Blackmagic to announce new camera related news at 12 noon PDT (8pm London)

[mercer]

Plus you don’t have to use the new P4K Metabones speedbooster... there’s the original Metabones, the Lens Turbo, the Viltrox or you can always use native M4/3 lenses. And with the new S16 mode on the P4K, a whole new slew of fast, wide angle, c-mount  lenses become an option.

[Skip77]

23 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Hey, champ, beyond a claim, just a fact, without mention, they are different models, didn't notice yet? Can I keep both or should I ask you a permit? LOL : -)

Sure I give you the green light to keep both. Permit granted. Lol

[Kisaha]

@Skip77

If you want to read my specific case you can read here

M43 has advantages. Dual ISO and bigger photons improve greatly the low light capabilities.

"There are just so many options with the 4K, I have a lens regain (X0.75), I can get the no-glass Viltrox (X1.9) for dead cheap, and maybe the P4K Speedbooster (X0.64) just to be safe for my wider primes.

1 lens almost 3 different lenses!

Also, consider skipping the 6K resolution altogether, there will be a lot of 8K options in a year..better save the extra 1400€ for then.."

I just bought 2 lavalier microphones and their accessories for 2000€, accusing people that are "too cheap" for this camera is a very silly argument.

We shoot tv shows with GH5 cameras and the Oly 12-100mm by the way. M43 is great and alive.

[RubanCam]

25 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

Does the speed booster happen to come FREE when you buy the P4K?  If not then why the $1,000 cheaper comments from P4K owners?  This is not correct information to be spreading. 

Sorry these prices are in Canadian $.

P4K  $ 1749.00 + 13% tax =  $1976.00  https://www.vistek.ca/store/423994/blackmagic-design-pocket-cinema-camera-4k

P6K  $ 3349.00 + 13% tax. = $3784.00  so the difference is $1808.00.  I can buy a Metabones speed booster 0.64X EF to M43 for $700.00 

[Skip77]

29 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Skip77

If you want to read my specific case you can read here

M43 has advantages. Dual ISO and bigger photons improve greatly the low light capabilities.

"There are just so many options with the 4K, I have a lens regain (X0.75), I can get the no-glass Viltrox (X1.9) for dead cheap, and maybe the P4K Speedbooster (X0.64) just to be safe for my wider primes.

1 lens almost 3 different lenses!

Also, consider skipping the 6K resolution altogether, there will be a lot of 8K options in a year..better save the extra 1400€ for then.."

I just bought 2 lavalier microphones and their accessories for 2000€, accusing people that are "too cheap" for this camera is a very silly argument.

We shoot tv shows with GH5 cameras and the Oly 12-100mm by the way. M43 is great and alive.

What's the name of the tv shows you shoot with the GH5?

30 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Skip77

If you want to read my specific case you can read here

M43 has advantages. Dual ISO and bigger photons improve greatly the low light capabilities.

"There are just so many options with the 4K, I have a lens regain (X0.75), I can get the no-glass Viltrox (X1.9) for dead cheap, and maybe the P4K Speedbooster (X0.64) just to be safe for my wider primes.

1 lens almost 3 different lenses!

Also, consider skipping the 6K resolution altogether, there will be a lot of 8K options in a year..better save the extra 1400€ for then.."

I just bought 2 lavalier microphones and their accessories for 2000€, accusing people that are "too cheap" for this camera is a very silly argument.

We shoot tv shows with GH5 cameras and the Oly 12-100mm by the way. M43 is great and alive.

Why do you feel you need to tell everyone that you have money to buy gear? 

I said if one couldn't afford the P6k then the P4K is the best option.  

And you actually have people crying over the P6K for $1,200 more.  So in your world you can afford any gear and money is not an issue but for P4K users that say the P6K is not worth the extra cost, that's talk and has nothing to do with not being able to afford the extra cost?

What TV shows do you film with the Gh5 again?

[drm]

This may not work for everyone, but I have bought more than one Metabones adapter on eBay for around $400-500. Much of the money that you spend on a Metabones can be recovered when you move on from needing it.

I certainly am a fan of not messing with a speed booster, but there is no denying that the P4K + the Metabones (and other) adapters are a great combination. You gain around a stop of light and your field of view gets wider, even wider than Super35. I think that Super35 is the sweet spot for video, not "full frame" sensors. The larger the sensor, the less depth of field, which causes lots of problems with video, particularly run/gun and corporate type work. I want to separate the subject from the background, I don't need to obliterate it

@Kisaha I agree. We also shoot tv shows, commercials, music videos, etc. using M43 sensor cameras (P4K, GH5, GH5s, etc.) without concern about the sensor size. People seem to forget that the camera is a *small* part of the overall gear budget.

15 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

What's the name of the tv shows you shoot with the GH5?

Why do you feel you need to tell everyone that you have money to buy gear? 

I said if one couldn't afford the P6k then the P4K is the best option.  

And you actually have people crying over the P6K for $1,200 more.  So in your world you can afford any gear and money is not an issue but for P4K users that say the P6K is not worth the extra cost, that's talk and has nothing to do with not being able to afford the extra cost?

What TV shows do you film with the Gh5 again?

Skip, if people are so price conscious where the Metabones is a problem, they should probably not buy the P4K, P6K, any of the Z-Cams, etc. anyway. With all of those cameras you will be spending an amount probably equal to the cost of the camera just to equip it where you can use it on a production (cages, batteries, etc.).

If someone is price conscious and they are asking me for a camera recommendation, I usually suggest that they pick up a GH5, Fuji XT3, or one of the Sony cams, like the 6400. Those will get you shooting video basically right out of the box, with minimal extra expenditures.

I believe that the point that @Kisaha was trying to make (and I agree) is that the cost of the camera is small relative to the rest of the gear necessary to do more professional work (sound & lighting can be expensive too, Skypanels are almost $6K each...). I have a silly amount of money tied up in gear to do what we do, and I am not running around with crazy expensive cameras like some of the bigger budget productions use (movies). I think that we are all looking for gear that gives us great quality images at affordable prices.

[Caleb Genheimer]

I would argue that with a proper cage that has support for hard mounting a booster, the cine locking EF (or PL I suppose) booster actually makes the P4K MORE of a cinema camera than the P6K would ever be. I don’t care how well-machined a standard SLR bayonet is, a positive locking cine mount is infinitely superior for any real cinema camera work with follow focus units. 

The Metabones optics are already fantastic, and now they have versions specifically for the thinner sensor stack of the P4K. There are a million things to worry about when doing cinema work other than 6K resolution. Sure, the oversample is a nice perk, but 4K is plenty.

Again, I feel like an SLR mount on a mirrorless camera is low-key stupidity. Let me put on a dummy EF adapter! Maybe even one with ND or a booster... but I digress.

I prefer the form factor of the ZCam stuff for sure, but their pricing I think is awful ambitious for a new company, no matter how good the cameras are. At the very least, the P6K will change the market’s price tiers for the better

[Skip77]

28 minutes ago, drm said:

This may not work for everyone, but I have bought more than one Metabones adapter on eBay for around $400-500. Much of the money that you spend on a Metabones can be recovered when you move on from needing it.

I certainly am a fan of not messing with a speed booster, but there is no denying that the P4K + the Metabones (and other) adapters are a great combination. You gain around a stop of light and your field of view gets wider, even wider than Super35. I think that Super35 is the sweet spot for video, not "full frame" sensors. The larger the sensor, the less depth of field, which causes lots of problems with video, particularly run/gun and corporate type work. I want to separate the subject from the background, I don't need to obliterate it

@Kisaha I agree. We also shoot tv shows, commercials, music videos, etc. using M43 sensor cameras (P4K, GH5, GH5s, etc.) without concern about the sensor size. People seem to forget that the camera is a *small* part of the overall gear budget.

Skip, if people are so price conscious where the Metabones is a problem, they should probably not buy the P4K, P6K, any of the Z-Cams, etc. anyway. With all of those cameras you will be spending an amount probably equal to the cost of the camera just to equip it where you can use it on a production (cages, batteries, etc.).

If someone is price conscious and they are asking me for a camera recommendation, I usually suggest that they pick up a GH5, Fuji XT3, or one of the Sony cams, like the 6400. Those will get you shooting video basically right out of the box, with minimal extra expenditures.

I believe that the point that @Kisaha was trying to make (and I agree) is that the cost of the camera is small relative to the rest of the gear necessary to do more professional work (sound & lighting can be expensive too, Skypanels are almost $6K each...). I have a silly amount of money tied up in gear to do what we do, and I am not running around with crazy expensive cameras like some of the bigger budget productions use (movies). I think that we are all looking for gear that gives us great quality images at affordable prices.

I mention the price difference because people complained about the P6K being $1,200 - You can take that anyway you want but if people are complain they the p6K is too expensive then that's what I take it has.  

Not sure why you turn this into a "they should probably not buy the P4K, P6K, any of the Z-Cams, etc. anyway."  That's not my point.  My point was once you buy a speed booster for the P4K the price becomes closer to the P6K.  The P4K owners leave out the added cost and time spent getting the right glass. 

Nothin in my comments or the following were ever about total gear and gear production cost. This is the reach people do the their post falls apart. You could say the same about the P6K in that it's cost is so low that it's not an issue. 

And you will be able to use an adaptor on the P6K, it's a matter of time. 

https://www.diyphotography.net/the-lucadapters-magicboost-will-let-your-blackmagic-pocket-6k-shoot-full-frame-raw-video-with-ef-lenses/?utm_source=jjd933d&fbclid=IwAR35DA-tmUN-TYFQwJ3ICyUhVXJ5SJZqpjO85Vmt1XJnBhl_P9inUNuNO94

13 minutes ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

I would argue that with a proper cage that has support for hard mounting a booster, the cine locking EF (or PL I suppose) booster actually makes the P4K MORE of a cinema camera than the P6K would ever be.

Please explain. ^^^

And what happens when the P6K get a speed boaster to shoot full frame?  

ZCam has already built the APS-C and Fullframe models.  M43 with it's little adaptors and small sensor if getting left behind by the same companies that everyone thought would champion them. 

[drm]

9 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

And you will be able to use an adaptor on the P6K, it's a matter of time. 

https://www.diyphotography.net/the-lucadapters-magicboost-will-let-your-blackmagic-pocket-6k-shoot-full-frame-raw-video-with-ef-lenses/?utm_source=jjd933d&fbclid=IwAR35DA-tmUN-TYFQwJ3ICyUhVXJ5SJZqpjO85Vmt1XJnBhl_P9inUNuNO94

The sensor on the P6K is smaller than the one in the Ursa 4.6, so maybe that will work on the P6K. Thanks for letting me know about that option. That is something to watch. I would be sad that I could no longer use my Sigma 18-35 or the Canon 17-55 after installing the adapter, but that does sound like an interesting option.

[Caleb Genheimer]

Explanation: Bolt this to a P4K cage: 

https://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BTB

Fullframe EF Cine Mount camera. Better than a normal EF mount. End of story. It just is.

The LucAdapter will be the closest thing for the P6K by making it fullframe, but it still doesn’t give you a locking cinema mount. You’re stuck with the bog-standard EF mount on that camera thanks to BlackMagic.

[JordanWright]

3 hours ago, Skip77 said:

The P6K will do better in low light. This happens when you move up to a bigger sensor. The P6K also has better processor and gives you upgrades across the board in what it can produce.  Yes the P6K and P4K can work perfect together and that's great. 

This is incorrect. A larger sensor doesn't mean better low light.

3 hours ago, Skip77 said:

The P6K gives you a full frame look right out of the box compared to the P4K. 

There is no such thing as the full frame look. 

[Skip77]

10 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

This is incorrect. A larger sensor doesn't mean better low light.

There is no such thing as the full frame look. 

You know what I was talking about. And you know people have asked if it was possible on the P6K.

And the jump up from m43 to APS-C and then full frame sensors does give you better low light abilities most of the time.  Look at the Gh5 to Gh5s and them the A7SII and the new mirrorless S1 and Z6 over the GH5.  

You act like the P6K will be a step down from the P4K with sped booster.  You either have a P4K, GH5 or just want to talk down the P6K APS-C sensor vs M43.  

[thephoenix]

1 hour ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

The LucAdapter will be the closest thing for the P6K by making it fullframe

it doesn't make it fullframe, please

it doesn't changes the sensor as far as i know

 

[Skip77]

All you GH5 and P4K m43 users are talking smack about the P6K and that's bizarre because it's in the same P4K family.  It's not like this is a rival company and you're trying to advise people to go with the P4K.  

This P6K is a win win for everyone. 

Just now, thephoenix said:

it doesn't make it fullframe, please

it doesn't changes the sensor as far as i know

 

What?  But using a sped boaster in the P4K makes it APS-C or Super 35?  You lost your mind if you're arguing about semantics. 

[thephoenix]

call it whatever you want, just shocks me when i see people saying it "makes it ff". it just doesn't

 

[Skip77]

5 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

call it whatever you want, just shocks me when i see people saying it "makes it ff". it just doesn't

 

They also say makes it "super 35".  Right?  

[JordanWright]

17 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

You know what I was talking about. And you know people have asked if it was possible on the P6K.

And the jump up from m43 to APS-C and then full frame sensors does give you better low light abilities most of the time.  Look at the Gh5 to Gh5s and them the A7SII and the new mirrorless S1 and Z6 over the GH5.  

You act like the P6K will be a step down from the P4K with sped booster.  You either have a P4K, GH5 or just want to talk down the P6K APS-C sensor vs M43.  

No, A larger sensor doesn't give you better low light performance... but I don't think its worth arguing with you.

And untrue: I don't think P6K is a step down. If I didn't already have a camera, it might be the one I would choose

[Skip77]

Just now, JordanWright said:

No, A larger sensor doesn't give you better low light performance... but I don't think its worth arguing with you.

And untrue: I don't think P6K is a step down. If I didn't already have a camera, it might be the one I would choose

I'm not arguing with you. I'm going by the low light performance being better from m43 to APS-C to Full frame sensor over the last two years.  

So you're saying the GH5 just has bad low light performance for no reason? That it was just an oversight by Panasonic and that they just some how improved it with the Gh5S?  Please post proof because I'm not taking your word for it. The trend in related cameras with the sensors above say other wise. 

[mercer]

The GH5s has better lowlight because it is a lower MP sensor than the GH5 and it has dual iso.

But to be fair, if all things were equal, including lens speed, the larger sensor would probably be better in lowlight.

[Caleb Genheimer]

It’s a step down for your wallet, that’s indisputable.

I would absolutely dispute any claim that it’s an objectively better camera. Both cameras are EXTREMELY similar. There are subjective reasons that someone might prefer either camera. The question potential buyers will be asking is, “are those subjective reasons important enough to me to justify the higher price tag?” 

For me, it is definitely not. If I want a camera compatible with EF full-frame image circle lenses, I’ll just get a cine speedbooster for the P4K. It really is that simple from my perspective.

I actually see the 6K as little more than a spec sheet bragging number. Seriously, for almost all practical work (that I do), 4K is more than enough. Anything more just means bigger files.

If you do work that simply MUST have 6K Raw, by all means, nobody is stopping you. Get the P6K. The difference between APSC and Micro 4/3 is honestly pretty negligible.

Any claims of it having less noise or better dynamic range due to its sensor are COMPLETE and utter conjecture. I’ll believe it when I see real tests, and according to all the press per BM, the DR is exactly the same.

It is 2019. The concept that 6K APSC versus 4K M4/3 is a HUGE deal radical difference (all else being equal) is honestly not only laughable, but potentially bad consumer advice. They’re just different, and both are a steal compared to anything else in the market. 

I guess I should apologize for voicing my honest opinion on the pros/cons of these two cameras. I didn’t realize this was supposed to be the blind circle-jerk thread.