IronFilm

I am guessing that there may be a slight delay, though nowhere near the 1-1.5 years the original pocket cinema camera. It could be a few weeks if not days. They already seemed to have tested it, but think the footage is still be tweaked even further. Also, they want to push the sensor to the max, within the limitations of the processor.
Every organisation has a common attitude, that trickles down from the top. Grant Petty seems to know what he wants, and he isn't in a rat race. He actually doesn't care at all for the rats, and that's why the profit margins are smaller, and Black Magic doesn't have inflated advertising costs and no unnecessary freebies for anyone. Also, Grant doesn't seem to be in any particular hurry to be a billionaire, with all the hyperbole advertising and specs (ala 'Cinemartin Fran 8K', or 4k at 480fps blah blah blah), endemic to the industry. Blackmagic has had its set of firmware and feature hiccups. But for the price, I doubt anyone comes close.
In many ways he and blackmagic design embody the true meaning of 'disruptive' without the glorified presstitute fanfare. 

I attended a Black Magic event today and got to play around with the BMPCC4k for a while (maybe 30 mins or so).
I cannot discuss all my observations for fear of causing unnecessary panic, but I will state a few things I noticed. 
1. The autofocus is not the best, but with the M43 lens advantage, and focus peaking  things should be fine.
2. A lot of firmware features were disabled and flavours of ProRes were limited along with recording capabilities, to prevent people from sharing random non final firmware footage.
3. The on-board fans for the camera were not only absolutely silent, they were also unnoticeable (I put my finger over the vents and noticed almost nothing).
4. The Windowed HD is a substantial crop. So Metabones may make a BMPCC4k specific adaptor (which would be essential IMHO).
5. Low Light seems decent. I would like to compare the GH5s with it, though the Black Magic doesn't seem to have any noise reduction, and so at higher ISOs, noise seemed visible (as was the high level of detail in the image). I think once a few units reach reviewers, I would love to see this reviewed for low light, among other things.
6. I found it to be heavy with cinema lenses. But I guess this may have been due to the lenses more than the body. Also after the composite, it should shave off at least 100gms off the weight. 
7. Very impressive ergonomics. Especially the wheels the grip.
After Panasonic's IBIS + OIS we're literally spoit if anything doesn't offer anything like that (Canon cameras?), it's a little disappointing (I know stabilizers are good enough).
I feel Blackmagic is working with a lot of accessory makers. I hope they get a battery grip with atleast 3 hours of juice. 
If Panasonic tweaks the VLog, I am sure they can easily get atleast another Stop of Dynamic Range out of the cameras (if not more).
I realised that M43 is in need of a very fast zoom lens with a decent Range (f2 12-36mm). They could make it fat or large, who really cares. And it must have good OIS (for cameras that don't have IBIS).

I came across another possible solution over my lunch break.
SmallRig makes a np-f to 12v mount/adapter for the BMPCC, all you would need is a cheap adapter cable. It has a 1/4-20 mount so you can attach it directly to a cage or rig.
https://www.smallrig.com/smallrig-dv-battery-plate-adapter-for-bmpcc-bmcc-bmpc-1765.html
https://timeinpixels.com/2016/09/battery-solution-blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera/
 

I shot with one briefly not long after it was released, mostly to shoot some beach tourism stuff with the underrated A-mount 16-50/2.8 on one of the LAEA adapters. I used Glencarin's profile as well. For me its biggest issue was how easily it clipped the highlights, this meant heavy ND use since I mostly shoot outside in bright sunlight. The ND color cast was a PITA to remove (admittedly I'm not the best colorist), so was AVCHD on my Mac back then. Internal ND's would have made a huge difference. I think it was a step forward at the time being a large sensor cinema camera, but with fs700r's selling for $1500 or so, the fs100 feels really outdated by comparison these days.
I've said for years I'd like to see something like the a6500 or even the fs700 sensor in a VG10/20/30 style small camcorder body to fill the gap between the a7 and the FS lines. The add-on XLR module would give you real audio. The new AF would be killer on a camcorder with a larger body to dissipate heat. But that will never be a reality.
Side note, I got my mint fs100 from a wealthy guy in Miami for peanuts who just wanted to get rid of it. He was using it to shoot porn and bikini babe videos of his wife. He upgraded to a C300 to shoot them in 4k. We met at a cafe and he rolled up in a convertible Ferrari, he was an interesting character, it was straight out of Boogie Nights. Would love to be able to see what he's doing now.
Chris

Colors kind of remind me of the frames posted above. The F3 produces a really good image. Really underrated. 

I don't envy you, "moding" is always a dirty game, if you ban someone, people will yell "censorship", if you don't the forum will quickly be filled with non-sense an nauseous arguments.. At least the sub-forum allows to keep all this content in one place under quarantine. Good luck.

Wellllllllllll...........    if you go back and look at my post:
 

What I did NOT say was:
"Great news for new F8n owners"

Yeah, I know, couldn't stop staring at her Lav!!!

I was thinking back today just how much I enjoyed the images produced by my beloved old Sony FS100.  I have shot with quite a few cameras since then, but I think I can honestly say that the FS100 produced some of the best-looking images on a consistent basis for me than any other camera I have worked with since.  I shot primarily with Glen Cairn's G log ultimate which gave me beautiful dynamic range and color straight out of camera.  Many times my grade was a simple lowering of the blacks and white balance adjustment.  And, the files for 24mb/sec AVCHD, so easy in post. 
We moved on with cameras because of the size and ergonomics but I think that if Sony rehoused the FS100 sensor in a mirrorless body today, I would be the first buyer.  Here are some 720p images from some of my old films for posterity sake.  Does anyone else have fond memories with this camera?  Some stills from your work with it? 

It might surprise you but I don't read every thread on EOSHD! 
So only just saw this and, whoa, that lav in the opening scene is massive compared to the top she is wearing! The lav is almost giving her more coverage than her clothes.

Probably not :p
Although Mattias guestimated that the D750 had 13 stops of DR in Flat profile. He compared it to his black magic cameras shooting in raw and prores, if I remember correctly.
To my untrained eye, Nikon seems to have some kind of magic going on with their Analog / Digital converters that sony still doesn't seem to have mastered

Yes
No
Yes
No
FACT is..
You prove my point, fake news...
Yes.. Trump..
No... Trump...
You are an idiot
No, YOU are an idiot
Banned

The usual course of this kind of thread. Creating a sub-forum seems to be a good compromise.

Do you guys hold stock options at Sony? 

Possibly is old news to many here, but this was news to me, an entire magazine edition devoted to anamorphic lenses:

http://www.fdtimes.com/pdfs/articles/anamorphic/FDTimes-Anamorphic-Special-May2015.pdf
 
This was also a good watch:
 
 

You need to be careful with this line of thought, because some times people go through life changes, Marriage, moving, child breath, family health issues, personal health issues etc etc. Any of them can have an impact on a creators content.

The number one thing that annoys me, are the negative little piss-ant commenters, doesn't matter if its my videos or someone else's. They complain the presenter is talking to much. or not enough, is giving to much detail or not enough,  is talking to fast or to slow etc etc  etc. I mean honestly, it takes a special kind of a-hole to act like that considering the content they are watching is free 99.9% of the time.
 

Actually, @Oliver Daniel reminded me that often on other forums they have an "anything goes" type of sub-forum which is for the hot topics.
In audio there are lots more hot topics than in cameras..  things like cables, ABX testing, etc.  At least here we all agree that Mojo and Motion Cadence are real things, despite there being a complete lack of technical explanation ???

I firmly believe in the right to talk freely, but you have to question whether such topics are actually a benefit to what EOSHD is all about? 
First and foremost, people come here to talk about geeky camera stuff. You might attract a trouble making swarm of trolls if EOSHD suddenly got known for political discussions, and people might find that unwelcoming. 
I think you should have a sub-forum, with a chat about relevant industry topics,  so it doesn’t get too personal and off vibe. 

ProRes 4444 is the post version of the format (has the alpha channel) and in camera it's called 444.
On the Micro cameras when I use them I only use the VA as a small lightweight monitor.  I record internally to 1920 ProRes HQ.
Resolution and dynamic range / bit depth aren't related at all really.  You could maybe make an argument that extra resolution helps with surprising noise, but it's only those that want to make a petty technical point that would say so because it's a small advantage.  I doubt the difference between 720 and 1080 would make any difference at all.
If the costs come down, I can see Networks going to 4K because they DO want to future-proof themselves, they just don't want to PAY what it costs to process and store all those 4k files.
To me as a cinematographer I care a LOT LESS about resolution and a LOT MORE about bit depth.  I'd rather have 1920 12 bit files than 8k 8 bit files.
JB
 
 
 

As mentioned in the other 4K Pocket 2 thread...
In episodic TV, where I spend a lot of my time, we shoot three cameras almost all the time.  The show I'm on now shoots 8+1, meaning 8 days of main unit and a day of second unit (while making unit starts the next episode).
We tend to shoot about 2 hours per camera per day.  
So that's 6 hours by 8 days of footage. On second unit they shoot with at least two more cameras, if not three.  So that means on some days the data wrangler has 12 hours of dailies to process from set from two units.
The footage is backed up on set, then shuttled to the post house offsite.
They backup twice again and then transcode the footage for editorial.  We shoot in Atlanta but editorial are in LA cutting on AVID.  So they grade (time) the dailies, for editorial and render DNX files and send them over a very secure connection to LA.  All done Overnight ?
Editorial then sound sync the dailies, first thing, compare the shots logged vs what they've received and sign off that they have everything that we say we shot (down to the shot).  After the emails I see from editorial are notes querying the wrong slate number just so that they can verify this.
As well as doing all that they produce the pulled or select dailies and generate 264's of just those circled / printed takes and they get assembled into a H264 file that gets uploaded to DAX for about 200 studio execs and production people to watch / refer to.  There are also some secured rotating ipads that get the same 264 files updated to them for those of us that hate trying to scrub 264 files over the internet.   I get those myself, and the director of the episode gets one as does the writer. 
Right now the show I'm shooting is on air 9 weeks after we started shooting.  That's a clock winding down, because it airs every 7 and we take at least 9 days to shoot each episode ?
You can see how it escalates.  There's no safety net for time at all. An episodic TV series will generate a LOT of footage that can quickly overwhelm a production and there's very little room for a slow down at any point.
The studio I'm shooting for now is Fox.  They still only air in 720 so they only master in 1920.  
Despite the rhetoric about 4K, the reality is that MOST TV DRAMA production isn't shot 4K.
We shoot 1920 ProRes and I always make ProRes 444 the minimum because it's 12 bit.  That's all I really need from a grading point of view and RAW workflows offer very few genuine advantages.  Try designing a test to show that it does and I'll show you a TV network that shoots 4K.  (None of them do)
They're not even interested in mastering 4K for a future proofing scenario.
4K also quickly kills workflow because everything is that much harder with all the above numbers.
I think ProRes RAW is an interesting option, but honestly, over 12 bit ProRes, I don't see much need to shoot ProRes RAW.
I have some friends on Stranger Things at the moment.  They do 12 to 14 days per episode.  We have 8.  That's nearly double the amount of time to shoot the same screen time.  They tend to shoot single camera too, because that's the style of the show.  But that's a large part of why they need so much more time.  I guess you can argue it's success makes the investment worthwhile, but days shooting is the most expensive part of TV production.  Because of the cast generally and their availability.  A show that shoots for longer tends to find it much harder to hang on to good actors.
JB
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Are you English? Got to love all the English sports!

"What British sports look like to non-British people"

I dont quite understand what particular video features people are looking for 'medium format' to add.
* Medium format is usually associated with very high mega-pixel cameras which are not the greatest starting point for video
* The Sony sensors (and they are pretty much all Sony sensors) have slow readout speeds meaning jello
* ...and they are not yet BSI so despite the larger sensor, low light isnt much improved...
*  Medium format lenses do not tend to be very fast so you cant really get shallower DOF than FF
I can definitely understand why someone who owns a medium format camera for stills would like to see better video but I dont really see how it would end up generating better video than what we can expect to see in FF.

With the introduction of Prores RAW and the soon-to-be-released BMPCC 4K, professional quality codecs are now really entering the prosumer market.
We've had some contact with RAW and High Quality codecs through BlackMagics BMPCC and Magic Lantern, but this is probably only a small percentage of us, even on these forums.
There are quite a few challenges I see associated with this, including:
Absolutely huge data rates
Most 1080 prosumer cameras are around 25-100Mbps,
BMPCC went up to around 600Mbps (6-24X prosumer),
Prores RAW is 640-1120Mbps (6-45X prosumer),
but the BMPCC 4K will go up to around 4352 (44-175X prosumer data rates!!) RAW requires extra processing in post-production
DaVinci Resolve includes this functionality but it might require a separate piece of software for other packages, and will take significant time to transcode to large proxy files Image quality beyond 'good enough'
The image quality from these RAW / HQ cameras is potentially more than is needed - in many cases shooting RAW 1080 or compressed 4K for a compressed 1080 output is going to be almost indistinguishable from shooting RAW 4K Commercial TV workflows are perhaps the best place to learn how other people manage these issues and why.  
I think they are better suited to our concerns than feature films because Prosumers and TV shows shoot over and over again using the same setups, so issues like scalability, efficiency, and so on are relevant here, whereas feature films only have to be done once.
Who has worked on serial productions with RAW / HQ cameras, and what can you tell us before we fill our HDDs with RAW 4K files?

There are still more Dslr sold than Mirrorless until now. The thing is Nikon had very very good profit this year with their downsizing and restructuring.  In their latest  fiscal year they said how the D850 impacted their profit as it was a huge success. Now coming back to the ML line, the more I look into it the more I see big big surprise. For a starter the new lens mount. The thing is gigantic, it is about the same than Fuji medium format. I am not saying that they would release bigger sensor that 35 mm, but that could be a possibility in the future. The most probable use will be for .9 lens or lets say .2 zoom, that would  put them in another category. The second thing is a much bigger sensor box where the sensor could move much more with ibis. Imagine a full frame camera with the same quality ibis a gh5 etc. I even think that the rear screen will be bigger than 3.2 from the size which we know  now is around d750. (but thinner). What I don't expect unfortunately is 10bit video, 4k 60 fps, log etc.