, I'd love to just say thanks for the gx85 cinelikeD hack.

Okay so I have a buyer for my kidney. Now when is the lens coming out?

@IronFilm wow I just did some research and you are totally right! I had no idea. I was certain the most recent Jim Jarmusch films were actually film, but apparently they were digital. It seems like just a few years ago it was a totally different story.

I think you're right to emphasize incredibly low budget films. Given the amount of excitement that the gx85 generated on this forum I think a lot of people here work on productions well below a $50k budget. Casey Neistat is a great name drop for a situation D filmmaker because his work is definitely cinematic, whatever that means. His frequent user of time lapse allows him to inject high quality images, in terms of MP and dynamic range, into his vlog. I also think there are many situation D/C filmmakers who are not vloggers. I have a friend who primary produces music videos. While he likes to control everything, he often works with artists who have limited availability and don't have the patience or control of actual actors. Because of these and other factors he adopts a situation D style of filming. Likewise in some documentary settings I've felt that using a larger camera or additional lighting would have really changed the behavior of the people I was filming. With respect to situation A, I think it's easy to find examples of people working with budgets less than $50k. The classic example is Robert Rodriguez's El Mariachi, which was shot on a $7000 budget. My favorite director, Maya Deren worked with relatively small budgets. Both of these directors shot film rather than digital, but these are very dated references. Personally I still get the impression that most indie situation A folks prefer film over digital, but I'm also fairly out of the game at this point. @IronFilm made a good point because the second I hear someone's shooting digital on a budget I assume they are in situation D/C, but they may very well be in situation A from your perspective. I like the idea of developing different categories of filmmakers' needs, but the more I think about it, it seems impossible. Maybe we can make relative assessments such as: person 1 works more in situation A-like settings than person 2. These relativistic claims could be made without committing to person 1 being considered a situation A filmmaker in all contexts... Have you ever read Wittgenstein? Trying to reduce a concept or phenomenon to a set of necessary and sufficient conditions is almost always problematic. I've really got to find a way to write shorter responses. Sorry again.

My bad I should have said "I" instead of "we". Personally I have never been a fan of autofocus (and don't you use veydras? In fact, when I was thinking about getting my first autofocus lens, you specifically said you couldn't test the sigma 16mm autofocus because you don't like using autofocus). I guess part of me has this obtuse attitude in which I honestly enjoy and prefer manual focusing regardless of the rare situations where autofocus might provided marginally better results. I do enjoy the IBIS on my gx85, but I don't think it is desirable for gimbal use or car mounts. I know you've said otherwise. My point was not to say that AF and IBIS are never useful, but that there are some times when I'd intentionally avoid using them. IBIS can't be fully turned off which can be problematic for some. AF I simply never use (like it's been more than 5 years since I've used AF in anything other than my smartphone and GoPro). At the very least, IBIS is far less important to me than battery life or an articulating screen (if the gh5s were the same price as the pocket, if take it's better life and screen over the pockets codec. But this is a controversial preference I'm sure). I guess I'm open to being converted on the issue of IBIS (pm me some comparisons if you like). AF and IBIS seem nice for quick travel photos with the family, but frivolous for the pocket's intended use. Sorry for the long wandering response.

I think Glencairn really nailed it when discussing AF and IBIS. Unlike battery life and a fully articulating screen, AF and IBIS are features that we often intentionally avoid using.

Why not put the OPF-CMOS in the GH6? The internal ND and Global Shutter that it allows would allow the GH6 to really stomp on its competition. The GH5 ergonomics and recording features are already so good that improving the sensor seems like the best and most natural way forward. If they can nail down a cost effective manufacturing process for the OPF-CMOS with the GH6, then rolling it out on their bigger cinema cameras will be that much easier. Furthermore, isn't the GH5s already "canabalizing" dedicated cinema cameras? Panasonic does not seem too worried about it. They can always cripple the V-log if they are that worried about their dedicated cinema cameras.

Do you remember if this photo was wide open or stopped down? Why did you end up selling the voigtlanders?

Has anyone compared the voigtlander to the much cheaper SLR Magic 17mm t1.6? I've found one lab test, but I'd love to hear from someone who has real world experience. I use the SLR Magic all the time and it's really difficult for me to imagine needing shallower depth of field. However I've never really spent time shooting full frame wide open. I will say that I've used 4x5 box cameras where it is easy to get razor thin depth of field and it looks terrible because almost nothing is in focus. I always thought high iso performance rather than shallow depth of field was the bigger issue for MFT. I do have the voigtlander 25mm f0.95 and I rarely feel the need to shoot wide open with it. Here's the comparison for the 17mm's that I mentioned:

Can we stop down voting every post that can be remotely interpreted as critical? Everyone knows and agrees this is a revolutionary camera.

Didn't the black magic micros have global shutters?

Really? What about the factor of convince for consumers who are more likely to have HDMI cables than SDI? Think of anyone who is coming from Panasonic or Sony hybrids, they'll all be used to HDMI.

My editing machine has really slow read write for SD and cfast cards (because my card reader uses a usb2 standard for it's connection to the motherboard), but it also has fast usb3 connections. If I needed really fast turnaround, which I don't, I could see myself going with USB-C SSDs just for the faster transfer, or possibly editing the video without even copying it to my internal hard drive. This would have nothing to do with recording raw, but I could see it as a reason vloggers might go with USB-C drives over SD cards. But maybe it's cheaper to invest in an external USB 3 card reader. I'm not sure how it would all work out. Maybe I could already edit directly from SD cards despite the slow read since so much of the project gets loaded into memory. Anyone have experience editing directly from their recording media?

I think the pocket 4k is intended to deliver professional level quality, which it will. But given it's priced at $1300 and had been marketed at vloggers, I don't think it's being marketed for the traditional/typical professional. Think about how they have emphasized the pocket 4k's microphones, which no traditional professional would use. While the camera can definitely work for a cheap studio set up, I think it can really capture market share from Panasonic and Sony prosumers, and that's a really big market. I've been really confused by people pitching the pocket 4k as a vlogging camera. But I think I'm starting to understand the idea. Personally, I don't really watch YouTube. So I thought it was basically just people like Logan Paul making light of suicide or PewDiePie being anti semitic. However, I then thought about stuff that I've seen some of my past girlfriend watch. There are a lot of fashion and make-up vloggers who really need incredibly high quality images even though they are basically running the channel on their own. Same thing for food and travel vloggers. No one wants to travel to the Rift Valley, Grand Canyon, Colosseum or Great Wall and capture anything less than the best. The price tag along with things like the low light capability mean that semi professionals, who might have more knowledge about fashion or travel than video, can capture incredible video even if they don't know how to or have the ability to light their scene. I'd bet that they could make great user of the baked in lut capabilities as well. I'm not trying to suggest that prosumer vloggers are the primary target audience of the pocket 4k. But I do think that using an HDMI port and also the USB-C connection make the camera accessible to users from a big market that companies like BM don't typically get to tap into. I'm really excited not just for the camera itself, but also to see who uses it and what they produce. If travel vloggers start using the pocket 4k, I might actually start going to their channels instead of watching national geographic reruns. (Though YouTube could certainly improve it's codec) Just my 2 cents. I understand that there are good reasons to prefer SDI over HDMI.

Does anyone have experience using Resolve in Linux? How smoothly does it run? Does it have limited video codecs in Linux? Or just any of behaviour that you wouldn't expect?