BTM_Pix

1 hour ago, Snowfun said:

Presumably a cage of some sort will emerge. Yes it possibly defeats the purpose but it’ll look good. (And possibly prevent the camera rotating on a quick release as it’s only got the single screw hole I think?)

If its anything like it was when the first version was released, it'll be rig mania for a while with people pimping them out.

Though I do have a soft spot for these two.

Thought $7995 for the set of 3 looked very interesting indeed.

Until I saw that was just the deposit!

Still groundbreaking price of course in comparison to others though.

16 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

What is the "look ahead limiters"?

Splits the signal, delays one and uses the non-delayed one as the sidechain to the delayed one.

Hence, it allows it to effectively look into the future to know when the peaks are coming and be ready and waiting with the adjustment so its giving you a brick wall guarantee.

3 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Is a pity it doesn't have more than one output from the BMPCC4K, as then you could have a LUT on one output for the client and no LUT for your own monitoring. 

If its like the Ursa, you should be able to have one (or none) for your camera LCD and a different one for the HDMI output.

If you wanted to use an external monitor for yourself as well then you could go out of the HDMI without a LUT, through your monitor (without a LUT) and into the client monitor where you have a LUT applied there.

7 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I'd assume/hope so, as that is just an extremely normal workflow for many MANY productions. 

Record raw/log for the best results, but apply a LUT on the image you sent to the client monitor so that they don't freak out! 

The Ursa Mini Pro can have a different LUT on each of its monitoring outputs so I'm hopeful too but I suppose its another wait and see.

12 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I've used the BMPCC almost naked while running around like a headless chicken at weddings. 

Its the pluralisation of wedding that concerns me most about that statement !

3 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

The GH5 and BMPCC5K sensor are very different? It is the GH5S and BMPCC4K sensors which have a similarity. 

 

Well if you're going to bring facts into it !

My mistake.

1 minute ago, sanveer said:

I doubt that. They are happy offering ProRes or whatever else by the HDMI out. .

I thought the wink thing would've got the point across that I wasn't entirely serious?

2 minutes ago, sanveer said:

Curiously having RAW via HDMI won't solve the problem. The Price Difference is too great.

It would do in terms of @IronFilm 's point that I was actually answering regarding how you would match the BMPCC4K and a GH5 if you had both.

1 hour ago, Snowfun said:

The Bluetooth feature... I so want to post a picture on reduser of me controlling the Pocket 4K using a Hydrogen...

On a more serious note, what sort of remote control might we anticipate?

It is the same protocol as the Ursa and BMD have already released the documents so there is nothing stopping someone working on products for it now in time to be ready for launch.

It is Bluetooth LE so is much easier to talk to directly from cheap single board computers if someone wants to make a hardware controller.

So you can expect anything from phone apps, basic start/stop triggers to full blown hand grips full of buttons mapped to all controls.

Just now, jonpais said:

Precisely. Paul Leeming has already promised to make a LUT for the Pocket 4K.

He's so busy on it that he hasn't spotted that his website is broken !

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

A solid case is made for that. 

But the only downside I might see of that dual camera set up is GH5 & BMPCC4K might not match as easily for quick turn arounds as using two Panasonic cameras together in a two camera shoot. 

 

I think the commonality of the sensor between the two will potentially make that less challenging.

With the ability to bake in a LUT on the BMPCC4K there does present an opportunity to have it produce out of camera footage that matches Panasonic's internal profiles more closely. Some sort of unifying LUT for the BMPCC4K, such as a version of the Leeming LUT for it, would have potential.

Plus, of course, by then Panasonic will have yielded to public pressure and enabled RAW through HDMI for the GH5

4 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Well, good to know that it is technically possible. On the other hand, Sony still seems to sell the original a7S new, so maybe it would breed new life in to it???

If they were to put it in anything, they'd put it in the A7Siii (whenever that happens) to stimulate sales of that.

But, then again, you then end up with the protectionism stuff again where they don't want to give away the farm on the lower (ha!) end cameras.

There is also the issue of getting too closely in bed with a 3rd party damaging your own brand if the whole solution doesn't work 100% of the time. There is a thread on here at the moment regarding the GH5s not playing nice at certain resolutions with the Atomos and both sides pointing fingers at the other. A bit of a minefield things like that, as is only being one firmware update away from disaster on either side so it also increases the support testing efforts and so on.

Manufacturers should make their own for all those reasons but for some reason (protectionism or not sufficient demand/return or both) they don't seem to bother.

I think it will help that this sensor has been available for quite a while so is a known entity and they've had the opportunity to study what other companies are doing with it.

That, combined with using the same OS as the Ursa, should make it much more of an integration job rather than a ground up development.

Add on Blackmagic now having another 5 years experience of learned lessons of development of building cameras and its not unreasonable to suspect it will be plainer sailing this time round.

I'll still be standing well back when I first plug mine in though, obviously.  

In 2021 no doubt.

5 minutes ago, mercer said:

So I hope people are prepared for this instead of jumping on board and expecting something this won’t be and then spreading hatred because their unrealistic expectations weren’t met.

I think you are completely disregarding the fact Tim Berners-Lee invented the world wide web for precisely that though.

We live for the let down and the entitlement fuelled ranting

Technically feasible but politically/commercially less so would be my opinion.

The only new sales it would generate would be for Atomos so I can't imagine the will would be there.

2 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Or RAW to CFast card and ProRes to SD card both internally. I'd like that.

Why not.

They've already gone "yeah, fuck it" and thrown the kitchen sink at it for that price !

Just now, Anaconda_ said:

You can if you record to an Atomos recorder :P 

I was thinking along the lines of something similar but much cheaper but it would require it being on the output.

We'll see I suppose.

I'm wondering if you can have a baked in LUT on the HDMI output whilst simultaneously recording RAW without one?

It offers some interesting possibilities if you can....

2 minutes ago, forofilms said:

If you can't charge from an external source while simultaneously recording to an external drive then it kind of defeats the purpose of having the feature to be able to long-record via usb-c. 

It still has an external power input though?

I presume you could use a usb-c hub as well?

I do hope Blackmagic have already bought up a boatload of the sensors.

I can just see Panasonic getting on the phone to Sony this morning and saying "You know that IMX294CJK sensor that we buy off you for our GH5 cameras? How many have you got?....Right, we're on our way there now....We'll take the lot"

Nice walkthrough here

Internal F-LOG is a big winner for me personally.

Would've been nice to have Eterna internal as well but as Fuji have released the F-LOG > Eterna LUT for it in their last update its not a major issue.

So if we couldn't have both, I'm glad they chose the internal F-LOG !

52 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Just for the record, the GH5 does not shoot garbage plastic looking footage. And while the Pocket 4K is probably awesome, it does not suddenly make shooting Panasonic Log obsolete. 

 

I don't think they are mutually exclusive either.

Its more the GH5s that has the problem as far as I can see.

Prices of a used GH5 are currently dipping below £1.2k and will be further deflated by the time the Pocket 4K  actually arrives to be more or less a flat £1k.

If you add in the value of the full version of Resolve then that means you could have a GH5 AND the Pocket 4K with Resolve for pretty much the same price as the GH5s and Resolve.

In that scenario, where I could have the best of both worlds in terms of a highly featured and capable all rounder AND a cinema oriented one for the same total price (especially as they share a common lens system) then I'd really struggle to choose the GH5s over that.

2 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Even OEM good panels (ask @BTM_Pix for that!) cost a lot more than 100$ from China factories, so they can't be very cheap.

Thursday is D-Day for Operation Cheap Screen so I'll let you know.

If it doesn't explode as soon as I plug it in.

1 minute ago, Anaconda_ said:

Yeah but with 20% tax - in NL we're at 21% so it messes with my reports and could open up some holes which I simply can't be bothered to deal with. I'd rather just wait a day or two for a store here to open preorders if need be.

They do tax free with an EU VAT number but, yeah, for the sake of a couple of days when we are all in all likelihood looking at a six month wait (at least  ) does seem daft

7 minutes ago, Danyyyel said:

Someone should do a 5 inch loupe like DSLR days, with a 5 inch 1080p screen it would be better than a lot of evf and give another contact point.

https://www.gridaccessories.com/products/grid-5-0-viewfinder/