The video that shows Blackmagic Pocket 4K RAW image quality is same as GH5S 400Mbit

[Mmmbeats]

How about something like Cineform rather than ProRes?  Would that be cheaper to implement?  I use it as an intermediate codec and it's great (supposedly better image quality than ProRes).

[Attila Bakos]

55 minutes ago, hyalinejim said:

I use 2 instances of OpenColorIO in AE, then pop it back to VLog and use a custom lut I designed for Gh5 VLog based on Portra 400. 

It means I can make WB and exposure adjustments in ACES where AE's legacy brightness control +15 = 1 stop and CC Color Offset does global WB. Then it's back to VLog, then my lut. It's a bit cumbersome so I only do it when I'm feeling fancy. I haven't yet found a way of doing accurate corrections to VLog in Rec709 space.

So it's not a fully ACES compliant workflow, but the ability to make accurate corrections when in ACES space...

To anyone wondering about exposure controllers in Resolve:
You can use the offset wheel in ACES, it's very close to a true exposure controller, but only in ACES.
In normal Davinci YRGB mode you can linearize the clip using the Color Space Transform plugin, and once in linear mode you just grab the top right part of the curves and grab it along the top or right border. Because you're in linear mode this will be simple multiplication, so it's an easy way to control exposure. Then you use the same plugin to convert back to log.

[Anaconda_]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The H.264 or H.265 files can be edited in any NLE, you are not pushed into Resolve like with BRAW

Blackmagic also released a plugin that lets you use Braw in Premiere. They didn't have to do that, and I think it's that approach that brings a lot of business. Their short comings are well documented, but they added higher frame rates, anamorphic modes and a bunch more in a free update for all. Not to mention Resolve seems to get free updates for life. Meanwhile Panasonic ask for a couple hundred bucks for Log profiles and Nikon are even worse, you need to pay them and send them your camera for a few weeks. Then you also need a 3rd party recorder to get raw, which locks you into FCPx, so only good if you're on Apple.

That's also what drew me to Fuji - adding 4k to the X-Pro2 gave me confidence in them. They're not about to ditch the customer, release the same camera as a 4k model and cash in.

 

[Andrew Reid]

4 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

Blackmagic also released a plugin that lets you use Braw in Premiere. They didn't have to do that, and I think it's that approach that brings a lot of business. Their short comings are well documented, but they added higher frame rates, anamorphic modes and a bunch more in a free update for all. Not to mention Resolve seems to get free updates for life. Meanwhile Panasonic ask for a few hundred for Log profiles and Nikon are even worse, you need to pay them and send them your camera for a few weeks. Then you also need a 3rd party recorder to get raw.

That's also what drew me to Fuji - adding 4k to the X-Pro2 gave me confidence in them. They're not about to ditch the customer, release the same camera as a 4k model and cash in.

 

Yup, a lot of positives to the Blackmagic approach. The good stuff is really good. Resolve, love it. ProRes, RAW, for those prices - amazing.

But I never shoot with my Blackmagic Pocket 4K and sent the 6K back.

Just not reliable enough, or ergonomic, or feature rich enough, compared to mirrorless cameras - and no full frame option either.

[Anaconda_]

25 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

But I never shoot with my Blackmagic Pocket 4K and sent the 6K back.

Just not reliable enough, or ergonomic, or feature rich enough, compared to mirrorless cameras

Fair enough. I much prefer how and where the buttons and grip are in my hand on a P4k compared to XT3. In fact the XT3 often has too many buttons and dials. One thing it doesn't have though, is a dedicated rec and stills button. Interestingly, the P4k does - so you don't need to keep switching between modes!

As for reliability, QC is for sure an area BMD should focus on, and it's a shame you're not so happy with yours. I've not had any problems with my camera and find it very reliable for both on the run street shooting and studio work. I choose to use my own P4k way more than the studio's FS5, and thanks to Braw and dual ISO, I also use it more than their UM4.6k.

[SteveV4D]

4 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Some good points here and all valid.

Colour science with RAW is easy to get right straight off the bat, with V-LOG or any LOG for that matter, it's easy to mishandle it. Put wrong LUT on and it's going to look terrible compared to RAW on default settings in Resolve.

I don't agree colour science is lacking in V-LOG or BT.2100 though. Very wide gamut, and the Vari-Cam it's based on won tons of plaudits for colour.

I also much prefer the Rec.709 colour styles on the GH5 and GH5S to Sony's, much nicer skintones and more natural.

Equally there are valid reasons to choose Pocket 4K, there are valid reasons to choose GH5 or GH5S instead. So it depends on needs of the shooter.

• The H.264 or H.265 files can be edited in any NLE, you are not pushed into Resolve like with BRAW
• Really well specced Anamorphic mode
• Articulated screen
• Built in EVF
• IBIS on the GH5
• Battery life
• Reliability
• Media is cheaper if you select the lower bitrate codecs or 8bit
• The stills side / hybrid use
• Better physical controls (I do agree menus are better on Blackmagic, a little over-complicated on the Panasonic but you do get used to it)
• Much more fully featured

I do not like to rig my small cameras up very much so adding EVF to Pocket 4K is not for me, really.

I would say with the Blackmagic you are getting a good image, a good codec, and a big screen with excellent menus (apart from the fact it's barely visible in day light), but everything else about the camera is as cheap and uninspired as you can get, especially how power hungry it is. A sensor in a box really, as far as ergonomics go.

Blackmagic need to up their game with the small cameras.

All Panasonic need to do is develop a good compressed RAW codec with sensible file sizes and 12bit image quality, and license ProRes for internal recording, absorb the costs into the increased price of the GH6 and it'll be a total winner that blows Blackmagic away.

ProRes and RAW are the main reasons people shoot Blackmagic.

Take those a way and why do it?

I agree Panasonic colour science is better than Sony. But it is not as good as Blackmagic.  Honestly I like the image more on Blackmagic, and that counts a lot.  Why do many choose Canon even though their features are 2nd rate compared to Panasonic.  Colour and image.  Same for Blackmagic.

I never use the EVF on the Panasonic cameras. Weird, but I don't.

I am grateful for Blackmagic for taking me from Premiere to Resolve.. so very grateful.  That free copy with my Pocket 4K has done more for me than  any other camera.  I dipped into Premiere recently and was shocked by how slow it was.  I've used it for over a decade before moving to Resolve this year and it's been the best decision in my career.

Don't use Anamorphic.

Media is cheaper, but SD cards are fragile.  One SSD drive and a few CFast cards isn't too expensive and so much better to use.

Battery life is better on the GH5, but I rig my Pocket 4K mostly and I use just 2 Sony fp70batteries for a single day shoot.  A lot better than the half dozen I used for the GH5.

Don't shoot stills for the most part.

And the tilting screen is something I have managed to live without, which surprises me, but yes, it isn't as important as I once gave it credit.

My Pocket 4k is very reliable. And I've had failures with my GH5 and GH5s, with both  stopping recording and locking up on the odd occasion. 

Seriously, I switch to GH5 when I need IBIS and the extra features, but not as often as I once thought I would.  

I spent years trying to find the right grade for my Panasonic and it still isn't as good as the one I get from the Blackmagic from the very start.  I just love the image.  It's beautiful.  Panasonic is great, but lacks something.  Just my opinion.

If Panaonic were to add RAW and improve their colour science a little more, I agree, I would probably make that my primary camera.  But I'm still waiting on that.

[Andrew Reid]

Yes all valid reasons of course.

Might have to start challenging Pocket 4K / 6K users to a V-LOG vs BRAW grading competition though

[eleison]

15 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Yes all valid reasons of course.

Might have to start challenging Pocket 4K / 6K users to a V-LOG vs BRAW grading competition though

Well, if both cameras are using the same sensor, and BRAW is closer to RAW (from what I hear, it's raw after the debayering) then the Pocket 4k/ 6K is going to win.  The question is by how much (is it a lot or a little)? and if it is worth the BRAW workflow? but from many people, I hear the workflow is not cumbersome and rather efficient and easy to work with. SoooooOOoooo.. perhaps, I am missing something?

[Deadcode]

16 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Yes all valid reasons of course.

Might have to start challenging Pocket 4K / 6K users to a V-LOG vs BRAW grading competition though

JSFilmz did a few comparisons, and you can find the original files in the comments.

It's takes about 5 minutes to match the VLOG to BRAW. GH5s is less noisy due to the internal NR, and you can't do better in post with the BRAW. 

He praises the BMPCC4K/6K, but he dont have to required colorgrading skill. However the BM is better looking straight out of camera.

[Andrew Reid]

A little bit better, but whoops where's my EVF and stills camera gone

?why bother?

He has compared BMPCC 6K to S1H as well

Original files for download are 12GB

[eleison]

20 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

A little bit better, but whoops where's my EVF and stills camera gone

?why bother?

Costs...  Pocket 4k is still cheaper than the gh5s.  Also, if you are comparing it to the S1H; you can get the EVF and stills camera by additionally buying a used a7iii, and you will still be paying about the same price as a S1H. 

Also, when the gh5s first came out, it was arround $2.5k.  Instead of buying an a7iii, buy an a6000 plus the pocket 4k - this would be about the same price.

Cost is always a concern, and the pocket 4k is well priced (hence the msrp hasnt dropped since release).

[Andrew Reid]

S1H is full frame. Let's not forget the sensor size. Full frame cameras are more expensive for a reason.

Low light also far better on the S1H.

Lenses more affordable. You can put a nice Contax Zeiss or Canon FD prime on there. No Speed Booster. No expensive native glass or vintage c-mount lenses required.

You need to add a proper battery, a screen visible in daylight and maybe an EVF, cage, etc. to Pocket 4K, so it's not even cheaper than a GH5S.

I just bought a used GH5S for £1200 in good condition.

But with Micro Four Thirds you need very expensive glass to make it look like an S1H with a £200 SLR lens from the 70's.

S1H has IBIS of course

I'd say it's worth the extra over both.

Again I am not really seeing where the Pocket cameras are so much better as people claim. It's mostly hype.

[Mokara]

23 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Well, since I am getting back into my GH5 / GH5S, I'll be doing my own tests but it's not looking good for the Blackmagic.

Is 10bit LOG at 400Mbit ALL-I all most of us ever need? What is the point of sacrificing so many features, battery life, and so much ergonomic niceness for a Pocket 4K?

Because it is Blackmagic dammit! Did you not look at their superior marketing? Was it all wasted?

[Julien416]

35 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Again I am not really seeing where the Pocket cameras are so much better as people claim. It's mostly hype.

Most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between those two cameras if there was not an A/B comparison.  

People are arguing about invisible sharpening - that can be desharpened, maybe 1/3 of a stop of DR and easily matchable color science. 

Most people are just rooting for brand loyalty reasons. And to comfort for own decisions to buy to buy this camera or the other one. For the rest of the world, the image coming out from those 2 is exactly the same. 

[eleison]

58 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

S1H is full frame. Let's not forget the sensor size. Full frame cameras are more expensive for a reason.

Low light also far better on the S1H.

Lenses more affordable. You can put a nice Contax Zeiss or Canon FD prime on there. No Speed Booster. No expensive native glass or vintage c-mount lenses required.

You need to add a proper battery, a screen visible in daylight and maybe an EVF, cage, etc. to Pocket 4K, so it's not even cheaper than a GH5S.

I just bought a used GH5S for £1200 in good condition.

But with Micro Four Thirds you need very expensive glass to make it look like an S1H with a £200 SLR lens from the 70's.

S1H has IBIS of course

I'd say it's worth the extra over both.

Again I am not really seeing where the Pocket cameras are so much better as people claim. It's mostly hype.

.. but yet sales of the S1H lags behind the pocket 4k.  imho, most people who buy the pocket 4k, don't buy because of hype.  They know what they are doing.  They are not  "rebel canon buyers" who buys because of brand.

Everyone has a budget.  If I was an arri alexa owner, I can say "who cares about mirrorless cameras?  S1H, pocket 4k, etc.. Arri has 14 stops, 16bit, 150fps"..  At some point people say this is my budget, and I'm willing to live with the features (or lack of features); but no more.  Perhaps the extra $500 is something they didn't want to pay to get a new GH5s.  Or perhaps they just really like BRAW.  I don't know.  One would have to do a survey to get a more accurate picture.

For me, the pocket 4k is a better camera for the price.  Even if GH5s had the same flexibility in editing (which I'm not totally convinced of), the pocket 4k is still cheaper than a new GH5s. 

Another thing that would be interesting to find out is who has a larger marketing budget?  Panasonic or Blackmagic?  I suspect Panasonic.

[kye]

9 hours ago, Attila Bakos said:

It's likely that I see this differently than most people. I don't have a Panasonic camera but I build IDT's, among other stuff, so small differences matter to me a lot.

Ah, I misread your comment and thought you were calling BS in the other direction lol.

Yes, if you're putting a priority on accuracy then the IDTs don't work.  I tried both and confirmed it for myself some time ago.  Taking two clips in HLG and exposing them one stop apart, then bringing them into Resolve, taking one of them and doing an X to Linear conversion, scaling up the brightness, then converting Linear to X again.  I tried every combination of X I could find (2100, 2020, etc) with each way to raise the luma (Offset, curves, Gain, etc) and no combination was a perfect match.

In the end I realised that many of the conversions were similar, thus my earlier comments about log profiles being similar.

When I finally wrapped my head around the idea that grading isn't about accuracy, it's about what looks nice, then I stopped worrying about profiles.  Many professional / high-end colourists don't bother with CST / ACES / RCM and just take the log files and adjust colour balance with LGG, adjust contrast and primaries and are done, often only taking 10-20s per shot for the bulk of the work before starting the polishing and 'look' adjustments.

5 hours ago, Attila Bakos said:

To anyone wondering about exposure controllers in Resolve:
You can use the offset wheel in ACES, it's very close to a true exposure controller, but only in ACES.
In normal Davinci YRGB mode you can linearize the clip using the Color Space Transform plugin, and once in linear mode you just grab the top right part of the curves and grab it along the top or right border. Because you're in linear mode this will be simple multiplication, so it's an easy way to control exposure. Then you use the same plugin to convert back to log.

Instead of doing a CST -> adjustment -> CST can you just use a single node and set the CS of the node (it's in the menu you get via right-clicking the node) and would it do the same thing?  My understanding is that the CST is simply a user interface to the same RCM functionality that applies to clips in the media pool, timelines, etc..  

I've been meaning to try it, but just never got around to it.  It would save a lot of time and simplify the node structure somewhat.

[Video Hummus]

1 hour ago, Julien416 said:

People are arguing about invisible sharpening - that can be desharpened, maybe 1/3 of a stop of DR and easily matchable color science.

I know. We are all insane.

And these are $2000 investments. Not 25K or 100K cinema cameras.

In a world were 80% of people consume content on 6.7” phone screens on average.

Maybe we are out of touch. Time for another low budget camera challenge.

1 hour ago, eleison said:

Another thing that would be interesting to find out is who has a larger marketing budget?  Panasonic or Blackmagic?  I suspect Panasonic.

You wouldn’t know it ?

[IronFilm]

12 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

I don’t think their will be another MFT BM camera.

I disagree, because smaller sensors always will get future new specs first at a lower cost. 

Which is what interests BMD, I expect/hope there will in the future be more MFT sensors with something special at a low cost which catches BMD's eye and they investigate building a camera around. 

Additionally, I keep on holding out hope BMD will realise the brilliance of combining S35 with MFT mount! Imagine a BMPCC6K MFT or URSA Mini 4.6K MFT?? ? (bonus points if it is a locking MFT mount!)
 

12 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

I have a GH5S. It’s a great camera. I do wish Panasonic would have payed more attention to it to make it more competitive, feature wise. The sensor is clearly capable of a bit more since it shares the same sensor in the P4K, Terra4K, Zcam E2...

I think however, it being built on top of the GH5 platform and not given more leg room put it at a disadvantage.

I wonder if the new generation of Panasonic MFT might follow the lead of what Panasonic did with the L Mount. 

A Panasnic GH6 would be like a S1H, a massive bulky body (the biggest MFT has ever seen from Panasonic) with a tonne of amazing features packed into it. 

While the Panasonic G9mk2 would be like the S1, a solid "pro" body but still kept to reasonable small/portable size just like the G9/GH5 is today, and the G9mk2 would have all the features of the GH5 plus whatever they can squeeze in from the GH6 while keeping the body still as small and compact as it was before. 

[Video Hummus]

22 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Additionally, I keep on holding out hope BMD will realise the brilliance of combining S35 with MFT mount!

I don’t think we will see anything smaller than S35 from BM.

But to be honest the sensor in the P4K is chasing the coat tails of being a S35 sensor.

JVC did it quite well. You might get lucky!

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

Would they though if the GH5S offered internal ProRes and a CFExpress card from the outset? I would have definitely (still) bought GH5S if it had that. I think that is where they messed up. People are willing to pay extra for it. They aren’t willing to pay extra for less, unless something is really important to them. They should have added things like false colors and a better vector scope. Punch in while recording...but they couldn’t because they were limited with the GH5 processing engine. Why didn’t they include 4K60p 10-bit?

GH5S was a death by a thousand cuts. Market wise. It’s a great camera at its current price.

Hopefully they fix these problems in the GH6.

Andrew is right. They should just pay the license fee and offer the internal ProRes or some compressed RAW. It’s time. Does ProRes HQ offer superior quality over Panasonic’s 400Mbit ALL-I? Probably not much. Definitely not for the storage increase, but it sure does speed up workflow, which is the most cost effective thing you can improve. That extra $250 license fee Panasonic made you pay will be paid off real quick.

Does it cost $250/camera to include ProRes though?? I very highly doubt it!

Otherwise a BMPCC with ProRes could not have been sold for $500!
 

7 hours ago, eleison said:

Costs...  Pocket 4k is still cheaper than the gh5s.  Also, if you are comparing it to the S1H; you can get the EVF and stills camera by additionally buying a used a7iii, and you will still be paying about the same price as a S1H. 

Also, when the gh5s first came out, it was arround $2.5k.  Instead of buying an a7iii, buy an a6000 plus the pocket 4k - this would be about the same price.

Cost is always a concern, and the pocket 4k is well priced (hence the msrp hasnt dropped since release).

Don't think most people would want to mix E Mount and MFT systems together. 

A better analogy would be to say:

Instead of a Panasonic GH5S, a person could for only a few hundred dollars more buy a BMPCC4K *AND* Panasonic G9. 

You'd then also have a camera with the G9 which is much better for stills than the GH5S, while also having a very able (even more so now!) B Cam to your A Cam BMPCC4K.