Aussie Ash

My dear erstwhile member can you please stop attacking John Brawley now.
I have long since given up on camera forum arguments so might not be completely up on who is right and who is wrong-evil / killed-a-kitten, but can we tone it down a bit. It's JB! We could be learning so much and having such interesting cameras talks with a film industry guy and I am sure one of the only people with a Blackmagic Pocket 2 prototype yet instead a handful of you are just bitching. It's pointless. Even if you disagree with him on certain matters, hold your tongue a bit for the benefit of the rest of us who are interested in what he has to tell.

It sounds like you’re threatened by this camera so you’re making sure you point out any and all shortcomings you can. Isn’t sissy a bit emotional ? You’re reaching.
Some people will be happy with 10bit 422 as their maximum image quality as long as they have a tilt able screen and autofocus. 
Most serious image makers know that 12bit raw and 10 bit ProRes for half the price trumps the MILC features you’re desperately trying to remind everyone your precious GH5s has. Mostly because “filmmakers” don’t tend to use those features anyway. I don’t use AF.  But I shoot narrative drama.  What I need isn’t what others need.
For the majority, they will prefer the utility of the form factor, longer battery life, AF and IBIS on the GH5 and will find the bare minimum for serious work 400Mbps codec to be good enough. 
People who care about image fidelity will likely prefer what a Pocket 2 produces side by side and will also decide that they can work around the shortcomings that pertain to the way they work.
The same way others will prefer to work around the shortcomings of a lower bit depth more compressed and sub sampled image because other features are important to them. 
On board batteries on an Alexa mini on my last show were lasting about 40 mins by the way.  I guess you’re calling me a sissy. 
JB
EDIT  by the way, I don’t think it’s at all appropriate to use sissy, a word that means effeminate man or homosexual. Maybe you want to change that.

im gonna make a camera that films in 16k at 3fps but the 3fps part is a secret, you have to buy the camera to find out about it and before you buy you have to sign a nondisclosure agreement

The problem here is 15p is the ONLY option. So customers seeing 4k in there buys it and then have fun when they discover they can't even film in 24p.

Seems like a pretty fair overview of the camera, and interesting that it's more sized like the BMCC rather than original BMPCC.

A very good article by Frank Glencairn on the new camera
https://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2018/04/19/why-the-new-pocket-cinema-camera-2-0-isnt-actually-a-successor-of-the-original-pocket-and-why-it-doesnt-mater/

A very good article by Frank Glencairn on the new camera
https://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2018/04/19/why-the-new-pocket-cinema-camera-2-0-isnt-actually-a-successor-of-the-original-pocket-and-why-it-doesnt-mater/

I have known that from the day I started photography.
BUT as you say, 1.2 and 1.4 on FF cannot be replicated on M43 and i do not agree there is a big difference between a FF 1.4 and 2.0. 
Also I don’t agree with DR in stills. Giant leap between M43 and FF, and yes I have owned a GH4, GH5 and Olympus as well as FF DSLRs and A7RII. Massive real world difference. In fact as you say super 35 is not bad. A Nikon D7200 for exemple boasts a very good usable DR better even that some FF like Canon shit. But M43, not at all.
For video DR is less impacted. In fact FF is not crazy important for me in video especially because having a 1.4 look in video is pretty hard to manage. 
I returned the GH5 not because of M43, but because of that god damn shitty AF. GH5 with great AF is all I need for video and I guess it’s gonna be a A7S3
i would not mind paying less for body and lens and loose FF. Again, for video only.
 

I used the 25m T/0.95 from slrmagic extensively and enjoyed it a lot. The GH5 still lags behind though compared to full frame. You need the GH5s in order to much the low light performance for the same DoF (two stops slower on the FF) at least in video. For photos there is still at least a 2 stop difference between m4/3 and FF and will always be the case for sensors with similar technology and a 4 times area difference. 
The advantage of the FF lenses is that you can get very good AF with very shallow DoF which can also work great with video. The eye-AF is just an amazing thing to have if you like shooting faces with very shallow DoF.  
Another important point is that while these lenses are OK for video, the quality is not great for stills. You have to go up to the newer Olympus f/1.2 PRO line to get really good results, and then you are actually paying a lot of money for a m4/3 lens and still lag behind in the sensor department. 

Will be joining the YouTube party at some point.

Interesting article and great job matching the focal lengths and depths of field, but the cost associated with getting the full frame look with the GH5 will put you at $2500-$3000. With an a7iii and a Nikkor 35mm f/2, you can be well on your way for less than $2200, plus you’ll have the option to go with f/1.4 and 1.2 lenses and higher ISOs.
The Voigts are a great cheat though and the 25mm is one of the best lenses I’ve ever used. 
 

Bigger sensor, or faster lens? Which is most important?
Well, a lens you can change and your sensor you cannot.
Here's how to stop worrying about crop sensors.
Read the full article

I wish you'd start a Youtube show Andrew to combat all the misinformation (esp from Northrup) out there

Make it 40... to me this camera doesn’t even exist. 
Eventually we’ll have footage from John Brawley or Frank Glencairn or Noam Kroll and the footage will look amazing. More people will love it but a few will find something wrong with it...
Eventually card info will be released, and more people will complain.
Eventually AF tests will show up comparing this camera to the PDAF of the a6500 and more people will complain.
Eventually low light tests will show up comparing this camera with the GH5s or the a7sii and more people will complain.
At the end, when it’s released, a bunch of people will complain because they hate that they have to use an IR Cut filter and they will complain that they only get 45-60 minutes of battery life and that they wish it had IBIS...
And eventually the usual suspects will be the only people that have the camera and the footage will be absolutely gorgeous.
The End.

Nikon's Cine lenses
http://www.nicovandijk.net/cinelenses.htm
 

Those are the ones, especially the 105mm f2.5, also it's worth trying the 28mm, but i suppose it's quite close to the 5mm - these really are a great set of lenses. Most people will be put off by the fact that they aren't very fast, but that's just silly & normally it's people following the idiotic rule that you should shoot wide open with fast apertures.
For vintage lenses, 55mm is normally the best due to the fact that the lens recipe is simpler & they perfected it. Have you tried any Tomioka (Japan) made lenses? The 55mm f1.4's are worth a try, very nice for video. They made for various people: Chinon, Yashinon, Revuenon etc.., must have "Tomioka Japan" on the inner ring & have the "Auto" moniker. They did do a 55mm f1.2, which is dreamy wide open & a lot more expensive.
At the moment, my goto lenses have been either the Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70mm f2.6-28 (the first version is an Angenieaux lens recipe) or the Mir 24m 35mm f2 - for me they are must have lenses.
You're right on the money there - 44-2 is an excellent lens if you get a good copy. Lots of other Russain lenses, actually most of them, give this lovely low contrast - it's why people have raved about them for video for a long time. Dirt cheap as well, but you might need to shop around for good copies

From the article :
"A North-American company, producing special cameras for the movie and defence industry - Photo-Sonics, founded by Adolf Furer in 1924 - used many Nikkors with special converted mounts."
Boy, that was a hell of an unfortunate name to have a few years later.
Reminds me of this 

Not exactly.  Sensors tend to heat up when you scan them faster, so cameras will often run them slower.  Not sure if it saves power too but that could also be another reason.  They run them at the fastest acceptable speed that they can manage even though a lot of sensors can run much faster.
On "The Resident" the micro shots are easy to spot. I don't know if it's just a wider FOV, but someting about them does look off at times. Micro shots match better in color than any other small camera would, but something about them makes them easy to spot.  Ursa Mini Pro not so much unless there's an extreme highlight or something that clips a little harder than the Alexa would.  But even then it's not like it's offensively clipping or anything, it's just maybe a little more.  The strong halo/lightwrap around bright light sources might be a sign of the SLR magic APO primes, and the usage of the camera for me is another clue as to which camera is which.  Overall though the look is maintained well across all cams.
 
For the limited uses of aerial footage, if that's all from the DJI x7 then those shots are very impressive.  That camera holds up well.

This update (especially the internal FLOG) weakens the X-H1 as an upgrade for X-T2 owners certainly.
But.....
Everyone is looking at Panasonic and Sony to implement ProResRAW but what if Fuji were the complete dark horse here and put it onto the X-H1 ?
They certainly have the track record in handing out additional value long after you've bought the camera and that upgrade would certainly let the X-H1 stretch its legs if they made it exclusive to that camera.
They're probably already at it

People easily overlook that the champion in sales is APS-C, and smaller than full frame sensors in general. Not a lot of people want to carry around big, heavy and quite expensive lenses.
It is good that Nikon is finally preparing a full frame mirrorless, but I would prefer to see an APS-C body. I seriously have no desire for a full frame camera at all, and I am not the only one (sales!).

Dynamic range of the 4K model is pretty weak.  If you compare it to they Sony F55 which is also global shutter, the performance is much worse.  So I think the 4K global shutter model was a big step backwards in image quality compared to other Blackmagic cams.  But because it was 4K global shutter, Aliasing/moire/rolling shutter artifacts were mostly gone so at the time it seemed better.  Now looking at Ursa Mini 4.6K images you can see a clear difference in the fairchild sensors vs cmosis.

Ursa mini 4k/BMPC/full size ursa are not relevant anymore with the pocket 4K coming out soon.

http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/firmware/x/xt2/index.html

Just upgrading now, looking forward to playing with 120fps!

Try this 139 year old lens up against your modern junk.
 

Nikon need to get "new products"(whatever  they may be)available before XMas to boost the current financial year.
They have only released one body in the last twelve months the D850 is just too expensive for a lot of photographers.
Based on figures from two or three years ago aprox 80% of their camera sales were APS-C,something that Canon doesn't
over look with a full range of  APS-C bodies down to the very cheap !.

If it's a customized variant of gh5s and terra 4K sensor then rolling shutter should be very fast.  GH5s is around 10.5ms and the Terra 4K is 8ms.  That's a top-of-the-line performance for any camera of that size, and honestly better than most bigger cinema cams too.  Newer RED 8K cams are quite slow sensor readout times and so are the really large Mostro/Vistavision sensors as well.

There's actually very few cameras that match that performance.
4K VFX is actually very slow.  The way our pipline typically works is we ingest reels of shots directly from the show and then generate the plates ourselves from original camera files and edl/xml data.  Shows not shot on Alexa maybe things are different, but this is the general workflow.  4K dpx frames are around 50mb each, so with 20 people all accessing a server requesting these large files, it's noticeably slower.  We have insanely fast workstations, but that doesn't make a difference when you're server can't keep up.

Only 4K shows that I do are netflix/hulu and occasionally there's a lower budget show that shoots on RED and they tend to do 4K post.  But I think they master at 1080.  Everything generally takes about 2x longer with 4K, but I have tricks that I can still work fast.