austinchimp

IMHO Tony actually did a very good test/survey. Blind tests are rare. Certain parts may be questionable but general conclusions are valid IMHO and quite revealing:
1. Color perception and preferences are subjective. Both for professionals and nonprofessional viewers. 
2. Brand loyalty skew personal opinions even more. 
3. Slight variations of colors usually gets unnoticed by the general public(viewers) and even by professionals. We start to see the differences when we compare different cameras / images. Quite true IMHO.
While there is definitely science in colors, personal preferences rules at the end. There is nothing scientific in personal preferences. So saying that camera A has better color science than camera B is somewhat wrong, when we discover that BETTER is subjective. Better color does not mean scientifically correct colors it just means colors we personally like and prefer. A blind test just prove how off those personal preferences may be. So it's correct to say better colors FOR ME.
Does it means we do not need LUTs or adjusting colors or use Andrew's EOS Pro Colors settings? Are color adjustments really just one click of the button away? Of course not. Getting the colors we want or like may be quite time consuming in both photo and video. If we like the colors of our videos strait off the camera and want to leave them like this, then fine. If we prefer the colors of camera A better than camera B, and have camera A then lucky us. But if we don’t like the colors straight off the camera or want some special colors and/or vision then we have to tweak them. In video this can be quite laborious and time consuming. Color correction and grading is a well payed profession. If somebody already have presets that tweak, adjust the colors the way we like it, well bring them on. He did the laborious part and those presets will save us quite a lot of time and work in post.
So Tony is right about the subjectivity but wrong when saying one click and white balance will do it for most of us. Unfortunately not that easy and simple. 
IMHO he gave the example of white balance adjustment to show that all cameras have good RAW images to start with and differences are not that big.  

Nope. Poll Includes outdoor portraits. 
“I gave 1,500 photographers a blind poll and had them pick the image with the best color in several different scenes, including portraits in different lighting and outdoor photos”
I think people should stop yelling fake news and click bait each time anything is released on internet. There is always an amount of bias, affiliate and so on somewhere. Just analyze and pick the info you need. There are multiple useful info in this test imho. 

Lovely example of the out of camera colour. Personally I much prefer the natural look to the LUTs which have been thrown onto the footage. I'm sick of seeing M31 and Deluts personally. It makes all cameras look the same, which is perhaps the point.
The ease with which you can obtain a pleasing, cinematic yet naturalistic look is what separates the men from the boys, in my personal opinion. It's why we all love Canon colours, Alexa, Blackmagic, and now Fuji.

Let me preface this by saying I'm not bashing Canon as a brand, and I do love the image their cameras produce, but there are legitimate reasons why they get criticised.
 
I agree it's partly because Canon are still the big boys in the market and therefore draw more criticism. However Sony have, in the last few years, released a number of cameras which have pushed the boundaries in technology, giving us new capabilities in Log, slow motion, resolution, size, hybrids etc. They haven't all been a huge success, but you do get the feeling they're pushing their own technology to see how much they can fit in to the cameras and straining at the limits. Remember how much criticism they get for overheating, which is proof they're pushing the tech pretty hard.
Canon, on the other hand, have been proven to deliberately hold back technology, and sit very conservatively in old tech with outdated specs, when we know they're sitting on things that could do better. Given how many people were invested in their systems, it's rubbed people up the wrong way.
lastly I would say that Sony gets loads of criticism for their colour, ergonomics, menus, pricing, some of which isn't really justified, while some of it is. So Canon aren't the only brand which gets bashed.
Very interesting discussion though, and I would say that when you don't pixel peep, the EOS R does produce some lovely video with rich colours and a very nice feel.

I agree with a lot of this. But it is user dependent. Looking at it from a Canon user perspective its Canon that push boundaries and offer innovative technology while Sony are holding back.
It all depends on who you ask, no right or wrong. But if someone makes a review saying that they are willing to live with the missing features and shortcomings of the A7iii thats ok. Just their opinion. If the same guy says the same thing about a Canon he is a payed idiot fanboy. 
But you are right, Sony gets a lot of flak for menus, skin tones, etc. But not their users in the same way that Canons do.
Since I have a youtube channel with a fairly large number of comments from the average camera dudes on line and read alll of them. I get a pretty good picture of the over all tone. And rarely if not never do I see Sony, Panasonic or Fuji users called "paid", "idiots", "fanboys" etc. But a Canon and Leica users are receiving it daily. 
With Leica its easier to understand since it has so much to do with the price and the fact that you really need to be a photographer to "get" Leica, not just a camera dude. But Canon has products in all tiers and prices. 
Your right, it is an interesting discussion. 

I find that to be incorrect. Even when adjusting raw, the original color science is in effect and dictates how and how much adjustments are needed. Otherwise for example all LUTs would work the same on all footage. But they don't. Anyone with two different raw capable cameras can easily try for themselves. Take a side by side. Adjust one and copy the settings to the other. It won't look the same.

And that is the key. Sure I can fiddle with images but sometimes there are a lot of them. In a project I was leading recently we where a couple of photographers that took roughly 15 000 photos. And I edited out maybe 5000 keepers that are going to be used in various marketing material. I was pretty happy that it was only one photographer that used a different brand and the rest of us all had the same color science.

If I ever for some reason would start to work full time as a photographer or filmmaker again. Spending a huge amount of time processing pictures. Then I would definitely want to minimize the time spent in post. 

you should buy a sony rx10 ii

Lovely example of the out of camera colour. Personally I much prefer the natural look to the LUTs which have been thrown onto the footage. I'm sick of seeing M31 and Deluts personally. It makes all cameras look the same, which is perhaps the point.
The ease with which you can obtain a pleasing, cinematic yet naturalistic look is what separates the men from the boys, in my personal opinion. It's why we all love Canon colours, Alexa, Blackmagic, and now Fuji.

Lovely example of the out of camera colour. Personally I much prefer the natural look to the LUTs which have been thrown onto the footage. I'm sick of seeing M31 and Deluts personally. It makes all cameras look the same, which is perhaps the point.
The ease with which you can obtain a pleasing, cinematic yet naturalistic look is what separates the men from the boys, in my personal opinion. It's why we all love Canon colours, Alexa, Blackmagic, and now Fuji.

Lovely example of the out of camera colour. Personally I much prefer the natural look to the LUTs which have been thrown onto the footage. I'm sick of seeing M31 and Deluts personally. It makes all cameras look the same, which is perhaps the point.
The ease with which you can obtain a pleasing, cinematic yet naturalistic look is what separates the men from the boys, in my personal opinion. It's why we all love Canon colours, Alexa, Blackmagic, and now Fuji.

I don't know what he means in the video, to me the EOS R does NOT get sharper with the sharpness setting, sure it adds a halo and increase the local contrast making letters stand out more, but I don't see any indication of "size of blur" getting smaller/more detailed. Sure it kinda looks sharper and does make it easier to show some detail but not really fixing the softness.
You can see the outline of the Chinese? letters around the 4:08 mark on the battery grip box get more defined while on the X-T3 (without halos mind you) you can see they have detail inside of them.
So I guess my take from it is, yeah it does not lack sharpness as in halos and edge contrast since I really don't like that. But it sure does lack detail/resolution compared to what other offers without being overly sharpened (in this case X-T3).
Now if this is the megapixel race of 4k or not I'm not sure, but cramming too much content all the way to nyquist do mess up a lot of scaling algorithms and do become a hassle at times, with audio you want the resolution to be way higher than the content so I don't see the problem doing the same for video if you know what you are doing.
I'm kinda balancing between "yeah it's soft and lack details but" and "I want that 1:1 pixel detail because reasons"
So is the real resolution about 3k vs 4k(example)? and does it matter at the end of the day? If you had quick turnaround and uploaded camera file in 4k to youtube, do the 1080 being scaled by youtube look better than similar X-T3 shot? How does it look like on a phone?

Basically shows the Eos R as soft with the default sharpening at 0 but looking better and matching the x-t3 at 4 and above

The $1K-$10K-$100K theme is a marketing ploy.  The $1,000 spot looks amateurish, while the $10,000 spot looks a lot better, yet the $100,000 spot does not add a lot more to the finished product.
Offer three different trim levels on automobiles, and most people will buy the middle level.  I'm not sure what type of client would spend $100,000 on a commercial, but I'm sure that this company is marketing to clients who are willing, and able to buy a commercial for $10,000. 

Sounds like you Need a GH5 or a GH5s. Nothing wrong with that.

I often feel like the critics are asking for BMD to turn the pocket into a camera that they already made, the Ursa Mini.

Well at my age I would make one hell of a lot more mistakes than IBIS is going to make! ?

Its a shame the xt3 does not have IBIS. For handheld shotting with adapted vintage lenses, it won't cut it...
 

The BMPCC 4K is already a recorder with a sensor ?

Here they are with the new V3 Main, and levels set per the Pdf, with WB correction as best I could:

Didn't grade at all or color correct. 
Flog
Eterna Lut
2048 x 1080 24fps 
-4 sharpening
-3 NR (thought it was all the way down) 
 

Thats because most people that own this camera use it as a stills camera and are not videographers, with no clue what they are doing on the video side - but yet - they still decide to upload shitty test footage on youtube. Also, a lot of people are using film simulations with auto white balance, default settings, NO log profile, with incorrect shutter speed settings, no ND filters,  and no idea how to color grade. Add that all up and you will get underwhelming results.
Don't let this forum fool you, the majority of people that still by this are long time Fuji photographers who aren't videographers. We are a still a small percentage. 
 
Use LOG with NR and Sharpening and -4 and then throw the Eterna LUT on and tweak it from there and you will see beautiful amazing/cinematic results not seen in many of the mirroless cameras.

Disclaimer: I dont like or want rolling shutter. I love the motion from the videos I shot with the global shuttered D16 and BMPC4K.
A fun fact I've told many times before, still applies so here it goes again  

One of the top, if not number one, TV shows in Sweden is a game show called "On the track" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/På_spåret).
Its a quite difficult show with questions about everything from food to sports in different geographical locations.  
Its been going on since 1987 with an average of 2 million viewers and a peak of 3.7 million.

In 1990 when the record was set that accounted for 43% of the population. Remove those to young and/or to old and we get pretty much everybody.
Three times every show we get to watch an up speed train ride and the camera is filming from within the train. It goes on until the contenders guess where the train is heading. So every week 2 000 000 people watch bent poles, crooked houses and leaning towers, for at least ten episodes per year.
Never ever ever ever, not once, nope nope nope, no no not a single time have I or anybody I know ever heard anyone point it out or simply said "have you noticed the bent poles?"
Camera nerds like us of course see it but no one else cares even a little bit.
My point is, if a camera ticks all your boxes but has a flaw like aliasing, RS or a bit of noise in the shadows. 
Then maybe its still good enough for your audience.

Imo it I rather have a camera I like with a bit of noise in the shadows than a camera I dont enjoy.

Thanks for that. 
Sonetimes I convince myself I have certain needs, and then when it comes to it, I realise i don’t. 
Theres many reasons why the GH5 has stuck with me, as I feel it makes room for more thought on creative ideas. I’m being asked to do stills more with video these days, and I’ve used the GH5 again for that. Personally, it’s not my flavour. 
I do have the EVA1 and I can’t give much of a review on that yet, only used it once! But I had an FS5 before and I sold it as the overall “technological” image wasn’t connecting with me. 
I love Fuji and Canon images, so I’m always curious. In all honestly if I didn’t need great HFR options, I’d have the C200. They really under delivered on the C300 II, and in my opinion, it’s a flop. Again, they lost me as a customer there too. 
I usually have to leave my emotional desires aside and have to pick the tools that meet the requirements of my briefs, hence the EVA1 having to come in. So I’m going to settle with these Panasonics and forget about all these distracting new releases. I want the quality of my work to step up further, and this will all be down to hard, focused work. 
 
 
 

The Pocket 4K has a lot of interesting features, of course, but somebody needs to do a proper comparison of 8bit, 10bit, ProRes, LOG, RAW, etc. Because the image quality is closer between them than people realise, when it comes to the end-result.
I've had Blackmagic cameras in the past, and it's fun pulling around a raw file in Resolve and seeing all that dynamic range on demand, but then I have also had a lot of enjoyment out of 8bit S-LOG and Canon LOG too. Seeing how silky smooth, noise-less the shadows are in low light from a full frame sensor, being able to fluidly play it back and slap on a LUT over Canon 1D C footage - wow - you wouldn't know THAT was 8bit. Instantly nice colour and dynamic range. Same with Hybrid LOG Gamma from an A7 III, or V-LOG with the GH5 and F-LOG on an X-T3. Even the EOS R, for all its faults, has an amazing ALL-I codec with film-like colour - and it's 8bit.
We are trading a lot of things on the Pocket 4K for that RAW codec. 10bit too, but others offer that now, so it's not unique to Blackmagic. Out goes a large sensor, out goes decent video AF, out goes IBIS, out goes articulated screen, battery life, high quality body, weather sealing and more besides. So it is important not to over hype it, as some have been doing on this thread. I have nothing against the Blackmagic Pocket 4K, but it has to be seen objectively.
I do have a little bit of annoyance pent up at the company, for their lame availability and non-support of EOSHD despite the tons of work I have done over the years to bring people's knowledge up to speed on their cameras and Resolve, but I am not going to let that influence the review once I finally get one.
Still no luck on that front BTW.