Tone1k

2 hours ago, kye said:

LOL..  I guess you know better than all the people who actually do this for a living.  I look forward to you releasing your prefect camera!!

If you read my original question, I said I understand devices like these can have bugs that need to be ironed out. What I don't understand is how a camera can be released with major imaging problems that show up under normal shooting conditions. It essentially fails at its main task. 

Would you accept a TV that did the same thing? I can't see a TV that displayed the same kind of imaging problems as BMD's cameras being allowed to market. 

You may be happy to pay for the priveledge of being a guinea pig but tests like and fixes should be done prior to release. Who wants a camera you can't use for a few months? 

5 hours ago, John Brawley said:

Here's a Black Sun from an Alexa shoot of mine, and a nice OLPF flare from a DXL / RED Monstro on the latest Mission Impossible trailer.

JB

Hi John, yeah I had similar issues with OLPF flare with the Epic. I get the point, Alexa black sun looks tiny in comparison to BMD's original problem but anyway..... all I wanted to know is if the cameras go through more vigorous testing than the gen 1 cameras BMD produced. 

I understand you can't comment.... 

22 hours ago, kye said:

I'm definitely not JB, but I can talk about testing, having been involved in software development and testing in my day job.

The short version of why things are released with bugs is this:

• A company figures out that they can build a camera with X features in Y time, and they think that it will fill a niche and make money
• They start to develop it, and due to how dependencies in projects work, development takes longer than anticipated
• The company knows that releasing a product late is a huge mistake, especially in a rapidly developing market, but they also know that releasing a product that is flawed is also a bad idea
• The company goes into TESTING, where people are using the camera, noting down issues, annoyances, and product features in a big database
• Everything in the database is ranked (according to importance) and then allocated to a tech to fix
• Once an issue is fixed it is then sent back to the person who found it to test it again
• It is common for a change to fix something but break something else, and it's also common for a problem to be caused by two things (eg, hardware and software, or two different software modules) not being completely aligned.  Communication needs to occur, discussions to understand what is happening, what to be done, implications etc..
• At some point (normally the publicised release date) a huge meeting is held and all the remaining items to be fixed are reviewed by management and the decision to release it anyway is made.  It is very very very rare for something to miss the delivery deadline because of the number of issues.
• The process of identifying, tracking, fixing, testing, continues during the lifetime of the product (and is why there are firmware updates to a product)

In reality there will be thousands, maybe tens of thousands of items involved in a process like this.  Nothing is ever perfect.  It is not possible to test every function with every combination of data. 

Here's a quote from an article about developing the software for the space shuttle:  [Edit: here's the link to the below]

I highlighted the relevant passages in bold.

Obviously, NASA has more at stake with software problems than a consumer electronics company, and even then, they can't possibly test everything.

There is a typical divide in culture in an organisation around Risk.  

• IT and engineering professionals are normally trained in a culture of excellence, where due to advanced mathematical training, there is often an underlying and often unconscious mindset of there being one answer to a question, and therefore one solution to a problem, with the rest being sub-optimal.  These teams are often incentivised by having KPIs and bonuses around system reliability.
• Sales, marketing, and product managers operate in "the market" which is complicated, messy, and is basically a shit-fight, and know that sales (and therefore profit) are more related to perception rather than facts, and they know that every day a product shipping date is delayed is lost sales.  They know that nothing will ever be 'perfect' and are fully ready to 'explain away' any shortcomings of the product once it's in the market, but they can't do a single thing or sell a single unit until it is actually released.  These people have KPIs and often have large percentages of their income based on sales bonuses.  They care about quality, but only as it impacts sales.
• Often, Sales, marketing, and product managers think that IT and engineering professionals are ivory tower elitists who will 'gold plate' everything until the company goes bankrupt and products have to be ripped from their hands in order for the company to ever be finished and for anyone to ever get paid.
• Often, IT and engineering professionals think that Sales, marketing, and product managers are reckless, dodgy, cowboys who have no pride in quality, no understanding of shafting the consumer by fast-talk and no integrity, and they need to prevent products from being released too soon otherwise their lack of quality will immediately sink the company and no-one will get paid ever again.

I hope this illuminates why products ship will bugs.  It's a fundamental issue, and the final result is always a compromise.

Thanks for the reply. While I understand that any piece of equipment can have many small bugs, major image issues for a device who's job it is to capture images should not be allowed to make their way into production. 

Hi JB, 

Thanks for your input here on this forum. 

While you say that BM have asked most of the questions asked here already in the devolopment stages, I'm a little more interested in the product testing stages pre release.

While the Ursa Mini line have had a lot less image quality issues than 1st Gen BMD cameras like the Production and Production 4k, image quality issues like sunspots in highlights, high levels of flicker and FPN (in the UrsaMini 4k) seem like obvious  issues that should be picked up on pre release of the camera. Why do issues like this get through if product testing occurs prior to release? Surely a test of the original Production camera would have included shooting a frame with a light source on it and the sun spot show up? 

While I trust that BM have learned from their past mistakes, and I know that a working version of the Pocket 4K has been doing the rounds with viewings in retailers here in Australia to hopefully get feedback pre release, do cameras go through more thorough testing now compared to a few years ago or can we expect the Pocket 4K, with a new sensor (to BMD) to have image quality issues on release and then BMD address them afterwards? 

Cheers. 

3 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

I spoke to my dealer (camera dealer that is) about B&H's 3rd Sept date. They called BM Europe who apparently said they have never confirmed the 3rd to anyone. I then notice B&H changed their date. Read into that as much as you like, I'm looking forward to hearing the conspiracy theories ranging from a leaked release date to definite delays ?

 

 

Let's not start speculating in delays until after September. There is still plenty of time for BM to deliver on time... Delay conversations are boring especially when the due date hasn't even passed yet. 

I don't see a problem with the way this discussion has evolved. It has naturally evolved to what it is based on the lack of new info on the Pocket. Let's not be so militant that natural conversation be stifled for needing to start new threads for each and every little tangent that a conversation might go on. I see JB as a BMD ambassador so his input is highly valued here. 

2 hours ago, kye said:

If you're using it like a traditional cinema camera then its appearance doesn't really matter (everything looks like a cyborg when it's rigged up lol), but if you're not using it that way then sometimes a cameras appearance can matter.

I shoot home videos in places people are ok with you shooting home videos but not 'pro' videos, and if the camera looks 'pro' then you run the risk of getting hassled.

Basically, other people make judgements about what your intentions are and where the footage might go from what type of shooter you are, which they judge from the equipment.  
If you're shooting in dangerous places then a pro looking camera might get you robbed, but a pocket one might not (people deliberately make their cameras look beat up or old when shooting in high-crime poverty-stricken areas for this purpose), if you're shooting an event and your equipment looks pro maybe people will be uncooperative with being filmed in the hope you will pay them, which they wouldn't do if it was an iPhone or P&S, if you're shooting your kid in the park and the camera looks pro the security guards and council workers who aren't cops but wish they were and act like it can assume you're shooting a commercial project with actors instead of shooting your family and hassle you for permits and make you leave.  Even if you're shooting a low-budget piece in public the larger your rig the more people in the background are going to stare at the camera as they walk past, but wouldn't as much if you looked like a parent or a tourist.
When I visited the Vatican they had high security and wouldn't let any tripods in, and didn't seem to care about my pocket-sized mirrorless camera, but if I had a VENICE or maybe even C200 I bet they would have hassled me for filming permits, and saying "I'm just a hobbyist" wouldn't get around that kind of situation.  Of course, a Venice or C200 would be overkill for a hobbyist, but people see a 5D as a "pro camera" because for photography it is, so there's a risk of someone seeing your tiny little video camera and thinking it's a pro looking stills camera.

If you're shooting for a professional purpose then having a professional looking camera isn't a problem, it's when it doesn't match your purpose that problems can come in.  

Lots of people shot hand-held travel films with the Pocket 1, so there is a segment of people that like IQ but want to use it incognito on unofficial shoots.

I'm pretty sure that when people criticise the P4K's looks, it's not because it looks 'too pro'. They just don't like the look of it and call it 'ugly'. Like it matters. 

I wouldnt give any style point to the Red Epic, Alexa Mini...... Etc. 

Why does what the Pocket 4k 'looks like' matter in the slightest? 

If the images are good and it's ergonomically well designed, I couldn't care less what it 'looks like'. 

I just don't get it, sorry. 

21 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

I don't like the locked off look of a gimbal for a lot of scenarios, but it depends.  I prefer a smooth movement, but one that looks "real."  A handheld camera with really good ibis is exactly the look I like, but that's mostly for stationary shots.  

For stationary shots, try a monopod or shoulder rig if you want some natural looking movement. 

52 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

I don't like the look of a gimbal, but I don't 100% need IBIS either.  I also hate the look of the tiny shakes you get with smaller cameras too.  I prefer a steadicam or glidecam alternative, or some sort of shoulder/chest stabilizer.

I agree that a gimbal still doesn't replace a steadycam for smoothness but from what I've seen of the ronin s, the gap is certainly closing. I've seem some super smooth stuff from the ronin s..... Something IBIS will never replicate. 

I personally don't see the big deal with IBIS in a camera like the Pocket 4K especially with all the hand-held gimbals on the market. Every lens and camera becomes stabilised with a gimbal and with the price of the Pocket 4K, you should be able to afford a good gimbal if you need stabilised shots. 

Sure, a gimbal is a little more cumbersome than IBIS but gimbals work much much better than ANY stabilised sensor. And if you are buying the Pocket4k, you are most likely shooting RAW or ProRes (pro formats) so you should be chasing pro results that a gimbal can give you and IBIS can't. If you are a hobbyist and just shoot handheld with no rigging , the pocket4k is overkill (even for the price) or get a stabilised lens but a Mirrorless or DSLR with IBIS might be a better option for you. Despite the price, this is a cinema camera and how many cinema cameras have IBIS? I'm not willing to pay for it or deal with its setbacks even when disabled. 

5 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

If I was James Jannard I would demand 1000 buck royalty for every damn camera body Kinefinity sells. It is a blatant copy. At least make Something different that you could claim you thought about for over 30 seconds in the design stage.I would be embarrassed to say I even own one.

That is the reason it is so cheap. They had no design team cost at all. Anyone that owns one ought to have to go to Confession and tell the priest you are co conspirator of Theft LoL. Some people I tell you what will do anything to save a buck. Even thievery.

Well I am kidding, eh I think, yeah I am....OK I am. ?

 

Eh, what!? 

The Kinefinity is the same design as a Red in the same way a Canon DSLR is the same design as a Nikon one, or a Sony ENG camera the same design as a Panasonic one, or a Brand A car fundamentally the same design as a brand B car. They all have the same basic design and configuration. 

18 hours ago, kaylee said:

I detest your attitude, and I have absolutely no interest in anything youre talking about ? A "condition of employment"??? ??? Are you high?

Great, youre American? You should be absolutely ashamed.

Dont you have better things to do? Thats my SHOCK – you think this argument is important!!! like your opponent. and now youre fighting me?

I feel sorry for you pal ?

Why has the word "sissy" been used on The Simpsons so many times? You dont think thats a "respectful" writing room?

Dude...

 

Seems like EOSHD is only for angry keyboard warriors like you who care more about a camera's specs and starting an argument and less about actually shooting and creating.

JB is a true professional who most of you here (including myself) could learn a ton from. Blackmagic actually give him cameras to shoot with prior to their release. Rather than engage in meaningful conversation, most of you are more interested in a slanging match than you are about actually learning anything. 

I actually agree with John, we should stop using the word sissy as a put down.

What a toxic forum.

I'm not going to bother analysing the 'stolen clip'. It's completely pointless and all based on assumption. We know the camera was a pre-prod model so why is anyone bothering being so critical of it. 

I'm sure BM will release some footage soon that we can then judge properly.... Until then, everyone's getting worked up over nothing. 

14 hours ago, Kisaha said:

What I am finding is some people with no sense of humor (nothing funny you ever said), no spirit (nothing intelligent), no critical judgement (you have a Fuji from 2014? with 16mgpxls sensor that doesn't do video? great buy), no humility (Fuji arrogance, we can call it check Yuryev's video mentioning Fuji fanboys), no witt at all (seriously, read some books), and not great in writing sentences (I hope English is not your mother tongue). I am just stop-ing here, first because you are a pack of wolves attacking me personally, and that is extremely primitive and pathetic, especially when you do that for thousands of miles away, but more importantly, because you bored me to death. 

Quite a personal attack you unleashed there Kisaha just because I said "thats what I'm finding too". 

I'll regret it but screw it, I'll bite.....

Sorry, I didn't know that we had to be funny on the EOSHD forum. Can't say I've seen you post a funny comment but maybe I haven't looked hard enough.

I have a 16MP camera from 2014? Not too intelligent are you then. Can you read? BTW, My critical judgement sees me earn a good living as a professional in this industry. I have many clients that are extremely happy with the work I produce and value my critical judgement.

"Fuji arrogance"? I use all sorts of cameras for my video work. From Red, Arri, Sony F55, FS7, FS5, A7SII Blackmagic UMP etc. How am I a Fuji fanboy? Did you take offence because I prefer Fuji's colour science to Samsungs? Grow up!  And quoting some rich boy Vlogger, Yuryev (yes, i looked him up) that is a Youtube hack shows your level of intelligence. 

I'm not great at "writing sentences" ....and then you type "stop-ing" and "you bored me to death" (past tense, do I not bore you anymore?) Enough said!

You are nothing but an angry troll. Pathetic.

1 hour ago, kye said:

Just listened to it..  I'm assuming it was the 12fps clip?

Audio sounded good, but there was nothing in front of the camera making noise so not way to judge isolation / directionality

Hmm..  unless they're recording 4 channels of audio it is possibly to control pickup pattern.  Promising!

Built in mic is stereo so just two tracks. 

2 hours ago, kye said:

I hope so!!  

They look quite large to me - considering that a condenser microphone is a very small object.  I'm having evil thoughts about them having multiple capsules in there with parabolic reflectors and wired in a way that makes the output more directional.  

I'm probably completely wrong, but this thread is about taking very little evidence and running wild with it, right?

The Pocket 4k does have four microphones apparently. 

14 minutes ago, Kubrickian said:

EOSHD: come for the camera discussion, stay for the suffocating toxicity 

Yeah, that's what I'm finding too. 

2 hours ago, Damphousse said:

As long as it is 85% of what we think it will be.

I haven't preordered because... Blackmagic.  I am being disciplined and waiting for them to sort out manufacturing issues, QC, and firmware updates.  I probably won't pick up this camera until 2019.  It will be great if they have a bunch of cameras on hand that work as advertised on day one but this isn't Canon.

The reassuring thing about the Pocket 4K is that BM are already taking it around to most of the Pro Sales and Rental houses here in Australia and letting people (rental managers, sales people, and industry professionals) play with it. We are still four months away from its scheduled release and the camera is doing the rounds. While they do state that it's a 'preproduction model' so not allowing anyone record footage with it, in terms of issues, these should be greatly minimised as they are getting feedback a long time before release.

On 08/05/2018 at 6:35 PM, Kisaha said:

You realize how weird that sounds in 2018?! My 2014 cameras do that.

Have fun!

Your post is is condescending. Nothing more. It's not a comparison of anything constructive. "Have Fun!" being the tell tale phrase...

16 hours ago, Tone1k said:

And I had a 4K shooting phone before Arri had a 4K Alexa........whats the point you're trying to make?

My comment was a ridiculous throw away line to try to demonstrate how silly your comment was. Yes, I know full well that you can't compare an Alexa with a phone camera. It was a silly comment aimed at the same level of your two comments boasting that you had been doting 240p for four years..... So what? A camera is more than one feature

I don't have a problem with Samsung's colour science but do prefer Fuji's by a long shot. 

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

I am not comparing a mobile phone with a tiny sensor, but

1) an APS-C sensor  on a

2) pro body camera (only Fuji and Samsung ever had a mirrorless APS-C pro body, in case you haven't noticed, so they are pretty much comparable) 

If you and others, can't see the significance here, then buy an Arri to call and text your friends and family, and shoot films with your phone.

Semantics aren't your strong field of science it seems. Too pity, because they are very important to film makers.

I am wondering how many hybrid cameras and systems you have changed since 2014, for other members, I am pretty sure they have changed at least 3. Of course it's your money, if I was rich enough, I would happily own every known camera system to humanity, live your myth in Fuji land and be merry.

Good grief, your attitude is pathetic.

I've changed camera systems once since 2014 but then I don't use these cameras for work. The Fuji is my personal camera that I use for taking photos of the kids, travel etc. The video function is secondary. 

For work, we use Arri, Red, BM Ursa Mini Pro, F55 etc. And that's the thing, professionals and filmakers don't get all hung up on one system. Can you categorically say that you have produced better images than anyone using an XT2 because you had 240fps four years ago? 

It doesn't really matter which camera had 120fps first or that you might  have one that does 240fps. To XT-2 owners this is a great, free upgrade. All cameras are different. Does your 240fps camera have Fujifilm colour science? I'll take Fuji colour science and 120fps over something like Sonys or even Samsung's colour science and 240fps. I'll also take Fuji lenses over ANY Sony or Samsung lenses..... Either way though, who cares who did what first. Choose the tool that you like using. Why should anyone care that you had a camera that did 240fps last year if that's not a feature I'm interested or have the need in using. 

The sum of a camera is all if it's parts, not just one spec. 

I bet you can't wait for the NX2 so you can brag to us all how far ahead of its time it is.....tell me, when are Samsung releasing the NX2 ? 

Finally, if Sumsung land is so fantastic what are you doing in the Fuji Land thread anyway. You obviosly have nothing constructive to add. Did you really just come here to gloat? 

On 08/05/2018 at 7:41 PM, Kisaha said:

@Django As I said, my cameras do 120 from 2014, and other cameras have gone to 180 and 240 frames already.

Admittedly, 120 is good enough for most uses, I usually shoot 60p anyway. 

I am curious about people's slow mo tests here.

and, everything the X-T2 gets, makes the H-X1 a weaker buy.

And I had a 4K shooting phone before Arri had a 4K Alexa........whats the point you're trying to make?

1 hour ago, John Brawley said:

" Show me some cinematic looking footage shot with this camera"

-  shows cinematic footage shot with the camera

"They could make any camera look good"

Yeah we all know that the skills of those shooting are the most important factor in terms of end result. But you asked for cinematic footage from the camera ??

One of those skills though is also choosing a camera / lens package.

There have been Zeiss super 16 format Superspeeds as long as the 35mm format ones have existed.  They're great and actually pretty cheap.  Mostly in AB or PL m ount which can be easily adapted to MFT.

Unfortunately at this price there are many users that are new to filmmaking, or maybe see filmmaking as a hobby.  Blackmagic are exposing many users to a RAW or even high DR LOG workflow for the first time.  I see people slapping on LUTs designed for other cameras, not bothering to grade or even learn Resolve turning out half arsed results.

But.

If you're willing to step up YOUR game, willing to LEARN how to grade within this workflow, the camera will not hold you back.  The codec will not get in your way. 

It won't guarantee success either, you still have to be able to light, make nice frames and have a plan.  But you won't hit a ceiling with the camera very quickly in terms of image fidelity.

JB

 

 

 

Well said. 

Much of the look of a film is in the grade. Having a camera that gives you the most flexibility in post does help tremendously. So while yes, the DP has a huge influence on the look of the image, they may not have got the same results if shooting on a GH4 (as someone commented) as they may not have been able to push the image around as much in post. 

While a great camera can't make up for a poor DP, the camera does play a role in the look of a film. If a great DP would do just as well shooting VHS as was also stated, then surely the big production companies would have got wind of this and saved some money by hiring great DP's and handycams.....

5 minutes ago, jonpais said:

uummm... I don't follow. If you're gonna use a monitor, you'll want a cage. Cages don't have to cost a fortune. Even if you use the threads on top of the camera, I see no reason to destroy the body just to attach a cable....

Sorry, I was being sarcastic.... And visicious. I wouldn't really tap holes in the side of my camera. I'll stop now.... It's late. 

Just now, jonpais said:

Why would you need to do that when the cage will have clamps?

HDMI is all about saving money.... Not spending it on a cage ;-) 

As another member suggested, I'm just going to find my own hacks to make it work. Might tap some holes in the side of the camera and use one of these....... Should be FINE!