Jim Giberti

I can't imagine that John shot that at anything other 180 degrees. And it looks pretty oobvious that he did.

But what do you really think about it?

After seeing a piece that John did with Oly glass (I think maybe an Oly 4/3 zoom too?) and an EM I got really interested in trying more of their glass. I already had the original 12-40 and 40- 150 but decided to add the 25mm 1.2 These are just great lenses from a build, IQ, Contrast and color, af and manual focus - they've got it all and I'm really looking forward using them on the new P4k for a lot of work. I can see having one with the 12-40mm on it pretty much all the time. Also, the the tiny Oly 12mm, 45mm 1.8 and 75mm are really great lenses too. Just wanted to add that shooting with MB adapters and big glass a lot, there's something really liberating about shooting MFT cameras with native MFT glass.

No, we don't use the Rawlite OLPF that is the thread subject. Yes of course, we protect against IR contamination. And with BM cameras we use Hoya ProNDs and Firecrest IR cut filters and ND. But that isn't the subject of the discussion or my response. So again: There is an IR cut filter in all BM cameras. Using additional IR cut is wise in many situations - particularly with tungsten lighting and ND filtration. Like all issues, it's a matter of degree and judgement as strong IR filtration can negatively affect color balance. The Pocket is very useable without a Rawlite OLPF installed.

Seriously? I wouldn't want to guess at how much work of all types has been produced and now much money made with the camera. I've worked with several in our kit and know lot's of other professionals who've done the same with the camera as it was delivered. It's proven to be amazing period.

You can't expect this camera, with it's advanced color science, codecs, 5" 1080 screen, phantom power, etc. to draw power like a GH5 or any other small camera. For all that it's delivering, I would consider an average 45min run time on an LP-E6 to be great power management on BMs part. I really don't get the contention. This is going to be a breakthrough camera by any standard. It's designed to be small with a compact battery solution that most people will use. Even running around in the field with a battery in the camera and 4 tiny replacements in your pocket you can shoot all day. If you do events or long format work with it, then there will be countless battery solutions to add if you feel the need. It's all good.

It's a cute piece. Skin tones look wretched.

No offense but I feel much better having not watched this.

I've seen some stunning work done on the C500 as I have with the C300... I mean seriously. JB is shooting some of his network narrative handheld with a BMMCC, just for one "local" example. Anyone can crap on anything if they want to but creatively speaking, any quality shooter/producer can make any number of cameras, tossed around this and other sites, produce brilliant imagery. It's like the the idea that no one is using _____ camera or ___ camera on big shoots. Well yeah, when you're spending tens of ks per day on production of course you use the most versatile, proven and adaptable cameras you can budget. But to equate that (as a lot of people do) into a sense that smaller/cheaper cameras can't produce the necessary image for quality story telling just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. We crossed that Rubicon a while ago.

I wasn't where? And where were you that gives you this magical power of creating new facts?

Graeme did/does great work. I remember when he first got recruited for the team. But you understand the difference between an opinion and a verifiable fact right? Like you just learned in this thread. The lesson is - don't be name calling and claiming knowledge when a bit of listening and learning will cure all of that.

In this strange new world I guess actual facts are seen as crazy to some. Oh well. I'll be sure to send you a quarter next time you lose one.

Yeah, because that's what happened. He started the actual conversation in 2005 - discussing the concept of the first camera. The timeline is what it is. Like Jim, I reserved the url 6 years ago for a new firm that's launching this summer. It's pretty common for enetrpreneurs to have an idea/goal/concept and come up with the name, "Red" in this case, and then reserve that name years before actually doing anything with it. That's all Jim did before 2005 - buy an $8 url.

Douchers.

MP3 I had a conversation with a talent in LA I was directing yesterday (I'm in VT.) The regular question working with remote studios is "how do you want the files?", meaning AIFF, WAV or MP3. I was saying how surprised I was, several years ago, when people I had worked with over dedicated ISDN lines were suddenly sending MP3 files for broadcast. It's amazing how quickly high rate MP3s became common place in broadcast production. So to me, telling them how much of what they hear on radio and TV is MP3 quality.

I don't think that it's crazy. What would be crazy, I think, would be to release less than optimal footage for everyone to squabble over while the sensor is possibly still being tweaked. Their cameras improve and evolve with each product and firmware release, so there's no reason to expect anything different with a camera they've been developing for so long. Obviously the countless people that pre-ordered within hours are confident that this will be the next gen, small camera that they've been anticipating. But of course it makes sense for anyone, who wants to see footage, to wait until the camera is out in the field and being shot, tested and reviewed, as most people do. Personally, I had no issue pre-ordering a pair at the end of the press event, without seeing advance footage.

It comes down to what you perceive as acceptable/ beneficial. There is no universal arbiter of this stuff - just opinions. With that in mind, a number of the more accomplished shooters here abouts regularly have VNDs on their lenses. VNDs are professional in the sense that professionals shoot with them all the time. In the most important sense of getting a great shot versus not getting it - they're invaluable for a number of situations. Example: I'm producing a commericial next weekend at a dairy for a new product launch. Because it will be very sunny, buggy, live critters and real time action for much of the B-roll. In this scenario changing lenses becomes problematic so I'll have two cameras with zooms. Having VNDs on them means I know that both FL and ideal exposure can be dialed in on the fly. In a situation like this it's hard to calculate how many more solid shots that will come from it - but a lot more than primes and fixed NDs. When we go back the next day for the setups w/ actors I'll use fixed ProNDs on the cameras because of the control. That said, shot well, there isn't anyone who'll view the work, broadcast or web, that will see the difference between the two.

We use a couple of Nikon mount Metabones "dumb adapters" - nicknamed so because the have no electronics, but a full manual iris that will work with any Nikon G/F mount lenses. They're really well built like the speedbooster versions but with no glass obviously...around $150 I think. I'm sure there are a lot cheaper versions but MB makes nice gear and these are great. And to the crop thing with the Sigma on a MFT sensor. Obviously if you shoot a lot in the 24 - 50mm range then a SB is a good option. That's why I like both the Oly and Sigma as zooms in the kit. The Sigma shines in the 35-70mm relative range. There are a number of nice 12mm MFT options for wider work and the Oly at 12mm (24mm) is really as good as most primes...the Rok 12mm f/2 is one I always carry going light. I really like the Sigma 50mm art as a closeup lens with the 18-35 but again for a lighter kit I have the Rok 50mm f1.2 which is a great, fast little mft portrait lens. Really looking forward to using these on the pair of BM P4Ks on preorder.

If I'm using a zoom for speed (setup) reasons on commercial stuff, I can shoot all day with the Sigma 18-35 w/ dumb adapter (35 -70mm.) Just a great lens that can cover a lot like that. If we're moving around, action/documentary style w/ monopods and smaller support gear then I think the Olympus 12-40 (24-80mm) is pretty much an ideal zoom in that it's much smaller and lighter obviously and perhaps even sharper. It's just a great utility lens that's got a great manual focus clutch. Again, IMO there isn't a zoom that can draw an image like the Sigma. It's a one-of-a-kind piece of glass. But for one small lens that can cover all the bases from wide to portrait and render really sharp, contrasty and rich images the 12-40 is my second favorite zoom.

On the push pull zoom topic, FWIW I offer the Nikkor 50-135mm f/3.5 Ai-s. This is one of those "under the radar" lenses that was only on the market very briefly but is pretty widely loved by the folks that have shot with them. We've used it on the UMP and Micro with MB dumb and SB adapters. It's built like a tank but really wieldy with a 62mm front. Unboosted on the new P4k it will be a 100-270mm which would be a pretty great compliment to a Sigma at a relative 35-70mm. The IQ is pretty stunning on my and other copies I've seen. Great contrast and uniform detail across the zoom range. Definitely the vintage nikkor look w/a slightly cool rendering vs Canon glass, for instance. You can find them ridiculously cheap on ebay $100-$200. Absolute no brainer if you can find a good copy.

I'm pretty sure that doctors talk about medicine when they're not doing surgery and pilots talk about airplanes when they're not flying. And by the way...shouldn't you be recording and working right now

It is pretty absurd to be analyzing a surreptitiously shot screen grab from a preproduction demo at a trade show. Making judgements about it?

It's still a preproduction model and they're clearly not ready to demo the finished look. A watched pot...

Exactly - it doesn't have tap-to-focus but one button push AF like in the original Pocket.