DBounce

Minor Firmware update but seems to address the various banding/bugs case issues @Snowbro has been complaining about:
Firmware Version 1.1.0 incorporates the following enhancements and fixes. 
1. Support for "continuous shooting" is available when "silent shutter" has been enabled.
2. Corrects a phenomenon in which an error may occur if there is a large number of files in a specific format on the memory card.
3. Corrects a phenomenon in which an error may occur when silent shutter has been enabled.
4. Corrects a phenomenon in which horizontal linear noise may occur when using specific lenses together with certain recording image quality settings.
5. Corrects a phenomenon in which the information displayed in the viewfinder may become abnormal. 
EOS R Firmware Version 1.1.0
 
 

Someone should tell Picasso that his art does not accurately reflect real people.
Art doesn't exist in a vacuum, it is always created and viewed in reference to previous work. Over time, film has deviated from being completely in reference to the real world, and has developed its own conventions, symbols, and nuances. New films are viewed in reference to other films, not the real world. In the same way, narrative storytelling, sound design, musical scores, and all other aspects of filmmaking are built on previous films, not just real life
You seem to be implying the color should be accurate to real life unless the artist specifically wants it to be different. This implies that using color as accurate to expected film convention is the work of a "hack." I think this is false.
Would you consider Max Richter's album Vivaldi Recomposed to be creative?

I'm not sure why everyone is certain it will have 4k? The 6DMk2 doesn't. It would seem this camera is being pitched as a stills camera, not a hybrid.

people who sent Ebrahim money

Ripped off? Can’t say I feel ripped off. And as you state, you don’t buy Canon so how can you really speak with any authority to the matter. 
Had the Fuji X-T3... two bodies... a full collection of lenses including MX cinema glass. Both bodies died. Yet I didn’t feel ripped off. I also wouldn’t call their cameras “shit”... but from personal experience I would be hesitant to buy from them again. The image was pretty good, but I prefer the Canon.
I also owned the Nikon Z6. I wouldn’t call it  “shit” but it’s AF is nowhere near as good as Canon’s. Also the image is a bit digital feeling for my taste. Reliability was good.
Who was “ripped off”? Did they not get a camera they paid for? Did Canon lie about the specs? I just don’t understand the hostility?
 

Agreed @Django I think @Snowbro got a lemon. My R exhibits none of the freezing or banding he mentioned. If it did I would have returned it day one.
Yes, RF is the future, but I think you are looking longer term for EF to be fazed out... 10 years or so. Canon are getting set to release four new EF lenses in the coming weeks.
 

There are many things baked into an image when filming (composition, lighting, subject, performance etc...). While adding things in post is a great option, I lean towards the idea that the less you need do in post the better. As Tiffen BPM filters can be found pretty affordable on eBay, why not just pick up a used set? 
Tiffen BPM filters are still used today on many, if not most major productions. If they get thrown on Cooke, Panavision etc lenses they must be good enough to “risk” baking in. I say the bigger risk is trying to add them as an effect in post. It’s pretty easy to make an image look artificial in post. And with the subtle nature of the BPM look, it is very difficult to pull off in post... as everyone here is quickly learning.
Let’s suppose you somehow manage to pull off the look on a static image... great work indeed, but how pray tell do you continue this deception once the camera moves?... You don’t... End of story!

Handling with the Canons is great. They are quick to get up to speed and get the shot. I think this new camera has a place... not something I’m personally buying into. I want something with 1DXMK2 levels of performance with a modern video codec.

I agree, everything has pros and cons.  Just think about how every new camera release we all turn ourselves inside out because there's no perfect camera
I think it also depends on what situations you shoot.  Some people have control and the time to tweak things as they shoot, and there are real advantages to getting it right in-camera.  Others are recording with varying levels of control or even influence on their situation, and just getting the shot might be the best they can hope for.  For these people, moving light-sources or tweaking settings just isn't feasible, so adjusting things in post when the pressure is off gives them extra creative expression.
My personal situation is that in shooting my family and travel videos I don't have time to fiddle around with various things.  This is partly because we go where it's interesting and not where the light is good, partly because for me the holiday comes before the photography, and partly because I'm just not skilled enough to operate the camera and think about every variable all at once, which is why I rely on automatic settings for some things.  
I started this thread because I really like the look of the BPM filters and was using the Glow OFX plugin with Resolve (that does an ok job at this effect) and wanted to see how well I could replicate the real filters.  I shared it partly because others might learn something useful, because it's nice to give back to the community, and because writing it up forces me to think clearly and critically about it so I learn more effectively by doing it.
Education is one of those things where everyone wins
Edit: I also really love that look during golden hour when the sun is out of frame but catches the BPM and gives a warm light-leak style rendering to part of the frame.  That's also something you could model through tracking and placing the lens flare effect off screen, but light-leaks and flares is something I haven't added to my videos yet, so maybe that's something I'll explore in the future.  I want to really push my videos but not to the point where the medium gets in the way of the content, if that makes sense

Yes... sad but true. The GH4 and then later the 5 sort of gave hope that perhaps Panasonic wasn't going to play those games. But now it appears that the real money maker they are protecting might be the GH5/S... and saving the real goods for the upcoming GH6. I think it's possible the real progress will come from Fuji. Their upcoming XH2 and Medium format monster look to be very interesting. Imagine 4k downsampled from a medium format sensor ?Fuji claims the upcoming GFX100S will do just that. Plus, I am certain these two top tier models will be manufactured in Japan... so build will likely be much better. I like the Fuji lenses also. 
Nikon also seems determined to be counted as a force in the mirrorless hybrid world also. I would bet good money their upcoming offerings will be serious contenders. 
 

I’m certainly not pro 4K crop. Of course I would prefer no crop. But that said all things are not equal. For whatever reason the Canon produces a more filmic/organic image that it’s contemporaries regardless of crop. 
Let me put it this way... if there was another mirrorless full frame Canon with 10 Bit output, DPAF in 4K, 30MP + sensor, flippy screen and no crop in 4K... I would be all over that. But that is not yet available.
With the introduction of the S1, the above scenario is a reality within the Panasonic lineup. So it would seem the argument for purchasing the GH5/S is diminished. Especially when the body is near to the same price. The problem is Panasonic seems to have kept some of the weaknesses of the GH5 and removed some of the strengths when creating the S-line. I cannot understand why they didn’t just pull out all the stops.

Until half your shots are out of focus. I think Panasonic dropped the ball on these cameras. Great AF has to be part of the equation for any new camera... for both stills and video. 

I think you are confusing focusing systems. "Contrast detect" hunts; moving past the point of focus and returning in order to establish sharp focus. DPAF does not hunt... regardless of which lens is used. I frequently use my 24-70mm F2.8, 16-35mm F4 and even my EF-S 10-18 on the EOS R... there is zero hunting. As there is also zero hunting on any other Canon bodies that I have used it on... C200 and 1DXMK2 to name a few. If the body support DPAF there is no hunting.
I'm curious... have you used this camera?
Now a case could be made regarding noise... not on the lenses I have previously mentioned. But if using in-camera mics, the 50mm F1.2 does make a noticeable sound when tracking focus. If recording audio externally, well it's a non-issue.

I completely agree. However "one day" doesnt help anyone who is shooting now. So until then, many of us are stuck with smaller sensors as the best option.

We can both agree that most if not all of the features of today's M43 sensors will one day come to Full Frame... but the reverse is not true... and likely never will be.
 

Not true! At least in body weight/size and price. GH5/GH5s/new Olympus are bigger, heavier, as expensive - as even some dSLRs are, and definitely a lot bigger and heavier than Z/A/a/NX cameras. Go check the numbers and you will see the truth. Cost, also. Even in the lower of the low there are full frame options now.
What that indicates is, that we haven't (not even close) fight the thermal monster yet. That applies to every digital appliance, especially to the ones that have to perform at the top of our digital performance capabilities, like cameras, editing laptops, military and industrial applications, e.t.c

?oh noooos not the rolling shutter! Really, how many people actually have a problem with rolling shutter ruining their shots in real world usage? Do you seriously film wip pans exclusively?
 

I will agree on that front. Full frame is to a large extent... overrated. However, it does have benefits when shooting in low light conditions. I think it's nice to have the options anyway. On a positive note, it's clear what Panasonic need to do to take the lead. Fix AF and add that dam flippy screen. If they do those two things, the S-Line will have more than a fighting chance. Like I said, the image out of the camera looks good and low-light is pretty amazing. 
Oh one last thing.... the system needs to be less costly... the price of admission is too high for what it is. 

There are a couple sort of obvious innovations that have somehow escaped the feature list on most of the current crop of cameras. Things like IBIS that can be locked down when disabled is a big deal, and really adds to the flexibility of the camera.  If you think about it, what good is it to be able to disable the camera intelligently moving the sensor, when the other option is just having it flop about inside the camera willie nilly? It just seems a bit silly to have the disable feature without this locking capability.
Another obvious, but absent feature is the sensor cover that is present on the new Canon EOS R. It's so nice to not have to worry about dust getting on the sensor when switching lenses. Both these features are things ALL mirrorless cameras should have as standard features. 

There are a couple sort of obvious innovations that have somehow escaped the feature list on most of the current crop of cameras. Things like IBIS that can be locked down when disabled is a big deal, and really adds to the flexibility of the camera.  If you think about it, what good is it to be able to disable the camera intelligently moving the sensor, when the other option is just having it flop about inside the camera willie nilly? It just seems a bit silly to have the disable feature without this locking capability.
Another obvious, but absent feature is the sensor cover that is present on the new Canon EOS R. It's so nice to not have to worry about dust getting on the sensor when switching lenses. Both these features are things ALL mirrorless cameras should have as standard features. 

Within the limitations is where you need to work... not just with the R... with all cameras. I use 4K all the time on the R. Yes there’s a crop... that’s been covered to death. But the image it produces is quite good. IMO, more filmic/cinematic than both Sony and Nikon. 
Side-by-side, comparing to the Z6, I can tell you that the Nikon’s is the more detailed image. The Sony produces a similarly detailed image. The problem is, for me at least, neither of these images feels very cinematic. They feel like video. Don’t get me wrong, they are certainly technically superior; and in low-light both handily outperform the Canon. But here in lies the problem. Regardless of technical superiority, the Canon just looks better. It looks organic. It moves better. And while the Canon cannot hope to compete at nose bleed ISOs, it works well up to 6400 or so, with noise looking more like film grain than the horrible confetti we are all too use to seeing.
Now here is the problem... while you can certainly sharpen the Canon image, there is no method I am aware of that can recreate the organic qualities that the Canon produces. I spent about two months comparing footage from these cameras. Trying to match to my C200 which is of course pretty flexible in post. During the course of this testing I tried numerous techniques, in an attempt to replicate the organic look that the EOS R could produce. I added filters to the lenses. Tried vintage glass. Used post processing... nothing... and I mean nothing could convincingly reproduce the filmic/organic feel of the Canon. Finally, frustrated and frankly, disappointed I opted to switch to the EOS R and part with the other “superior” cameras.
My conclusion: Cinema is art... and art is not a technical exercise. While the others are without doubt better spec wise, that means little if they fail to produce an image that you love.
I’m positive that if you search around you can find some awful EOS R footage. But I can tell you right now... that’s operator error... not the camera. In the right hands this camera can produce impressive imagery.

I love this because it’s so true. I went with Sony for a couple of years (FS7/5, A7s, A7rII) because they seemed to be crushing in specs. But despite all the technical prowess, the 8-bit HD image out of the 5 year old C100 was still way nicer looking. 
Now I have a mixture of Canon and the GH5, but will probably stick with Canon now that they have a full frame mirrorless line.
hoping for a $5000-ish cinema line camera with RF Mount soon as well. Then could be happy for a few years. 

Well maybe Canon will hire you as a consultant. You clearly understand the way industry works far better than they do?

IIRC It was in an interview with Atomos. They mentioned that the Nikon can do 4K raw, but Nikon will not offer it until support for CFExpress is added.

That may be your own personal conclusion, but many photographers & videographers would obviously disagree.
Body specs aren't everything. Albeit certain limitations, as a complete ecosystem, Canon have imo the most appealing lineup (for my type of work) that give great results with minimum fuss.
Again more & more single operators. Current trend is also 'body per lens' type of shoot. 2 or 3 bodies and a bag of lenses.
A perfect setup for that is a C100/200 as A-cam,  5D4/1DX2 as a B-cam & EOS R as a C-cam (on gimbal, motorized slider).
I would only trust Canon with their DPAF for that type of shoot: