bwhitz

1. Some people just don't like the obvious artificial limiting/crippling of tech... they'd like real competition and better products
2. Some people actually LIKE the boomer-protectionism of the 1980's technology markets. I.e. hacks can just say "I own X or Y expensive camera! You HAVE to hire me now!"
3. Some people like to pretend that there is something "Magical" about $5000 or $15000 cameras that will give them better results over something like a Blackmagic P4K or capable DSLR. There isn't. 

1. Some people just don't like the obvious artificial limiting/crippling of tech... they'd like real competition and better products
2. Some people actually LIKE the boomer-protectionism of the 1980's technology markets. I.e. hacks can just say "I own X or Y expensive camera! You HAVE to hire me now!"
3. Some people like to pretend that there is something "Magical" about $5000 or $15000 cameras that will give them better results over something like a Blackmagic P4K or capable DSLR. There isn't. 

Yes, to concede a fair-point (because I wasn't very specific) if you're doing documentary or event work... something with allot of built-in features is probably worth it over pure-image-quality (or close enough quality). But, I'd still argue that if you have a controlled set, lighting, ect. a $5,000-$15,000 camera isn't going to magically get you better results than a Blackmagic or good DSLR. anymore. I've even seen a Alexa vs P6K video where the Pocket looked BETTER. Same with Red, the current Blackmagics look better, IMO, than even something like the bit-older Red Dragon's (which I've used extensively).

Yes, to concede a fair-point (because I wasn't very specific) if you're doing documentary or event work... something with allot of built-in features is probably worth it over pure-image-quality (or close enough quality). But, I'd still argue that if you have a controlled set, lighting, ect. a $5,000-$15,000 camera isn't going to magically get you better results than a Blackmagic or good DSLR. anymore. I've even seen a Alexa vs P6K video where the Pocket looked BETTER. Same with Red, the current Blackmagics look better, IMO, than even something like the bit-older Red Dragon's (which I've used extensively).

Well I'm a professional and something like the Pocket4k/6k is perfectly fine. I've had literally ZERO issues. Add a V-mount... like you would to literally ANY other professional cine cam. You think people shooting Red or Arri's complain that everything doesn't fit into a tiny-package and they have to add almost every accessory? What exactly are you shooting? Have you seen the camera's they shoot movies with?  

1. Some people just don't like the obvious artificial limiting/crippling of tech... they'd like real competition and better products
2. Some people actually LIKE the boomer-protectionism of the 1980's technology markets. I.e. hacks can just say "I own X or Y expensive camera! You HAVE to hire me now!"
3. Some people like to pretend that there is something "Magical" about $5000 or $15000 cameras that will give them better results over something like a Blackmagic P4K or capable DSLR. There isn't. 

1. Some people just don't like the obvious artificial limiting/crippling of tech... they'd like real competition and better products
2. Some people actually LIKE the boomer-protectionism of the 1980's technology markets. I.e. hacks can just say "I own X or Y expensive camera! You HAVE to hire me now!"
3. Some people like to pretend that there is something "Magical" about $5000 or $15000 cameras that will give them better results over something like a Blackmagic P4K or capable DSLR. There isn't. 

1. Some people just don't like the obvious artificial limiting/crippling of tech... they'd like real competition and better products
2. Some people actually LIKE the boomer-protectionism of the 1980's technology markets. I.e. hacks can just say "I own X or Y expensive camera! You HAVE to hire me now!"
3. Some people like to pretend that there is something "Magical" about $5000 or $15000 cameras that will give them better results over something like a Blackmagic P4K or capable DSLR. There isn't. 

1. Some people just don't like the obvious artificial limiting/crippling of tech... they'd like real competition and better products
2. Some people actually LIKE the boomer-protectionism of the 1980's technology markets. I.e. hacks can just say "I own X or Y expensive camera! You HAVE to hire me now!"
3. Some people like to pretend that there is something "Magical" about $5000 or $15000 cameras that will give them better results over something like a Blackmagic P4K or capable DSLR. There isn't. 

Yep. This camera appeals to me since I do allot of VFX work. Pulling keys from this are going to be insanely good. Even if you composite for 4k delivery. This could very well become the next go-to VFX cam.

Canon and Sony color science looks like ass. Both basically only capture some variation of magenta and/or green. I only like shooting Arri, new-Red, or Blackmagic now.

You must be on some kind of drugs then. I've never seen a GH5 video that didn't look like absolute garbage at 4k... hell, it doesn't even look like a proper 2k image. The Sharpening and NR have no true off settings and it renders the detail as nothing but over-sharpened muddy-plastic. I'd like to see this GH5 video that has the "nice detail" you talking about. I'd love to be proven wrong...

I am an indie filmmaker, I shot my first feature on Sony HVR-FZ 1, back in 2009 and a year later Canon 5D disrupted the market. We toiled hard to get over harsh video look and deep DOF of HVR Z1 and then 5D made us look like fools. Even though many known filmmakers appreciated the screenplay, but harsh video look was stumbling block. Then every other indie filmmaker was coming out with "cinematic" 5D, 7D footage and our film looked amateurish. That got me started with DSLR and understanding them.
I was shooting Panasonic GH2 till last year and finally I got GH5. I was absolutely loved it. I though 10 bit is new standard for indie filmmakers now, especially those who can't afford raw. Just few months later Panasonic released GH5S, which is even more suited for my work. I didn't need IBIS more than low light capabilities. I was anyways juggling between between GH2 and rented A7SII and then GH5 and A7SII. When I heard they already had GH5s in mind even before the launch of GH5, I felt cheated. Panasonic like any other camera manufacturer was trying to exploit market. I am Panasonic fanboy since Panasonic DVX100 days.
And then comes BPCC 4K, it gives 12 bit raw, which even Panasonic EVA 1 can't deliver. If it has same or similar sensor as GH5s, I don't need A7Sii. I hardly go over 10,000 ISO even on AS7sii. And it is cheap. It will force Camera manufactures to reduce price on cameras like Canon C200, EVA 1, Sony F7 and F5. IMO Raw will be new indie film-making standard, if not already and 10 bit will be new prosumer standard. It may have lots of issues, but I won't shooting another indie on anything less than 12 bit raw. If budget permits I will go for C200 or even better. But in worst case scenario there is always BPCC 4k to fall back upon. Point is BPCC 4k will disrupt the indie film-making landscape just as Canon 5D did back then. 

Yea, I'm not sure what is even being implied in this post? Most big projects use cameras from a rental house. Allot of "professionals" don't actually own personal cameras. BUT... It would be nice to have something that can be used on a gimbal/drone to get extra shots or as a B-Cam to get some extra angles. It's also nice to own something you can do personal projects with that's in the same ball-park as "bigger cameras". On the project I'm working on right now... the Red is kind of a pain to carry around. Even on the Ronin... it's HEAVY. We REALLY wanted something smaller for a hand gimbal... but the A7sII (lack of 60fps 4k) and GH5 (lack of clean resolution) aren't making the cut, unfortunately. Again, it's frustrating because the GH5 is ALMOST there... there's nothing about the specs of the GH5 that couldn't be used professionally... besides the uncontrollable  Sharpening and Noise Reduction.

I have no idea why a discussion on "garbage" cameras is getting so personal... THEY'RE CAMERAS. They're inanimate objects. Everyone gets new ones all the time and there's always something better around the corner (Blackmagic Pocket 4K). Sheesh....

Yea, I'm not sure what is even being implied in this post? Most big projects use cameras from a rental house. Allot of "professionals" don't actually own personal cameras. BUT... It would be nice to have something that can be used on a gimbal/drone to get extra shots or as a B-Cam to get some extra angles. It's also nice to own something you can do personal projects with that's in the same ball-park as "bigger cameras". On the project I'm working on right now... the Red is kind of a pain to carry around. Even on the Ronin... it's HEAVY. We REALLY wanted something smaller for a hand gimbal... but the A7sII (lack of 60fps 4k) and GH5 (lack of clean resolution) aren't making the cut, unfortunately. Again, it's frustrating because the GH5 is ALMOST there... there's nothing about the specs of the GH5 that couldn't be used professionally... besides the uncontrollable  Sharpening and Noise Reduction.

I have no idea why a discussion on "garbage" cameras is getting so personal... THEY'RE CAMERAS. They're inanimate objects. Everyone gets new ones all the time and there's always something better around the corner (Blackmagic Pocket 4K). Sheesh....

I completely agree.
But guess what, I was reaching out to Panasonic ambassadors and developers in the past about this issue. They we're either uninformed and said there is no additional sharpening and NR, though the evidence thanks to strong halos in high contrast areas, harshness and sometimes even ghosting is there - or they were laughing at me "everyone loves how our images look"... 
 
Btw. the 6K mode suffers from artifacts thanks to the rather weak H265 implementation, but yh, basically no sharpening artifacts but banding. lol

You must be on some kind of drugs then. I've never seen a GH5 video that didn't look like absolute garbage at 4k... hell, it doesn't even look like a proper 2k image. The Sharpening and NR have no true off settings and it renders the detail as nothing but over-sharpened muddy-plastic. I'd like to see this GH5 video that has the "nice detail" you talking about. I'd love to be proven wrong...

lol... it's offensive? To who? The camera? Come on... The GH5 has an image that looks like plastic. When you compare it to the detail you get with Red or even Alexa at 2k... then yes, it's garbage. And I'm a BIG fan of Panasonic actually. That's why I'm being so hard on the GH5. I know what they're capable of... the EVA1 image is fantastic. The Varicam image is also one of my favorites of the major cameras. The GH5 ACTUALLY resolves a great image... in the 6K abamorphic mode... where it looks like it disables the garbage Sharpness and NR settings. So all Panasonic has to do is write ONE STINKING LINE OF CODE to disable the horrible, horrible, image-processing. This again, has nothing to deal with one's personal work. It literally doesn't factor into the discussion about camera images.

You must be on some kind of drugs then. I've never seen a GH5 video that didn't look like absolute garbage at 4k... hell, it doesn't even look like a proper 2k image. The Sharpening and NR have no true off settings and it renders the detail as nothing but over-sharpened muddy-plastic. I'd like to see this GH5 video that has the "nice detail" you talking about. I'd love to be proven wrong...

Depends what you're using them for. For documentary production... you're right 8-bit is totally workable. But for anything "cinematic", anything with VFX... ect. Yes, all those cameras are crap. And trust me, I used to think people like me were a**hole trollers... I used to roll my eyes at all that "client-facing" or "professional" talk... but damn, I was wrong. I had to eat my words when I started working on some of these productions. Sometimes these people want a crazy stylized look to the footage... but a certain paint, or fabric, whatever, needs to be isolated and colored to advertised specifications... and the image cannot lose fidelity. You simply cannot grade 4:2:0 8-bit footage in any real sense or use it for VFX (where I mainly work). I've tried... I've had colorists try... it always ruins the image and cannot be presented outside of "crash-cam" or "spectator" footage. 

But to say something somewhat constructive... I will say the detail looks very good in that video though. I've been wanting to get a GH5 or GH5s... and I just cannot find a video that looks like it even resolves a 2K image. I guess I had never looked at the footage that closely... but something is ruining the images from those cams... even the "camera originals" people offer for download. There must be heavy noise-processing that cannot be turned down all the way. Everything has that "digital-gause" that ruins fine details and textures. Even the older Blackmagic 2.5k camera appears to resolve more detail than the GH5. So, anyways... the Fuji does look allot better in this department! 

I think there is a bit of confusion here. I am arguing for the xh-1 over other consumer cameras like the gh5 and the a6500 on the basis that people who are purchasing these products will experience no discernible difference between the 8 bit and 10 bit codec, which is something you appear to be confirming. 
I didn't say 8 bit is not enough, but if you are going to produce a movie and if you have a decent amount of financial backing, then there is no discernible reason to choose an 8 bit camera, short of aesthetics, and certainly none for high-paying client work, which is more exacting.
For the purposes these cameras will be used, which does not mean they are not good enough for cinema, the 8 bit or 10 bit is really irrelevant. In fact, if I have great Fuji color SOC then why would I need 10 bit to get it to the same end point, except for some unique situations where I have missed exposure. More important is autofocus and good color. That's partly why canon outsells anyone.  
8 bit cameras can be used in cinema but in practicality they won't be. Tangerine was shot on an iphone. But the director has just followed it up with Florida Project, which had a bigger production value and was shot on an Arri. 
Last year, the winner of the Golden Lion at Venice, the woman who left, was shot on a as7ii and in 2012 the winner pieta was shot on a 5d mark ii. It is possible in indie narrative work, but given the choice people will pick the raw cinema camera, because there are distinct advantages and it does look better. There is no question about it, and it isn't just that one is raw and the other is 8 bit - there are many more factors as you know.
So I am saying at this level the xh-1 is the most appealing, and will be more appealing to a wider audience than the gh5 or a6500 if the color and the autofocus are as good as the rumours are saying. Face detect autofocus coupled with ibis - it's the only camera on market that would do that. Think about the possibilities with that combo and with the fuji colors. 10 bit on a small m4/3 camera pales in comparison. 
If I am using my cinema camera I don't need this, but for these types of cameras and for their intended use, the fuji wins hands down, and I think this will be reflected in the sales numbers if they can market it properly.      

Depends what you're using them for. For documentary production... you're right 8-bit is totally workable. But for anything "cinematic", anything with VFX... ect. Yes, all those cameras are crap. And trust me, I used to think people like me were a**hole trollers... I used to roll my eyes at all that "client-facing" or "professional" talk... but damn, I was wrong. I had to eat my words when I started working on some of these productions. Sometimes these people want a crazy stylized look to the footage... but a certain paint, or fabric, whatever, needs to be isolated and colored to advertised specifications... and the image cannot lose fidelity. You simply cannot grade 4:2:0 8-bit footage in any real sense or use it for VFX (where I mainly work). I've tried... I've had colorists try... it always ruins the image and cannot be presented outside of "crash-cam" or "spectator" footage. 

But to say something somewhat constructive... I will say the detail looks very good in that video though. I've been wanting to get a GH5 or GH5s... and I just cannot find a video that looks like it even resolves a 2K image. I guess I had never looked at the footage that closely... but something is ruining the images from those cams... even the "camera originals" people offer for download. There must be heavy noise-processing that cannot be turned down all the way. Everything has that "digital-gause" that ruins fine details and textures. Even the older Blackmagic 2.5k camera appears to resolve more detail than the GH5. So, anyways... the Fuji does look allot better in this department! 

So... in other words... another junk camera that can't really be used on any client facing work or serious projects. Wonderfull. 

Hallo, no honour to me in that regard. It´s from the testers from slashcam. They turned sharpness and NR down afik from other tests of the GH line since the GH2.

I don't believe in censorship, but I do believe in content standards. Paul should be shunned, if nothing else, for being a talentless hack. And people should be shunned for watching garbage that people like him put out. I feel bad for the professional-media industry in general these days. I mean, this guy has made well-over 10 million jumping around like a asshat and talking about nonsense. There are girls that are multi-millionaires from fucking make-up tutorials. Who the hell is going to want to actually write and film real stories in the future?