Shirozina

I don't see any 'sharpening halos' on this video or my own BRAW footage - can you post some samples to show this please?
What's with the cyan cast on the 2nd video?

Not that the P4K looks bad, but these sharpening halos (easiliy visible in the thumbnail around the jacket even) make the P4K look way less organic than the original BMCC.
Was shot in either ProRes or Braw. Cdng doesn't show any of these internal processing issues when sharpening in Resolve is set to 0. Still wondering why BMD joined Panasonic, Sony, Canon (since EOS R) etc...

DNG 'looks' like it has sharpening applied with it's overly emphasised edges. Anyway who looks at a film at 300% an come to think of it who look at a film at 100%??? 'sharpness' is not the reason to choose BRAW anyway. Having the post production flexibility of not having and ISO curve and WB baked in is a bigger advantage than apparent 'sharpness' gains at 300%.

DNG 'looks' like it has sharpening applied with it's overly emphasised edges. Anyway who looks at a film at 300% an come to think of it who look at a film at 100%??? 'sharpness' is not the reason to choose BRAW anyway. Having the post production flexibility of not having and ISO curve and WB baked in is a bigger advantage than apparent 'sharpness' gains at 300%.

Maybe I was a bit harsh on Yashica - they are good value lenses but nothing exceptional. Based on what the OP want's from a set of lenses that will work with future 6 and 8k capture needs then exceptional lenses are what are required. 

I used BRAW for a big project all last week and I agree with you. No reason for Prores for me moving forward.

You need a version of the NPF sled with a transformer built in to step up the voltage.

After testing for a couple of days, we're Q5 all the time.
Shot a film with it last week and yes, in the new Resolve, it is as fast - even faster than ProRes w/ FCPX.
I was in the field w/ a MP skimming through a twenty minute timeline, every clip w/ a LUT and a grade. It's amazingly fast.
So much so that as a small shop w/ 3 FCPX stations I really never expected to integrate resolve. After 1 week shooting braw and working with it in Resolve, I'll never shot ProRes or edit in FCPX again. A couple of producers had mentioned to me that they didn't see the "magic" from the new cam until they shot in braw and processed it in Resolve and I have to agree. It isn't just the file size and the ease of editing and grading - it's where the full potential of Gen4 and the new cam IQ comes together.
 

I normally find that if you can run a short test to answer a question then that's normally the best way to do it.
I have a GH5 and I'd run the test for you, but you should just do the test yourself and that way you get to choose the right scenario and look at the footage without internet compression
Edit: quoted the wrong message first time around. fixed now

2 step balancing is just so little! most have 3-5 steps with 0 also.
This is just a bad design, as most setups need different settings.
Imagine if you have your GH5+ 70-200, and then you want to put an 24-70, suddenly you have run out of steps, because the 70-200 is very forward heavy, the 12-35 not at all, and you will still miss a couple of middle steps for different lenses and setups.
par example: The Ace M is 0-4Kg, that means that is perfect for the average mirrorless, let's say, my plain NX500 with the PZ lens or a pancake = 400-500gr, or the full rigged NX1 with the 16-50S and cage and a Focus SmallHD = 2Kg, or even a fully rigged FS5mkII with a 70-200 = 2.5 - 3Kg.
The Ace XL is a 2-8Kg head, that means, you need at least a C200 camera, which starts from 1.5Kg, so easily reaching 4-5Kg, and Sony FS7mkii that is near 5Kg. For some rigs, for super professional and fully rigged situations, maybe the Ace XL is not enough. I some times operate a fully rigged C300mkii with Fuji/Arri Cine Zoom lenses, and you can not believe the tripod (Sachtler) we use! Takes 2 persons to move the set up.
Just some tips for future tripod-head buyers that will check the thread!

What do you hope to gain from these tests? 

I'm going to bang the Ninja Star drum again but I've got to say that if they were going to split the Ninja V into its two component parts then they've arguably decided to sell the wrong half !
Don't get me wrong, its a great monitor for that price but at £349 the extra £200 for the Ninja V having the recorder is almost a no brainer.
Whereas if they reversed that equation and made a compact recorder only version for £200 then everyone who's cameras offer enhanced frame rates and bit rates over HDMI only would be all over it.
And while we're at it, Atomos would also have a big hit by doing an affordable EVF.

I get the feeling you don't like Canon.....
 

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

I am sure RAW is better but the prores looks dang good. Hard to believe the output you get for 1000 bucks. 

It's the Voigtlander look........ If you want the Leica look at 40mm get the Summicron F2  that came with the CL camera. 

Difficult to recommend any legs but the  Flowtech for a 75mm bowl. As stiff as carbon twin tube designs but more compact and once you have used the top leg lock system you will never go back.

Why so angry about camera you don't own and don't intend to own ?

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.