Andrew Reid

Embedded it for easier viewing (Just cut and paste vimeo url)

At least they got Tidying Up With Marie Kondo (Season One) https://ymcinema.com/2020/01/13/the-cameras-behind-43-best-netflix-original-tv-shows-of-2019/?fbclid=IwAR2y_Qf7aYSbLNz7L5Dj7CemB7oB528TUBFc77SI1amGl81UftSthduUT9o Are high-end shooters looking elsewhere in 2019? Looks like it. C300 II has been a flop? Looks like it. Will C500 II change things? Not without ProRes or a better raw codec. C700? Nah. RED and Arri just seem much more attractive at the moment for filmmakers...

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.

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

Yes all valid reasons of course. Might have to start challenging Pocket 4K / 6K users to a V-LOG vs BRAW grading competition though

Have watched entire video now and the bit about the Contax 35-70mm F3.5 Check out these shots from it. A multi-talented lens if ever I saw one and still quite compact & lightweight. And last but not least the 15mm F3.5 got to be worth a look as well judging by the character of this shot...

Maybe that is the reason!! Or maybe Sony's skintones put people off buying in the first place and they end up with a Blackmagic.

Nobody is denying you can't make a Sony image look great. But you said it yourself - other brands straight out of camera colour is superior. In terms of content, composition, production values yes. But not in the case of Straight Out Of Camera colour where there's nothing for the user to do - stick it on default, no grading - the same shot A/B on Fuji vs Sony will be superior looking SOOC on the Fuji, as it will be Canon vs Sony also, and many others. If I knew no better and just shot with the Standard creative style or Cine2, I would not be getting anywhere near as flattering skintones as I would be with a Fuji, Canon or Olympus. I bet you anything the majority of A7 III users don't shoot video with an exotic mix of settings and when they use S-LOG, well, just look at the average grade on Vimeo and that tells you everything about how challenging that is to get right. I remember well when S-LOG first came out how much awful sick and dead looking subjects there were shot with the Sony cameras. These days, people have learnt to grade, people have tons of quality LUTs to choose from, so that's a positive. But at no point did Sony help us out. If anything Sony makes cameras that get in the way too often.

Wonder what this one is like? Nice range on it https://www.shphoto.de/carl-zeiss-f-contax-rts-3-3-4-5-35-135mm-vario-sonnar-t-mmj.html

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.

Looks good. https://phillipreeve.net/blog/carl-zeiss-vario-sonnar-t-c-y-35-70mm-f3-4-a-review/ Parfocal as well?

Have you seen how much free open source software is in a Japanese camera? Maybe it is a mindset... Software not important. Hardware important. Won't pay for software, got to do it on the cheap. Panasonic should talk to Apple and RED, and simply pass costs onto customer. I'd happily pay a bit more for ProRes and REDcode in GH6. H.264 was always seen as a consumer or streaming codec. It is terrible marketing. A ProRes badge on box immediately talks to creatives and pros... And besides more importantly it's a great codec, easy to edit, smooth, brilliant image quality.

Will add the Fp now! This is the most surprising thing for me. As surprising as lack of Olympus attention is sad. Sony aren't as popular (at least with the active registered users here) as thought. Maybe there are a lot of Sony lurkers. Shows Blackmagic's power of marketing and lure of ProRes and RAW. Market it as a cinema camera, sell it cheap, put ProRes and RAW in it.... And you have a winner, doesn't matter if camera itself is basic.

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?

Early days of 2020 and the poll but here are the manufacturer popularity tallies so far: Panasonic 37 Fuji 24 Sony 15 Blackmagic 15 Canon 15 Nikon 9 Pro cinema cameras 6 Other 4 Leica (SL series only) 2 Olympus 0 Pentax 0 I think it is interesting the split between Canon / Blackmagic / Sony all on 15 Canon have lost the most to these two. They should be out front in video on 40+ I am surprised Sony is not a bit higher but it was the case with the last survey as well. I think Sony lose users to Blackmagic for the better codec and Canon for the better colour. The real success story is Fuji who would have been on zero in the X-T1 days. What a turn around for video. It's sad to see Olympus on 0 and a bit surprising, because E-M1 II / E-M10 III are great filmmaking tools at bargain prices. I suppose Micro Four Thirds shooters find it a doozy to go with Panasonic instead if they want video specs. UPDATE: Added Panasonic GH5S and RED cameras to poll

Yes. The idea is not to keep updating it. How often do Arri change their colour science? Once you get it working, once you get it looking beautiful, there is no need to keep tweaking it. Sony had it right in 2008 then fucked it up and tweaked it for past 8 years to the point where it's only 10% better than the fuck up. Honestly head should roll, but just like they doggedly stick to the same broken menu system, it seems they stand by their failures in people management too. My reading of the situation, is that most people are attracted to Sony by the high-specs. I am sure they have more enthusiast usage than pro for stills. I think most stills pros are on Canon / Nikon / Leica. If you buy a stills camera for the high specs you are not going to care about JPEG very much. You are going to care about the raw files, and have ample skill in Lightroom to do what you like to the colour and dynamic range. In video, it's a different story and you are at the mercy of the image processor to a much higher degree. It has to be right. I have had lovely results from Sony's cameras because they at least afford us a great control over the picture profiles, gamma modes, colour gamuts, etc. and enable us to mix up the settings to patch over any shortcomings in the default ones... of which there are legion. But it is still the case that my 1D C beats it every time for skintones and teal / orange shooting where you want to maintain a nice emphasis on warm and cool tones in a single frame. The auto white balance is also far better. I will do a comparison between the 1D C, Leica SL2 and Sony A7 III soon which proves there is a big difference in the ways the cameras handle colour and WB. The good thing like I said above is that Sony is not shy about giving us a lot of settings to play with. When you have the Minolta colour science to compare with (Sony A900), a Leica SL2 and a 1D C, or even an Alexa, you have the best industry reference for colour science in the world to act as a guide. This is what makes EOSHD Pro Color possible, so thank you Sony for allowing us all those complex options to diddle with while I compare. On the other hand if you are a non-technical shooter with a great eye and a job to do, but no time to diddle around and not a high level of nerd ability and nerd patience, are you going to have a spare 100's of hours to test settings or even the benchmark cameras to compare to? I don't think so. You just want the damn camera to deliver out of the box effortlessly like your last one did. If I were the latter, I would not let a Sony mirrorless camera within a yard of my shoot. It would be Leica SL2, Fuji GFX, or Canon 1D X III all day long.

It's not just the hours put in to videos like this, it's the effort and skill. I love it when someone at the top of their game gives something back to the community and builds a channel with this kind of quality. It is much easier to just talk in front of a slideshow like the Northrups then have a jolly expenses paid trip to Hawaii.

I had to snap that up. Good find mate Now I am waiting for my Fp to arrive. Sent the previous one back, and bought it for £1650 inc. 45mm F2.8. Yes, it may be an import. But if it breaks I can fly out, get it repaired in Japan, have a holiday, and still be £100 up vs the ridiculous UK price Hopefully we will see some juicy firmware updates soon including Sigma-LOG Or they might just call it V-LOG and nick it from Panasonic

A lot of cards yeild very weird benchmark results for write speeds. I find some V60 and even V90 cards get fragmented and lose 50% of their performance, making for laggy start/stop in 400Mbit/s ALL-I, slower buffering of stills and premature recording end sometimes too. This is one of the more weirder benchmarks https://alikgriffin.com/best-memory-cards-panasonic-gh5/ Then another test might be totally different (depends if video related or stills) https://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/panasonic-gh5/fastest-sd-cards/ So take all stuff like this with heavy pinch of salt. I'd recommend buying a range of cards and sending back the ones that don't perform after 1-2 weeks of intensive testing. Only then can you be sure you're getting value for money and reliability. I found the chart at the bottom of this article quite useful though. It also tests sustained random write speeds not just sequential. https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-sd-cards/

I can only guess most Sony shooters don't shoot much JPEG. The problem for us video shooters is our colour and white balance are baked in... yes even in S-LOG to some degree. And that is a pain enough to grade, so if I want immediate impact and the complete image, wonderful skintones etc. from a Sony, I have to spend hours experimenting with 100's of combinations of settings in the creative styles, picture profiles, and white balance menus. I don't mind, if Pro Color is the result. But don't you find it slightly ridiculous that Sony with all their billions can't get it right after 8 years of trying? And they change the damn colour science with almost every camera, there is ZERO consistency. They are also very inconsistent between different kinds of subject. And by the way let's not get too excited about Sony's sales. It is still a dramatically shrinking camera market overall, it's just Sony now has a greater slice of the smaller pie compared to 10 years ago. Every Sony shooter should pick up an old full frame 24 megapixel A900 for $400 and see how much better things were in the Sony-Minolta days of 2008

Rare set available on eBay... A snip at £70,000 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Arri-Zeiss-Super-Speed-MK3-T1-3-PL-Mount-Lens-Set-of-5-Lenses/274130508235?hash=item3fd37399cb:g:C30AAOSw7bZd6qN-

An interesting watch from Media Division: Zeiss Super Speeds vs Contax Zeiss Literally hours and hours poured into a video like this. The total opposite of the Northrups.

Is that Mt Fuji?

The great thing is, Speed Booster GH5S outperforms the 6K EF Pocket in low light as well. Unless you can get one of Luca's rather nice Magic Boosters. Who's for a GH5/GH5S Shooter's Guide?

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?