X-T3 or Pocket 4K?

[Gregormannschaft]

49 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said:

 

Thanks for that. 

Sonetimes I convince myself I have certain needs, and then when it comes to it, I realise i don’t. 

Theres many reasons why the GH5 has stuck with me, as I feel it makes room for more thought on creative ideas. I’m being asked to do stills more with video these days, and I’ve used the GH5 again for that. Personally, it’s not my flavour. 

I do have the EVA1 and I can’t give much of a review on that yet, only used it once! But I had an FS5 before and I sold it as the overall “technological” image wasn’t connecting with me. 

I love Fuji and Canon images, so I’m always curious. In all honestly if I didn’t need great HFR options, I’d have the C200. They really under delivered on the C300 II, and in my opinion, it’s a flop. Again, they lost me as a customer there too. 

I usually have to leave my emotional desires aside and have to pick the tools that meet the requirements of my briefs, hence the EVA1 having to come in. So I’m going to settle with these Panasonics and forget about all these distracting new releases. I want the quality of my work to step up further, and this will all be down to hard, focused work. 

Curious why you think the C300 Mk2 is a flop? I also have a C200 and absolutely love the image, even the 8bit stuff. I know it's been said countless times before but the colour science just makes footage sing. The RawLite footage is beautiful, and will become easier and easier to manage over the next few years as storage prices continue to drop. The AF is incredible and the ergonomics are lovely.

Buuut, I don't see why the C300 Mk2 would be so much different. It has better codecs, but crippled by poor slow mo options and slightly bulkier ergonomics?

[Oliver Daniel]

57 minutes ago, Gregormannschaft said:

Curious why you think the C300 Mk2 is a flop? I also have a C200 and absolutely love the image, even the 8bit stuff. I know it's been said countless times before but the colour science just makes footage sing. The RawLite footage is beautiful, and will become easier and easier to manage over the next few years as storage prices continue to drop. The AF is incredible and the ergonomics are lovely.

Buuut, I don't see why the C300 Mk2 would be so much different. It has better codecs, but crippled by poor slow mo options and slightly bulkier ergonomics?

Its at least a flop in the UK, because the FS7 was released and Canon couldn’t beat many of its features. Now, the FS7 is the most rented and requested camera. The C300 II is nowhere to be seen, where before the C300 was always No.1. 

For sure, the Canon has the prettiest image and DPAF, however with more productions calling for high quality HFR - Sony succeeded massively. The FS7 today still has sexier specs than cameras released now. 

Even on shoots now with many cameras and shooters (at least the ones I’m on)  - I’ve seen all the cameras being used are Sony now, where in 2012 it was all Canon. They’ve simply lost their hold. 

I love the C200 image, it’s stunning. I’d have bought one if the HFR was better. I could see it working with the X-T3 nicely.  But with a lot of my clients asking for high quality HFR, EVA1 it is. 

Like the topic title, camera choice is important. My advice - stick to a brand and just go for it. Minimise swapping them around and only change if the difference is greatly beneficial. 

 

[crevice]

I have conducted a bunch of tests comparing shots between the XT-3 and the Pocket 4k, which unfortunately I can't share because they are of my wife and she won't let me post them online. I will see if I can do some shots of other folks whom are comfortable having video of them shared online. But for now I can give a bit of insight with my findings. The highlight retention/roll off of the Pocket 4k is miles ahead of the XT-3. Having the ability to have RAW, is also miles ahead of the XT-3. Both of these are obvious to me and I pretty much knew them going in. I think we all knew this. The colors straight out of the camera, again, blackmagic wins. So is the obvious choice the Blackmagic Pocket 4k? No. Keep reading...

After all that, the combination of a more organic/slightly softer looking image and much MUCH smoother motion cadence of the Fuji XT-3, make it look more cinematic, with less work. When both cameras are out of harsh light, I prefer the video of the XT-3. Just the way the movement looks is immediately apparent and almost jarring. I know a lot has been talked about whether the pocket 4k is the same sensor of the GH5 or not, personally I am not here to say it is or it isn't, but the actual movement (motion cadence) reminded me of my old GH5. You can soften the video all you want, add grain, but tweaking motion cadence is not an easy thing. So I really value the way the motion looks.

With both arguments out there, I still don't see it as a clear choice for the XT-3 or Pocket 4k, unless you start factoring what you want out of it. If you do gimbal work, the XT-3 is hands down a better choice with its great auto focus. If you need RAW, then you don't even need to read or bother with your choice and I am not sure why you even read this far, the Pocket 4k is your choice. Screen on the pocket 4k is amazing, fujis is small and harder to use. But, you can use a small Ninja on the Fuji and record prores. With the Pocket 4k, unless you are using CFAST, you will need to mount an SSD on a cage. So with either one, chances are you will have either an ssd or monitor on top of it.  I prefer having a monitor on top, because thats an added bonus of easier to focus and choose angles.

Here is where I stand. I shoot video and do photography, pretty much 50/50. The specs of the pocket 4k blow my mind. They are amazing. But, for what I do, I am not sure if its worth having 2 cameras, 1 for photography and 1 for video, which means more gear I need to carry - as opposed to just my Fuji to do both.I bought the pocket 4k to see if it would blow my mind. It has impressed me, but has not blown my mind. I lose some, no RAW, not as great of a color science, and far better codecs. But, I also gain some with the Fuji, smaller body, easier to balance on gimbal, autofocus for gimbals, and no need to lug around 2 cameras and more lenses for each system. This last argument is whats making it harder to just keep both. The fuji regardless is staying, because its my main photography camera. Its a keep the fuji or keep both choice for me.

I am going to do more tests once the sun goes down a bit and see how they fair outside of the harsh light I tested today. Right now, I am leaning toward sending the pocket 4k back, just to simplify things. When I have too much gear , over stimulated/whelmed with choices - I end up NOT being creative. This is why I have always liked hybrids as a photographer, the camera is always on you and ready to shoot video when you need.

Decisions, Decisions...

I am open to answering any questions on either camera.

[Inazuma]

Could you perhaps show us footage with your wife's face blurred? It's quite surprising to me that the BM would be miles ahead in DR because the Fuji is no slouch

[crevice]

13 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

Could you perhaps show us footage with your wife's face blurred? It's quite surprising to me that the BM would be miles ahead in DR because the Fuji is no slouch

The highlights in general are better on the pocket, but that’s mostly because of the RAW. Not sure I said the DR in general itself was miles ahead. I am going to run some tests in better lighting and hopefully I’ll be able to share. Both great cameras. 

[deezid]

18 minutes ago, crevice said:

The highlights in general are better on the pocket, but that’s mostly because of the RAW. Not sure I said the DR in general itself was miles ahead. I am going to run some tests in better lighting and hopefully I’ll be able to share. Both great cameras. 

Would love to see some comparisons as well.
Especially skin tones in low light (high iso). Still a bit afraid of skin tone smearing on the X-T3.

Do you lower sharpening and noise reduction to -4 (and turn off inter frame nr?)

[crevice]

11 minutes ago, deezid said:

Would love to see some comparisons as well.
Especially skin tones in low light (high iso). Still a bit afraid of skin tone smearing on the X-T3.

Do you lower sharpening and noise reduction to -4 (and turn off inter frame nr?)

Great questions - sharpness is all the way down,  Noise Reduction is at 0 and inter frame NR is off. Should I turn noise reduction all the way down?

[deezid]

54 minutes ago, crevice said:

Great questions - sharpness is all the way down,  Noise Reduction is at 0 and inter frame NR is off. Should I turn noise reduction all the way down?

Since the Pocket 4k doesn't do any, I would say so.

[IronFilm]

On 10/13/2018 at 3:55 PM, jonpais said:

And my wife would be perfect if only she would squeeze the toothpaste tube from the bottom. ?

And leave the toilet set up.

 

On 10/14/2018 at 9:05 AM, Gregormannschaft said:

Curious why you think the C300 Mk2 is a flop?

Too expensive. 
Too late to market. 
No 4K 60fps

TL;DR: the FS7 happened. 

[webrunner5]

That Variable ND that Sony has on the FS5, FS7 mk II is a feature that is hard to beat also.

[thebrothersthre3]

On 10/13/2018 at 5:53 PM, crevice said:

The highlights in general are better on the pocket, but that’s mostly because of the RAW. Not sure I said the DR in general itself was miles ahead. I am going to run some tests in better lighting and hopefully I’ll be able to share. Both great cameras. 

Do you think the XT3 was capable of a good image in harsh light tho? How does highlight roll off compare between the two?

[crevice]

53 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Do you think the XT3 was capable of a good image in harsh light tho? How does highlight roll off compare between the two?

Highlights in general are handled better by the pocket - but the XT-3 held its own. Roll off on the Pocket 4k is better, but don't let fool you. XT-3 holds its own very well and in many cases pulls ahead. The pocket 4k footage was very warm compared to the XT-3. The XT-3 seemed more neutral. The XT-3 looked much more organic and cinematic, which is a combo of a much smoother motion cadence and softer sensor. The pocket 4ks motion cadence is jarring at times when compared to the XT-3, as the pocket 4k has a much more "digital" movement in its motion cadence. 

Both are great cameras - but I ended up returning the pocket 4k. To me - having 1 camera that can shoot video and photo of this quality is important to me. As a photographer and videographer, one camera where I go is way better. Also - the auto focus on the xt-3 is great, especially when on a gimbal. 

[Alex Uzan]

As many of us here, I watched every video about the Pocket 4k. Many times ?

And it has too many flaws to my taste. 

I ordered a X-t3, that could replace my A7iii.

[TurboRat]

On 10/14/2018 at 5:20 AM, crevice said:

After all that, the combination of a more organic/slightly softer looking image and much MUCH smoother motion cadence of the Fuji XT-3, make it look more cinematic, with less work. When both cameras are out of harsh light, I prefer the video of the XT-3. Just the way the movement looks is immediately apparent and almost jarring. I know a lot has been talked about whether the pocket 4k is the same sensor of the GH5 or not, personally I am not here to say it is or it isn't, but the actual movement (motion cadence) reminded me of my old GH5. You can soften the video all you want, add grain, but tweaking motion cadence is not an easy thing. So I really value the way the motion looks.

What is motion cadence? Like frame rate or slow motion? But I agree, I think the XT-3 is a better all around camera

[Alex Uzan]

I’d say it’s the perfect amount of motion blur that makes the video cadence so natural, and no diginatural.

[IronFilm]

17 hours ago, Alex Uzan said:

And it has too many flaws to my taste. 

 

What put you off specifically?

[Alex Uzan]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

What put you off specifically?

I'd say :

- Poor battery life (40min is not acceptable)
- Drop frame in raw 4k60 (!)
- No way to use a powerbank and a SSD,
- No Ibis, and Im ok with that since I have a Gimbal, but with no afc (even a bad one like GH5) it will be painful to use
- The design with the hole on top for ventilation scares me a little for durability.
- No remote control compatibility with any gimbal (but that could change)
- The 120p crop
- No tilt screen ( I don't care about fully articully)

At this time, I see no reason to buy this camera instead of the GH5 with VLOG.
Or even the X-T3 if you take stills a lot.

[webrunner5]

I admit for an overall camera the Fuji X-T3 ticks a lot of boxes. But after I have seen the footage of the PK4, all 13 stops of it, the Fuji, along with most of the other new ones just sucks ass for video. For just everyday use hell yes the Fuji wins. But for serious stuff not too sure about that.

Sure I would Not recommend the PK4 as the Only camera to have, but for video you are not beating the output of the PK4 for what money we have to spend. Now in controlled shots sure the X-T3 works, but outside with the sun shinning it is just not getting the job done, at least the way I have seen footage wise.

So yeah like says @Alex Uzan, it has a lot of warts, but it has some pretty damn killer output, and for MY needs, wants that is the top reason to own it. @Alex Uzan

[Alex Uzan]

@webrunner5?

Except the colors and the DR 13 stops, do you see anything else really interesting in this P4k ?

[Kisaha]

12 minutes ago, Alex Uzan said:

@webrunner5?

Except the colors and the DR 13 stops, do you see anything else really interesting in this P4k ?

5" monitor/recorder with XLR, usb C recording, equal or better low light performance than most APS-C cameras in the market and on top of that a video camera as a bonus!

You went for the X-T3.

"- Poor battery life (40min is not acceptable)" - Fuji is similar or worst
"- Drop frame in raw 4k60 (!)" - Fuji isn't even close to that, certainly no raw at all
"- No way to use a powerbank and a SSD" - no way to use an SSD on any other camera. Period.
"- No Ibis, and Im ok with that since I have a Gimbal, but with no afc (even a bad one like GH5) it will be painful to use" - Fuji certainly has no IBIS.Zone focus.
"- The design with the hole on top for ventilation scares me a little for durability." - all video cameras have extensive heat management solutions
"- No remote control compatibility with any gimbal (but that could change)" - that will change
"- The 120p crop" - yes, stupid, but in 4 years I have used my hybrid system in 120p just in one project.
"- No tilt screen ( I don't care about fully articully)" - at least it has a 5" display, others too small and dim anyway. I am using SmallHD Focus with everything.