Kubrickian

The floaty image-stabilized look has come to define this level of filmmaking. I would like to build out a proper shoulder rig with some weight to get a higher-production value look with unstabilized primes and the x-t3. 

Y'all are probably well aware of this suggestion, but FWIW, I always lift my darker levels a bit with Fuji files in Premiere using "fast color corrector."  I'll push "output" blacks up 8 and bring down the highlights to 235.  From there I'll tweak some mids too, depending on what I'm trying to match.
FUJI colors are nice, but the levels from my X-Pro2 are quite different compared to what comes out of other cameras.  
None of this is probably germane to your problem, but if you can recover your details in h.265 to your preference and the issue is at least consistent, you'll have a rough work-around.
These sorts of hardware/maths issues are why, even though it's painfully slow, I typically like to render my important work using "software only."  That might be worth a test.  I know my PC does all sorts of frustrating things when I'm trying to export using hardware acceleration.  So much so I just can't trust it.

The floaty image-stabilized look has come to define this level of filmmaking. I would like to build out a proper shoulder rig with some weight to get a higher-production value look with unstabilized primes and the x-t3. 

The floaty image-stabilized look has come to define this level of filmmaking. I would like to build out a proper shoulder rig with some weight to get a higher-production value look with unstabilized primes and the x-t3. 

Shot this one with my X-T3 in April. I was happy with my Samsung NX1, but X-T3 is way better (except battery and grip). Filmed with anamorphic lens Bolex Moller 16/32/1.5x.
 

Not nearly as beautiful as that Patagonia piece. But we just got back from a weekend trip to Vietnam. 
 
Filmed on XT-3 F-Log, used the Eterna LUT. Canon 17-55 f/2.8 with Fringer adapter and a super cheap and ugly variable ND.
 
 

One thing I've discovered - and this might help some people - is that the rendering settings in Premiere can create extreme banding and blotches in your h256 footage once you apply a lut.
I had terrible problems with this on my Mac, before I realised I'd accidentally created a sequence with the Metal hardware acceleration setting selected under Project settings. When I changed it to OpenCL, the banding went away completely.
Might be something worth playing with. I usually find Software rendering to be the most reliable for quality, albeit by far the slowest.

I like a lot of his choices here to set up the camera UI for video shooting.
 
 

Idk, I think someone posted a link in a Canon thread that showed all of the Acadamy Award Doc nominations were shot on Canon cameras and a bunch of people came here to dispute the sense of shooting on a Canon.
The reality of the situation is this...
NOBODY CARES WHAT CAMERA YOU USE!!!!!!!!!!
They only care about the STORY you tell with that camera.
Case in point, I recently watched The Florida Project and I really enjoyed it. While watching the credits I learned it was shot on film and then i also saw the Filmic Pro logo. Immediately I looked online and learned that the last scene/sequence was shot on an iPhone and you know what... while I watched the film... I didn’t even notice. And after learning the iPhone was used... I didn’t even bother to go back and see if I could tell the difference because I enjoyed the story.

This is racist as fuck.

decide yourself ) (shot this handheld with xt2)
 

Messing around with my XT-3 last night. Used minolta lenses 24mm 2.8 and 135mm 2.8 Shot with Eterna, no color corrections, just a couple curve adjustments here and there. 

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!

RS on EOS R is poor in 4K.
That said if you’re shooting car chases or fight scenes RS will be an issue on most cameras (even pro cine cams unless you’re shooting an Alexa or GS camera).
I often notice RS skewing in big budget TV/Hollywood productions (just the other night watching The Sinner on a bridge shot).
RED even has an article on it:
https://support.red.com/hc/en-us/articles/236069387-8K-Sensors-and-Rolling-Shutter-Skew-Effects
They also suggest reducing the resolution to counter the issue.
I do this all the time on EOS R, mainly to get FF shots (you can easily switch from FHD to 4K with custom movie settings) but also to combat RS.
I just know when I’m in 4K to slow down camera movements.
 It’s far from ideal, it’s clearly a workaround the 4K crop & RS.
Hopefully EOS RP’s 24MP sensor will have similar or better RS performance to other 24MP cameras (A7III/Z6) as it probably won’t supersample. 
 

A reference for anyone looking sharpness and clarity.  C100 MKII 4K upscale filmed at 60fps exported to 24fps in davinchi resolve. EOS Standard Profile with the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 II  I was quite surprised at how good the footage turned out.  Very action cinematic to me.  It looks even better when in slowmo. 
 

To add to what @Michi just wrote... after spending some years reading this site, I think the most logical approach for many forum users here is to go and buy a cinema camera and use the right tool for the job. 

Wait & see, unless I missed something all the rumors said was 26MP & no touchbar.
But Canon isn’t silly, they know how to segment and are not going to give a lower end model better (video) specs than the R.
The 26MP is probably the same 26MP sensor as in the 6D2 (just like the 30MP on the R echoes the 5DIV).
So what does this indicate? Probably no 4K! Or maybe 4K with no DPAF (a la M50)
Other possible limitations could be: 
No touchbar, no flip-out screen, no top LCD, no C-Log, no ALL-I codec, no 10-bit out, less AF points, less DR.. etc
Again I highly doubt the RP will have anything better for video than the R.
Canon are just applying the same formula & release strategy than their 6D, 5D, 1DX2 FF models imo: mid market first, then lower end, then pro.
Plenty to hate about Canon but nobody is going to end up crying.. you guys sure like to jump the gun!
 

Just an observation while recording today. I got the best results using auto focus by setting it to multi. Worked better than using area or touch focus. Custom settings were -2 speed and +3 tracking. 

Touch works well but when operating a gimbal its pretty hard to touch the screen while concentrating on getting your movements right and keeping the gimbal steady. 

Over the past few weeks I have spent a lot of time with the Canon EOS R. I have also spent a lot of time with Nikons new Z6. On paper the Nikon Z6 would appear to have the EOS R beat dead to rights. And in all fairness to the Nikon, the 4k output from the Z6 is more detailed, sharper and cleaner at higher ISO than what the Canon can manage. So case closed then... an easy win for the Nikon, Canon fanboys go home! Well, not so fast... the problem is that for all of these specs, when viewed side by side... the exact same scene shot on the Canon EOS R just seems more organic. More filmic... in all honesty, it feels more cinematic. 
Most here know that I have long praised the Nikon for its strengths... and rightly so. It's one hell of a camera. But when looking at the same scene, shot on both the Nikon and Canon, I can tell you, there is something magical about the Canon footage. I caught myself constantly trying to make the Nikon footage more like the EOS R. I thought softening a sharp image would be a simple matter of adding in a diffusion filter. But in practice nothing I did could duplicate the effortless organic vibe of the Canon. It's not the sharpest, but it is clear and in focus; softer by default, and frankly in a world filled with over-sharpened footage I find it refreshing. The color out of the EOS R look great. You need do very little if anything to the files. But if you shoot in C-Log, there is ample data to play with. Better yet if you output to the Ninja V in 10 bit. 
While it might not make sense... and you would be right to argue that the Nikon is superior... none of that changes the fact that the Canon produces a nicer image. Even when it gets noisy the noise looks more like film grain than noise. 
Between the two, both are fairly easy to use, granted, there is a learning curve if switching from one brand to the other. But nothing that bad. I find the Canon's menus to be better, but that might be just because I am use to Canon. I will say that the Canon's controls are arranged to be easier to use from in front of the camera. The flippy screen is also a big plus. The crop did bother me at first, but I don't favor wide shots so it was not a deal breaker, and for those times that call for more FOV, I can easily adapt one of my wide angle lenses.
In the end you have a choice to make... Go with the spec sheet, and get a superior camera; or pick the one that delivers more cinematic footage. For me the choice was difficult until I stepped back and looked at the output from both cameras. Once I did that the choice was clear. Canon wins again. I'm not sure how they managed it. But perhaps that's part of the magic.
 

Yeah, this looks impressive... until you realize he was not actually recovering lost information from an overexposed shot, but rather just undoing the processing that FCPX did to the footage when he imported it. Let me ask you this... if you shot stills in raw @14bit, and they were that overexposed... do you believe you would be able to recover that much detail? Of course not. This video is a excellent example of a YouTuber misleading by not fully understanding color space and the processing that it being applied.

Definitely have a look at FHD Crop mode. It is indeed supersampled from 4K and has super good sharpness/detail that rivals C line FHD.
The way i have my EOS R setup is FF FHD on Movie Custom 1, FHD Crop mode on Custom 2 & 4K on Custom 3.
By pressing mode and selecting C1/C2/C3 i can very quickly switch modes depending on the scene and double the focal length of my primes.
Personally, I love the ergonomics. I use the grip though. Its quite different from any other camera so it might take a moment to get used to it. 
The customisation of the camera is pretty deep, i really enjoy that too.

I prefer this version:
 
 

The focus throw is terrible for video on this lens. 

I would say that straight out of the camera the Fuji colour looks very nice, but not necessarily like film. You probably wouldn't mistake it for film, that's for sure.
The BMPCC4k, from what I've seen, looks a little more filmic with vintage lenses, but both of these cameras are going to require some work in production and post production if you're trying to lose the video look entirely.
I think there's also a bias in the kind of footage we've seen from both cameras. The Pocket seems to have been bought by more indie filmmaker types, while the Fuji seems to be in the hands of more photographers from what I can tell by going on YT and Vimeo. So I think the Pocket footage is appealing if you match that profile. A lot of the Fuji footage is badly shot, exposed and graded.
The Fujifilm can also shoot stills, so it kind of depends if you need a hybrid or not. It also has good autofocus.
Do a search for H1 footage, and you'll see more Fuji footage with a filmic treatment.
 
 
https://vimeo.com/265565687

This nifty thing showed up a couple of days ago. Have been playing with it today and I really like it.
Its sweet to have it pretty much permanently sitting on the tripod. That way Im never to lazy to bring along a slider.

Did a quick revive as well.