kye

This is true.. and these days, it's not a terrible backup option Good point! even if it took me a while to work out what you were talking about ???

After I posted those shots of the Philip Bloom pushed and pulled around I had the same thoughts and wondered how well other lesser footage would respond. So I pulled in a shot from my XC10 in C-Log and a shot from my 700D and applied the same push and pull. I expected both to not stand up, and of course the 700D footage broke so hard it looked like modern art, but the 305Mbit 8-bit C-Log from the XC10 looked just fine. As I don't film like PB I didn't have a shot with similar tonal distribution, and then all my thoughts about how camera comparisons aren't done right (by basically anyone) so I didn't end up posting them. I really like the look of the OG Pocket and this one hasn't given the same wow factor, but considering that BM release early and tweak, considering that we've not had many examples of footage that was well shot, considering the extensive camera tests that high-end cinematographers do with a new camera working out it's sweet spots and optimal settings, and the maturity of understanding with other contenders like the GH5, A7Sii, etc, we really can't tell what potential there is in this camera yet.

I'm interested in how much redundant equipment people bring in case of malfunctions. I know it's not that common to take two bodies or duplicate lenses and that it's basically inevitable that people have multiple batteries and media, but who takes things like duplicate battery chargers, card readers, microphones, cables, and computers on set or when travelling? I shoot travel so tend to travel light, but I'm contemplating buying a spare charger, card reader, and a few little bits like that to lessen the number of single-points-of-failure while I'm out travelling.

Wow.. that will be such a great combo. I know that time is money for people who have to turn things around quickly as you say, but this could also be a way of getting proxy files to edit with but not having to wait for the computer to render them when you ingest the footage. A good media management program (or even just a script like I have) would mean it's not that much harder to ingest the footage from two sources instead of one.

Indeed it is. I've seen lots of YouTubers do their tutorials in mixing sound and adding foley and it's truly amazing at how much latitude you have with making things still believable. and how much the sound really makes a difference. I've heard people say that the picture is for the viewers brain and the sound is for the viewers emotions. I think excellent sound and music is one of the reasons I like many movies. A few that come to mind is The Hours and Run Lola Run, and I'm also reminded of the cult Australian hit Hercules Returns. Highly recommended

Yep. and for those who are used to shooting in those rec709 profiles and throwing on a LUT in post it's definitely a case of "oh Toto, we're not in Kansas anymore!!" ???

You might be a silly tourist, but in film-making terms you're definitely not! Truly nice work, and if the modest setup is limiting you then it's not coming through in the edit. Makes me want to sell everything and buy an RX100 and just go shoot stuff, which is a sign of a successful film! Subscribed.

Or just own it, and do every interview between two ferns!! Surely there are some fake ones you can buy that will come apart and fit into a tripod bag?? ???

Thanks, that's what I was thinking. I've read that Olympus helped Panasonic with the IBIS in the GH5 and that's why it's so good, but the difference seems to be more like 10-20% better rather than night-and-day. Yes, ideally I'd wait, but I've run out of time before my next trip so I'm picking up a GH5 today. In the end it was the 10-bit, 4K60, 1080p180, 29 minute limit and the noisy preamps on the EM1ii that swayed me. Even if the image and stabilisation is nicer, those are still differences I can't get past unfortunately. The EM1ii looks like a much better camera for stills, especially with PDAF and the 50MP sensor shift, but I'm almost 100% video so it's just not the right match for me.

Of course.. I didn't think of that. It's like they're cheating lol record 360p and upscale in camera to 4K.....

I agree. Lots of people are saying "this 4K RAW isn't that much better than our best H264 cameras, how disappointing" when I think they should be saying "wow, our H264 cameras weren't completely put to shame by this 4K RAW camera, how things have changed since the BMPCC, and aren't we spoiled for choice now!". I totally agree. I watched the 2012 Zacuto camera challenge recently (doing it blind as they suggested) and ended up putting the cameras in three tiers, which I found out afterwards were basically sorting them by price! The only exception to that was the F65 which I placed in the middle tier instead of the top tier because I didn't like the grade. I think there are two ways to properly execute a camera comparison - set the cameras to their flattest profile and show the files untouched out of the camera having only done a WB, or use a colour checker and have the NLE grade it for you using the full checker so it can linearise the luminance and adjust primaries and all that stuff. Otherwise, like you say, we're evaluating their grade and not the camera. Has anyone compared the P4K to the BMPCC by downscaling the P4K to 1080 and then comparing? Sharpness and resolution have a lot to do with things being cinematic...

That file that Philip Bloom uploaded is pretty interesting. I have very little experience with grading high-end footage, but this seems to be really gradable and very difficult to break. Here's a frame without any processing linked at the bottom of this post. and the waveform: If I adjust levels to use the full height then I get this: and using contrast and pivot we can push it up or down a really long way... There is a little noise there on the guys jacket, but it doesn't look like fixed pattern, and this is pushing it until it breaks. Crazy stuff. Thanks to Philip Bloom for the file PB BMPCC4K test footage Untouched_1.1.1.tif

IIRC he said something about wanting to improve his outputs. I'm not quite sure if that was in output or in learning, but he's hardly the first to think that new equipment will help creatively. Unfortunately it can be true sometimes, new equipment can inspire, or challenge you to work in a new way, or make you overcome new challenges and learn something useful etc.

Good points. He does talk a little about why he bought it in the video so I'd recommend watching it if you haven't already. What is your definition of cinematographer vs videographer? Not being sarcastic - I googled this very thing some time ago and there didn't seem to be much consensus. People have commented before that many people will buy the P4K and then get a shock and sell/return it and others have said that if it didn't do RAW internally then there probably wouldn't be the hype around it that there is. I think these are symptoms of it being a cinema camera and people not understanding the differences. The original pocket kind of taught the average person a bit about the difference, but I think this version will have quite an effect on people. They will realise the file sizes are huge, they're not good all-in-one solutions like an A6500, and most importantly that RAW won't make them a better cinematographer. I've looked at RAW RED footage before and been surprised and disappointed because it wasn't magical. I think the Ferrari is a good analogy, except if the analogy was that people were trying to take it off-road. It can do it, but it's really not the best tool for the job.

Which bits Jon? I've said a few things In terms of me moving away from AF, it's a complete change in philosophy. I'm moving from wanting a camera to record whatever shots I can see (and therefore being really flexible), to having a camera that I love the images of and then just accepting that it won't capture everything I want. In that sense, I think I want manual primes, and potentially vintage ones. Once I switched philosophies in my head I worked out what that setup would look like and it makes sense that approaching my work in a different way would mean the equipment would be quite different too. I shot a few videos testing various elements of the setup and concluded that MF is fine if I get good focus assists. I shoot in MF for my kids sports games anyway so I'm kind of used to it. You don't need anything - just put a lens on it and go. Sure, the battery doesn't last long, but it lasts long enough for some people. If you want longer battery life then put on a V-Mount, and if you put it at the back then add an external screen too. Rig it as large as you like, then it's like a normal cinema camera. My point is that if you get the brain of a real cinema camera then you can't even put a lens on it, let alone record any footage. This is both a "pocket" camera AND a cinema camera. Most cameras this size aren't good cinema cameras rigged up, and no cinema camera is this size. They've designed it for both and everyone is moaning that it's not perfect. It's not perfect - neither is any other camera. I agree that a hinge on the screen would have been nicer. But for a cinema camera, it's a bonus they gave us a screen at all.

Totally agree. I think I worded that part of my post badly.. I should have separated the two points, that Caleb said the RED was a mistake for a number of reasons, and that MY interpretation of those reasons applied to the P4K. Like @Mattias Burling said - this is a cinema camera. If you accept that it's a cinema camera then it needs to be understood in that context. Including the size... for a cinema camera it may as well be called the Black Magic Microscopic Cinema Camera! It's another effect of convergence of technology. People who are part of the DSLR revolution don't understand how cinema cameras work (thus the complaining about the battery life, screen, file sizes, AF, etc) and so they compare it to cameras of the same price or physical size. Just like you wouldn't do any serious overall comparison between a $1000 iPhone camera and a $1000 DSLR because they're the same price (what do you mean the camera can't make phone calls???), or a 5D with a film camera because they're the same shape (why doesn't the 5D take Ektar???), comparing the P4K with A7III GH5 etc also makes no sense because they're built for completely different things. I wonder how people see the screen on the back of their real cinema cameras?

That's a good point, and also explains why some footage looks ok and other things don't. Assuming you shoot with a 180 degree shutter then people running will be a lot easier to compress in HFR, but if you're shooting a waterfall then it's the opposite - the 180 shutter will blur the water droplets in normal speed but in HFR many more droplets are visible because they're moving a lot slower during each exposure, and so there's heaps and heaps of fine detail to fit into the bit-rate. I guess the moral of the story is that consumer cameras are ok to film your cat in slow motion, but if you're travelling and want to film the town waterfall then it's got to be a cinema camera recording RAW ???

I'm downloading it. If anyone has any questions or requests for things I can (quickly / easily) do in Resolve, just ask A three minute film is a good length.. just edit in-camera like first year of film-school and you'll be set!

That is fantastic footage. In a way it's still a "trick" kind of like the bullet time effect by swinging it around your head on a string, but it's probably much more useful for the GoPro action camera crowd who want shots of mucking around by the pool or whatever. The IQ is still pretty bad though, and notably all those shots are wide. Wide shots are better for these cameras as essentially you're cropping in to get a tighter angle so with a low bit-rate 4K codec anything tighter than perhaps 15-25mm is going to look like Youtube in 240p. When these things get affordable 8K they will take over. Everyone will have a smart phone and one of these to video their family or whatever. Being able to hold it out in front of you while you're mucking around in the park and then be able to choose camera angles in post like every 1-shot, 2-shot, and group shot combination had a camera recording it is completely next level. You can have a normal camera that records 16K RAW and it still won't capture the funny moment AND all the reactions to it. This will automatically record everything.

I did a bunch of that on my last trip actually, kind of like a fake sideways slider shot. It's harder to do at longer focal lengths but I had success in staying within the IS of my XC10 with perhaps 60% of the shots I tried. I found the trick was to make sure neither leg was straight, hold the camera steady and "fix" your upper body so it's all rigid (but not tensed) and then after you slowly breathe out to just take your eyes off the screen, or just kind of let them go soft-focus, and then just move from one leg to the other while holding your upper body motionless. I found that if I looked at the screen then I was tempted to rotate the camera to keep an object in the same spot in the frame, and that means that your upper body isn't fixed and you're now slowly rotating the camera, which means that the IS has to sense you're now panning and all the shakes are likely to return because you're moving slightly. If you are looking at the screen then it will be motionless if you're holding it within the IS range, but if you go outside of that then you'll see movement in the screen, which will prompt you to try and move to compensate, and often that movement will mean you shake more, and it all goes downhill from there. In any case, it's better just to rock back and forwards a few times, partly because it gives you a chance to relax and kind of practice, but also it gives you flexibility in post of choosing which direction you want the shot to slide in Thanks, that's useful. I did wonder if the GH5 was 90% of the Oly or 60% or how close it was. The GH5 has so much else going for it to take into consideration. My iPhone 8 (not plus) has pretty good IS actually. I am frequently impressed with it stabilising when I didn't think it would, like if you're shooting and moving or if there's a gust of wind or whatever. Unfortunately these things are all relative - someone with steady hands will say something is great but those with a bit more movement will have no success with it, so it's hard to judge if people haven't compared both options over a period of time.

Having two cameras is handy.. for the price of the RED anyone could have 3, 4, 5, or more P4K rigs, and those combined would probably be comparable in terms of weight and size. My take-away from Calebs video was that he thought that buying the RED was a mistake because of a number of reasons, most of which the P4K doesn't suffer with. I understand I'm not waiting anymore. I've had a few people recommend I get the EM1 mk2 over the GH5 because of the IBIS, but I'm not sure because the Oly has some other limitations. Either way, I've got some vintage lenses and adapters on the way, and I'm planning on buying something this week. I leave for India in about 3 weeks and was going to shoot it with the GF3 but the wife talked me into upgrading before the trip instead of afterwards when I was planning on it, so that the footage from the trip is nicer. "Cinema" and "Pocket" are both in the title, and let's be honest, it's reaching for both. Cinema is a stretch because it doesn't have SDI outs, and a range of other things that a Venice or RED or ARRI would have. Is it fair to compare the $1300 camera with a $100K camera because it has "cinema" in the title? No, so we're not doing that. That kind of a comparison is unreasonable because the cameras are for vastly different users and offer vastly different features at vastly different prices. And yet because it has the word "Pocket" in the name we're comparing it to genuine pocket cameras. I say that kind of comparison is also unreasonable, also because the cameras are for vastly different users and offer vastly different features at vastly different prices. Then we compare it to cameras that neither claim to be pocketable or to be cinema cameras, and don't have the features or form-factor of pocket or cinema cameras, like the A7III or 5D or GH5, but somehow this is a fair comparison for batteries. And we do so because we don't want to buy a few extra and carry them in a bag with the lenses, filters, and media cards that we are inevitably carrying around, or if we want long battery life we're not willing to buy an external solution? If it came with 10 spare batteries, a V-Mount with mounting hardware, and cost a few hundred extra then people would moan that they're paying for things they don't need. If it came with a larger internal battery then people would moan that it was too large. All this talk makes me wonder if anyone understands the concept of things being "modular". In terms of everyone having their own preference, I think it's designed perfectly - it can be used in either a small setup or a large one, making this the flexible approach to meet everyones needs. Making it heavier to hold or requiring a larger gimbal for those willing to swap batteries and wanting a small and light setup is imposing your views on those users.

It is where it's heading and I agree. It's just pretty damn difficult to film something today with next years camera! Comparing the P4K to cameras in the future should wait until we get those "P4K vs A7SIII vs Panasonic S1 mkII vs GH7" or "P4K in 2021" threads that are inevitable. Mostly EOSHD talks about cameras in a relatively sane way, but this thread has started to remind me of those smartphone reviewers who give a 1 star rating because the included AI doesn't make their bed for them.

I haven't flown myself, but I've seen a lot of YouTubers go up and it seems like a tough environment. Apart from the motion of the heli I think I've also noticed that it's really windy up there? Especially when you get the doors open and are hovering (not going with the wind) and that's the time you want to take shots! I seem to remember the wind potentially blowing the cameras around a bit. Maybe someone with experience can confirm?

Great thread. Wouldn't it just be a matter of bitrate though? 120 is difficult in those busy deep DoF shots because the amount of data available for each frame is low and the IQ suffers accordingly because there's so much information in the frame to try and fit into that limited data. I never understood why manufacturers didn't just scale the bitrate up with the frame rate - the idea of slow motion is to conform to the native frame rate..

I want IBIS and was also wanting AF until I recently changed approach. If I didn't need either then I would be all over this camera like a rash. I would just buy a few more batteries. If anyone doesn't like changing batteries then get a V-Mount and power it externally, the port is there. If some camera company turns around tomorrow and releases an 8K RAW camera that has 27 years of battery life then it doesn't change how good this camera is, or the fact that there are plenty of battery options, both for the people who want a small setup or those who want to rig it up and have a large one that will run all day. and if anyone doesn't like that it has the word "Pocket" in the name and it doesn't fit in your pockets then I really don't know what to say....