jbCinC_12

Heard good things about the Firecrest
There are still some kinks to iron out. So I'm gonna wait til next year for next production P4K. By then, there will be a ton of advice / workarounds for some of its problems. No rush to buy unless you really need that Blackmagic RAW.

Sorry pals but complaints on IR pollution and vignetting?! Are you kidding me?  When we all know there's no OLPF there as so many other cameras?! Use a filter and stop the nonsense please : )
BTW is this the first time you've seen this one here? ; -)
 

Canon 24-70mm f/4 on the 5D Mark III. Processed through Resolve using its basic Rec709 conversion in the Raw Tab and then some curve adjustments...

Sorry that isn't mine (I wish it was).  This is someone else's.

Another low light test from the P4K

"Blackmagic Pocket 4K's ISO10,000 still usable? Yes, with Neat Video.
The noise level in ISO10,000 from the new Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K is as noisy as ISO3200 from the Panasonic GH5. The best part about the Pocket 4K's HFR is that there are no signs of banding. Keep in mind that in ProRes, even in 120fps, it is still 10-bit."
source:
https://vimeo.com/294680968
 

Your comment has lead me to think a bit more about slow-motion.  The below isn't directed at you, just inspired by you
I think the topic of slow-motion is an interesting one.  I agree that it is over-used and especially over-used in camera tests and on YouTube where people are failing over each other to try and make their footage more cinematic instead of making it more creative / useful / interesting / etc.
I have my camera setup with three modes - one is 25p, one is 50p, and one is 180p.  I don't think of them like that though, I think of them for the aesthetic that they will give to the footage they will create.
I shoot home videos, and my goal is to make a video file with the aesthetic of fond memories.  This means things can be slightly warmer, softer, nicer, more flattering, and less real than reality actually is.  Also, because the brain doesn't process memories in linear time (think of memories of loved ones, a toddler running around, someone giving someone a hug, etc..  you can easily slow these down in your minds eye, in fact, often we slow and almost stop memories, like they're not a continuous stream of perception but little bubbles of moments) so speed and slow motion in my work are far more flexible, and far more compatible than most other genres.
I think of 25p as reality.  "Here's what happened".  Shots like this are about content alone, where the emotion isn't going to dominate.  I can slow these down in post but it's not as good.
I think of 50p as flexible.  I can slow it down to half speed or play it back at normal speed.  Normal speed will look like video, which I'm fine with, and slow-motion is slow and slightly dreamy but doesn't look fake.  Hollywood uses 50p for the shots when emotions are at the forefront, there is action, and they have music instead of real-life sound (eg, someone is sad and they're running away from their troubles, someone is happy and things are great, etc).  It's kind of makes fast motion gentle but doesn't look like a special effect.
I think of 180p as a special effect.  It's very obvious as a special effect, and even with modern cameras you lose quality so should only use this on things where you want that effect - it's not a flexible mode.  For me this would be for very fast action and because a 3s shot in the edit will represent less than half a second of real-life it's about moments, rather than a sequence of events.  I think of this as almost like 'moving photographs'.  This is where we think of things like a kid running and making all the birds take off, and a photographer would get the shot with the kid running, smiling and the birds going everywhere, in this mode we can use the same moment but we can savour that 0.4 of a second over several seconds in the final edit, along with nice music.
I'll reiterate that most people over-use it, and we should be critical of it being over-used, but the criticism shouldn't be that it's not needed, the criticism should be that it's being applied where it is not aesthetically useful to do so.  While this isn't as dramatic as taking the opposite stance of 'always/never' thinking, it's actually more cutting because we're not criticising the use of a camera feature, we're criticising the offenders ability to know how to make art, which is ultimately the most significant criticism that can be made I think.

It doesn't have half the features of the GH5/GH5s,  It has different features. Taking the photo side of the GH5 out of the equation, I would say the pocket has more features for video. If you need a hybrid camera obviously the P4K is the wrong choice.
 
I really don't understand this way of thinking. When shooting video, the GH5s only really has AF and a tilt-able screen up it's sleeve compared to the Pocket4k (and better battery life). Yes, AF is handy for shooting home videos, and yes, I wish the Pocket4k had a tiltable screen but to call it a useless camera is pretty silly. I've used it in a run n gun situation with zero accessories and more than happy with the results. How do you get to $3000? Add a $100 monopod, a $180 AndyCine a6 and an NP-F battery (the andycine can power the P4K) or 4 more LP-E6N batteries and you have a run n gun package that will be better than any IBIS can provide. A monopod is the most underrated bit of gear by videographers. Quick to set up, lightweight, easy to carry, versatile... and better than any IBIS or OS.
While AF is nice for home videos, if you want to step up your video game, the sooner you learn to focus manually and ditch stop relying on AF the better. 
Are people today born with eyes that can't see, or hands that can't turn a focus barrel? Are they all born with hand tremor? Is a camera without AF or IBIS really useless in todays world? Maybe according to you, but I'm managing to use cameras from many different manufacturers that don't have either features pretty well. In relation to IBIS, while IBIS is nice for Home videos, for anything else, i'd still recommend using a monopod with or without IBIS. Are the X-T3 or GH5s useless today because they lack IBIS? No, people will make great videos with both. 
 
So, you're starting to add accessories? Again, I can easily add the Andycine a6 to the Pocket4K to get the tiltable screen. Speaking of adding accessories, you don't need to add any to get good audio into the P4K which you do for the GH series. So your GH5 has already gone up in price by adding the ninja star and Battery Grip. Talking about the Ninja Star, you do realise it's 1080p only right? To fairly compare to the Pocket4k you need to add the NinjaV which is $599USD. Your GH5 with NinjaV and battery grip to get audio now costs $2946USD but has the advantage of AF. The Pocket 4K with monopod and Andycine a6 cost around $1700. Will you be editing your videos? If so, you will need to add another $299 to get resolve for your GH5 making it closer to $3250.
 
The P4K is far easier to use than the OG Pocket you really can't compare. Far better screen and ergonomics make it possible to use handheld. The OG Pocket was way too small to be used in the hand. You really can't put the two cameras in the same category or draw any similarities to them. When I switched to Fuji for stills, I really enjoyed using the camera and this made me want to use it more. In terms of video, so far the Pocket has done the same thing for me. Small package, un fussy menus and a great screen that reward's you instantly when looking at nice shot's. I just want to use it.  
 
It's actually less of a toy than most mirrorless cameras and I'm finding it a joy to use professional. It's far quicker to change settings on it than my X-T2 or the A7 series cameras that I have used as B-Cams before. It's by far more of a proper video tool compared to a hybrid but that's just my opinion. The workflow is not hard, you can bake LUTS in if you need quick turnaround or just use the provided BMD Rec709. I don't see how it's any slower. And if you shoot LOG on the GH5, then that still needs grading in post. 
For anyone reading this, camera brand aside, if you think IBIS and AF are going to make you shoot like a pro and some how magically make your images 'cinematic' ...they won't.
'Out of the box it's useless' ....'need to spend $3000 to make it work'....... 'it's a toy'. Considering you haven't used the camera yet, these are all pretty biased and inaccurate statements that I'd expect to hear out of a Panasonic rep ?
 
 
 

My feelings exactly.  The 60/120p slow-mo is cool and all, but what about the 24p, 30p?  How about showing what it offers in 1080p.  One can only hope.

My feelings exactly.  The 60/120p slow-mo is cool and all, but what about the 24p, 30p?  How about showing what it offers in 1080p.  One can only hope.

Does Anyone shoot Anything in normal speeds anymore? Jesus what is the deal with trying to see if Anything is worth a crap on a camera at 120p Slo Mo. Sam Peckinpah is alive and well.

Did you expect it to look like an Arri Alexa for 1400 bucks if it is real footage? I thought it looked pretty good. In this day and age about anything can look pretty good with skill. I have not seen any camera other than your C200 frame grab, a few PK4 Raw footage, and some original BMPCC, even some ML Canon stuff which was probably shot in Raw, that is worth taking about that is great.
So I guess the take away is if it is not shot in Raw it is not too shit hot. A iPhone, a Panny G7, a GH5, a X-T3, Z7 etc. can all pretty much look alike, and actually does to be honest. And to add  fuel to the fire you have to be pretty damn good to even edit, grade Raw. Most people on average suck at it, me included.
So the average persons footage is going to look well... Average. Imagine my surprise. Take away, shoot with what you have, and be happy. Because unless you are skilled as hell it ALL looks alike no matter what it is shot on. So just save your money, shoot with what you got.

MFT is the most versatile cinema mount you can find, so you can add from affordable native f/1.7 primes as for instance -- I've had reports 12-35mm f/2.8 is a good match for P4K as well. Both pretty affordable Oly 12-50mm f/3.5‑6.3 and Panny 45-175 f/4.0-5.6 offer you electric-powered zoom capability like you had a video camera in your hands. Without mention the Queen 18-35mm (I'm afraid longer focal length zoom won't make much sense once much heavier) f/1.8 coupled to a focal reducer where ends +1 to + 1 1/3 stop of gain and finally, those incredibly cheap C-mount pieces.
There's no other mount where you can add almost everything you want, even PL mount lenses via adapter. So you are in some special territory where you can even mimic something midway S35mm film and FF look as you wish : -)

So many false informations here... It’s not specificaly targeted at you but yes you can totally record custom baked in LUT and that’s an overlooked killer feature. Actually the biggest feature after raw. You can basically get any look straight of camera. I have a review coming showing the power of it !
And so was I worried about highlights handling and DR when I first watched the early footage online. But I can tell you : this camera has more DR than the « legendary » original BMPCC. Once again, I’ll show it in my review. So to sum up : saying that GH5 has a better output for SOOC footage is nonsense I think, granted extended video mode and video mode aren’t any good (you can achieve something pleasing with extended video LUT applied on RAW when you have complete control on WB, with PRORES, I find it to be more complicated...)
Anyway, people (me included !) shouldn’t jump at conclusions when they’ve never shot with the camera.

According to the poster who shown the teaser (I believe he brought back the first part of it) in the summary.  It supposed to be shown on Blackmagic's Youtube channel sometime.  Just thought I share.
 

Exellent tripod work. I noticed a zoom in the middle of the video- great operating skills with that Tokina! Makes me want to use my own Tokina more!
Holy, this looks massive. Convinced now, seriously! I mean, how could this camera not give a fantastic image. It'ś BM after all now now even with great low light capabilities. Great time to get a BMCC in MFT mount for little money!

Another low light test from the P4K

I didn't. He did in his previous post. Anyway, cameras are just tools and by specs I consider the Pocket a capable cine camera that can do things the C200 can't.

True. I wouldn't buy a C200 with the price of half-dozen Pockets... LOL : -)
 
 

Please keep this out of this topic.
it’s really boring when you come here for the subject of this thread ?