kye

Footage looks good to me.  What is it about the shots that you don't like @PPNS?

thank you very much! although i've expressed my skepticism before about inherent looks about cameras and sensors, it does help that the p4k lets you record raw/or if you're a bit anal about definitions, the equivalent of prores444 with metadata that lets you perfectly reconstruct the wb value. it also helps that it doesn't seem like it does any noise reduction which does make the images feel very natural compared some other cameras. 
for what it's worth i've used this filter for the film and added some of the stock davinci grain while color grading. but that's maybe more related to the behavior of the lenses...
 
thank you as well, i will certainly post a link here once i'm allowed to! the t-stop kind of varied on a shot-per-shot basis, i tend to start at t/4 or t/2.8 and see whether i want more or less dof. some shots were done wide open at t/2.2, while sometimes i had to pull focus a alone on a shoulder rig, where i was more likely to be at t/4 or t/5.6. those shot-reverse shot frames at the school entrance were done at around t/3.5-4 i think on the 25mm for example, because i liked the background at that aperture.
i haven't used samyangs since around 2017, but i kind of remember them leaving a sour taste in my mind. from what i can tell their mirrorless lenses and newer options tend to be a bit better, but i'm skeptical about them as well. the meikes are super clean and sharp, which i can't really remember the samyangs being, and that also means that theyre super versatile. the 25 has the most chromatic abberation wide open, but it's completely ignorable by t/2.8. it's very trendy rn to have glass that's very quirky, which is cool too of course, but i think at this point i'd rather have a very compact, matching lightweight set thats made out of aluminium and that basically doesn't breathe at all. since i've stopped using focal reducers i've noticed that my image quality got quite a bit better without weird optical errors, so i can't go back to that either. that supermist filter can give me a similar to vintage low contrast look i tend to like, but without the weird flares and halos coming from light sources, while looking more intentful at the same time. its worth mentioning that i got them my set second hand, so 40% less than the price new (in which case they are still actually an incredible deal). if you're like me, and interested in (attempting) actual fiction filmmaking, i think this lens set and the camera are quite frankly some of the more interesting gear to get, especially for the money.
 
probably a combination of quite a lot of factors, partially being very excited during pre-production, having a bit too much self confidence and expecting it look incredible, and not getting at that level with the finished result. there's also the fact that the acting isn't quite there (although that's not my responsability as a dp), and me only seeing that when watching the end result. most of the dialogue was in spanish, which i cant speak, and i only got to see the end result with subtitles quite a lot later. i tend to be pretty insecure about my skills as a dp too tbh, and i feel like i've done better looking stuff than this as well. there's also the fact that i was a bit selective with the stills. if you're interested, here's some stills of the stuff i'm less happy with for example: 

cool to hear man, would love to try one of these out!

Nice to see you happy. Grats.

The chart is actually a little bit misleading - there weren't three films shot on A7 cameras.  Of the 49 feature films that premiered at Cannes, three of them used an A7 camera within their camera lineup.  Of course, the A7 might only have contributed a single shot to the film to be included.
The list is:
 

There has been a revolution in colour grading over the last 15 or so years with the invention of colour managed workflows.  These enable the automatic conversion of footage between various colour spaces, and enable things like colour matching between cameras.  
Prior to this, all colour grading was based on either manufacturer-provided LUTs (or other LUTs like print film emulation LUTs), or manually grading the camera files to create the desired output (typically grading log into rec709).  However, colour management doesn't negate the need for manually adjusting the image to get a desired look.
I've been working with colour management and colour grading for years now, but decided to up my game by getting a control surface and learning to do things manually, no colour management or LUTs - just full manual ruthlessness.  
Enter the BlackMagic Micro Panel!

which isn't actually that micro in real life....

After shipping delays (8 weeks!!!) it has arrived and I've put in maybe 6 hours over two sessions.  As anticipated, my skill level is "disappointing", but my plan is simply to put on some music and put in the hours, like building any other skill.
My first grading session was actually a bit of a revelation.
I started off grading C-Log footage from the XC10, and using on the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls.  My second session was grading HLG footage from the GH5, and including Contrast/Saturation/Offset as well as a bit of Lift/Gamma/Gain.
The three trackballs adjust the hue offset, and the three rings/wheels adjust the luminance.  At first I thought that the wheels were very insensitive, large rotations seemed to make small changes in the image - especially the Gamma wheel.  However, the more I used them a funny thing happened.  I found that there were all these little "niches" where suddenly a particular thing emerged.  Go a little bit one way or the other and you adjust the feel, but go a bit too far and the look dissolves.  These are so fragile that the whole niche might only be 1-2mm of adjustment on one of these wheels.  So when you find one of these all of a sudden the control feels like it's very sensitive, not too sensitive but you definitely don't want it to be faster.
These things are "looks" related to a colour balance, but can also be "textures" related to shadow levels and shadow contrast, or to do with highlight rolloffs.  They can be broader too, like "warm sunset glow" where the balance of the colour matches the contrast, or when I was grading some Thai temples there's a way to make the gold-gilding on the buildings and statues really glow.  These looks really seem to be based on combinations of various things in the image.
Here are my initial take-aways:
These controls are enormously powerful
There are dozens / hundreds / more? of looks that you can do with only the LGG controls - throw in the Contrast/Pivot/Saturation/Offset controls and it's almost limitless.
  Just using a surface is a revelation
I've used all the individual controls (LGG, Contrast/Pivot/Offset/Saturation, etc) literally thousands of times over the years, but I'm learning new things by the hour that I never noticed or never understood.  I genuinely have no idea why having a control surface has made this difference, but it really has.  Maybe it's being forced to concentrate on only one or two controls at once.  Maybe it's the tactile nature of it.
  Moving multiple controls at the same time is game-changing
Moving two controls at the same time and in opposite directions is game-changing and simply isn't possible without a control surface.  This is where the plethora of looks comes from, as you adjust multiple controls against each other the overall image doesn't change much (assuming you're balancing the adjustments) but the ratio between the two does and you can gradually dial in different looks by navigating up and down this balance point.  There's no way you can do this with a mouse because by the time you adjust one control (which throws off the whole look of the image) and then adjust the second control (to almost completely eliminate the impacts of the first control) you've forgotten what it looked like before, so you can't possibly dial in the subtle changes required to find these tiny niches in any reliable way.
  Muscle memory developed really early
This surprised me, but it was really fast to really develop.  The surface feels familiar even after a few hours.  I'm told that pros grade without looking down, maybe at all, and that's part of their efficiency.
  You can grade full-screen
This is perhaps a Resolve-specific thing (I don't know how panels work in other NLEs) but if you're adjusting things with the mouse then you can't do that with a full-screen image because the controls are hidden from the cursor.  I have an external reference monitor, but it means that I can put scopes on my UI monitor to cover the controls and I can still adjust things even though those controls are under the scopes.  Very useful.
  It's teaching me to see
I've spotted a few things happening in the footage (which I had seen previously) but because I was adjusting something at the time they emerged, I was able to play with the controls and see what caused them.  Now, I recognise that thing and know what is causing it.  I've learned what causes things I've been seeing for years.  Once you've found a look it's interesting to adjust each control individually to see how that control impacts the look.  That can help to dial-in the look too - you adjust each control to optimise the look and after a few 'rounds' of tweaking each control you'll have nailed it.  You'll also learn very quickly which controls matter to the look, and also which ones that look is more sensitive to. Would I recommend this?  
Yes and no.
Yes, but only if you're willing to put the time in.  If not then you're probably going to have a very bad time.  I tried grading some iPhone footage, with its auto-WB and highly processed 709 image, and I was half-way to rage-quitting within about 15 minutes.  I still had that sour taste in my mouth the next day, and it took me a few days to get over!  I've now realised that all practice is good practice and so I may as well grade more forgiving footage and leave the iPhone until my skills are significantly more developed.
I don't know what my long-term plans will be, maybe I will learn to grade well enough that I don't need to use a panel but will be able to use the knowledge I've gathered.  Maybe I'll always want one.  I will definitely grade real projects using colour management and LUTs, but having these skills will complement that.
At the moment, it's a learning tool, and damn - I'm learning a lot.

Footage looks good to me.  What is it about the shots that you don't like @PPNS?

There has been a revolution in colour grading over the last 15 or so years with the invention of colour managed workflows.  These enable the automatic conversion of footage between various colour spaces, and enable things like colour matching between cameras.  
Prior to this, all colour grading was based on either manufacturer-provided LUTs (or other LUTs like print film emulation LUTs), or manually grading the camera files to create the desired output (typically grading log into rec709).  However, colour management doesn't negate the need for manually adjusting the image to get a desired look.
I've been working with colour management and colour grading for years now, but decided to up my game by getting a control surface and learning to do things manually, no colour management or LUTs - just full manual ruthlessness.  
Enter the BlackMagic Micro Panel!

which isn't actually that micro in real life....

After shipping delays (8 weeks!!!) it has arrived and I've put in maybe 6 hours over two sessions.  As anticipated, my skill level is "disappointing", but my plan is simply to put on some music and put in the hours, like building any other skill.
My first grading session was actually a bit of a revelation.
I started off grading C-Log footage from the XC10, and using on the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls.  My second session was grading HLG footage from the GH5, and including Contrast/Saturation/Offset as well as a bit of Lift/Gamma/Gain.
The three trackballs adjust the hue offset, and the three rings/wheels adjust the luminance.  At first I thought that the wheels were very insensitive, large rotations seemed to make small changes in the image - especially the Gamma wheel.  However, the more I used them a funny thing happened.  I found that there were all these little "niches" where suddenly a particular thing emerged.  Go a little bit one way or the other and you adjust the feel, but go a bit too far and the look dissolves.  These are so fragile that the whole niche might only be 1-2mm of adjustment on one of these wheels.  So when you find one of these all of a sudden the control feels like it's very sensitive, not too sensitive but you definitely don't want it to be faster.
These things are "looks" related to a colour balance, but can also be "textures" related to shadow levels and shadow contrast, or to do with highlight rolloffs.  They can be broader too, like "warm sunset glow" where the balance of the colour matches the contrast, or when I was grading some Thai temples there's a way to make the gold-gilding on the buildings and statues really glow.  These looks really seem to be based on combinations of various things in the image.
Here are my initial take-aways:
These controls are enormously powerful
There are dozens / hundreds / more? of looks that you can do with only the LGG controls - throw in the Contrast/Pivot/Saturation/Offset controls and it's almost limitless.
  Just using a surface is a revelation
I've used all the individual controls (LGG, Contrast/Pivot/Offset/Saturation, etc) literally thousands of times over the years, but I'm learning new things by the hour that I never noticed or never understood.  I genuinely have no idea why having a control surface has made this difference, but it really has.  Maybe it's being forced to concentrate on only one or two controls at once.  Maybe it's the tactile nature of it.
  Moving multiple controls at the same time is game-changing
Moving two controls at the same time and in opposite directions is game-changing and simply isn't possible without a control surface.  This is where the plethora of looks comes from, as you adjust multiple controls against each other the overall image doesn't change much (assuming you're balancing the adjustments) but the ratio between the two does and you can gradually dial in different looks by navigating up and down this balance point.  There's no way you can do this with a mouse because by the time you adjust one control (which throws off the whole look of the image) and then adjust the second control (to almost completely eliminate the impacts of the first control) you've forgotten what it looked like before, so you can't possibly dial in the subtle changes required to find these tiny niches in any reliable way.
  Muscle memory developed really early
This surprised me, but it was really fast to really develop.  The surface feels familiar even after a few hours.  I'm told that pros grade without looking down, maybe at all, and that's part of their efficiency.
  You can grade full-screen
This is perhaps a Resolve-specific thing (I don't know how panels work in other NLEs) but if you're adjusting things with the mouse then you can't do that with a full-screen image because the controls are hidden from the cursor.  I have an external reference monitor, but it means that I can put scopes on my UI monitor to cover the controls and I can still adjust things even though those controls are under the scopes.  Very useful.
  It's teaching me to see
I've spotted a few things happening in the footage (which I had seen previously) but because I was adjusting something at the time they emerged, I was able to play with the controls and see what caused them.  Now, I recognise that thing and know what is causing it.  I've learned what causes things I've been seeing for years.  Once you've found a look it's interesting to adjust each control individually to see how that control impacts the look.  That can help to dial-in the look too - you adjust each control to optimise the look and after a few 'rounds' of tweaking each control you'll have nailed it.  You'll also learn very quickly which controls matter to the look, and also which ones that look is more sensitive to. Would I recommend this?  
Yes and no.
Yes, but only if you're willing to put the time in.  If not then you're probably going to have a very bad time.  I tried grading some iPhone footage, with its auto-WB and highly processed 709 image, and I was half-way to rage-quitting within about 15 minutes.  I still had that sour taste in my mouth the next day, and it took me a few days to get over!  I've now realised that all practice is good practice and so I may as well grade more forgiving footage and leave the iPhone until my skills are significantly more developed.
I don't know what my long-term plans will be, maybe I will learn to grade well enough that I don't need to use a panel but will be able to use the knowledge I've gathered.  Maybe I'll always want one.  I will definitely grade real projects using colour management and LUTs, but having these skills will complement that.
At the moment, it's a learning tool, and damn - I'm learning a lot.

There has been a revolution in colour grading over the last 15 or so years with the invention of colour managed workflows.  These enable the automatic conversion of footage between various colour spaces, and enable things like colour matching between cameras.  
Prior to this, all colour grading was based on either manufacturer-provided LUTs (or other LUTs like print film emulation LUTs), or manually grading the camera files to create the desired output (typically grading log into rec709).  However, colour management doesn't negate the need for manually adjusting the image to get a desired look.
I've been working with colour management and colour grading for years now, but decided to up my game by getting a control surface and learning to do things manually, no colour management or LUTs - just full manual ruthlessness.  
Enter the BlackMagic Micro Panel!

which isn't actually that micro in real life....

After shipping delays (8 weeks!!!) it has arrived and I've put in maybe 6 hours over two sessions.  As anticipated, my skill level is "disappointing", but my plan is simply to put on some music and put in the hours, like building any other skill.
My first grading session was actually a bit of a revelation.
I started off grading C-Log footage from the XC10, and using on the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls.  My second session was grading HLG footage from the GH5, and including Contrast/Saturation/Offset as well as a bit of Lift/Gamma/Gain.
The three trackballs adjust the hue offset, and the three rings/wheels adjust the luminance.  At first I thought that the wheels were very insensitive, large rotations seemed to make small changes in the image - especially the Gamma wheel.  However, the more I used them a funny thing happened.  I found that there were all these little "niches" where suddenly a particular thing emerged.  Go a little bit one way or the other and you adjust the feel, but go a bit too far and the look dissolves.  These are so fragile that the whole niche might only be 1-2mm of adjustment on one of these wheels.  So when you find one of these all of a sudden the control feels like it's very sensitive, not too sensitive but you definitely don't want it to be faster.
These things are "looks" related to a colour balance, but can also be "textures" related to shadow levels and shadow contrast, or to do with highlight rolloffs.  They can be broader too, like "warm sunset glow" where the balance of the colour matches the contrast, or when I was grading some Thai temples there's a way to make the gold-gilding on the buildings and statues really glow.  These looks really seem to be based on combinations of various things in the image.
Here are my initial take-aways:
These controls are enormously powerful
There are dozens / hundreds / more? of looks that you can do with only the LGG controls - throw in the Contrast/Pivot/Saturation/Offset controls and it's almost limitless.
  Just using a surface is a revelation
I've used all the individual controls (LGG, Contrast/Pivot/Offset/Saturation, etc) literally thousands of times over the years, but I'm learning new things by the hour that I never noticed or never understood.  I genuinely have no idea why having a control surface has made this difference, but it really has.  Maybe it's being forced to concentrate on only one or two controls at once.  Maybe it's the tactile nature of it.
  Moving multiple controls at the same time is game-changing
Moving two controls at the same time and in opposite directions is game-changing and simply isn't possible without a control surface.  This is where the plethora of looks comes from, as you adjust multiple controls against each other the overall image doesn't change much (assuming you're balancing the adjustments) but the ratio between the two does and you can gradually dial in different looks by navigating up and down this balance point.  There's no way you can do this with a mouse because by the time you adjust one control (which throws off the whole look of the image) and then adjust the second control (to almost completely eliminate the impacts of the first control) you've forgotten what it looked like before, so you can't possibly dial in the subtle changes required to find these tiny niches in any reliable way.
  Muscle memory developed really early
This surprised me, but it was really fast to really develop.  The surface feels familiar even after a few hours.  I'm told that pros grade without looking down, maybe at all, and that's part of their efficiency.
  You can grade full-screen
This is perhaps a Resolve-specific thing (I don't know how panels work in other NLEs) but if you're adjusting things with the mouse then you can't do that with a full-screen image because the controls are hidden from the cursor.  I have an external reference monitor, but it means that I can put scopes on my UI monitor to cover the controls and I can still adjust things even though those controls are under the scopes.  Very useful.
  It's teaching me to see
I've spotted a few things happening in the footage (which I had seen previously) but because I was adjusting something at the time they emerged, I was able to play with the controls and see what caused them.  Now, I recognise that thing and know what is causing it.  I've learned what causes things I've been seeing for years.  Once you've found a look it's interesting to adjust each control individually to see how that control impacts the look.  That can help to dial-in the look too - you adjust each control to optimise the look and after a few 'rounds' of tweaking each control you'll have nailed it.  You'll also learn very quickly which controls matter to the look, and also which ones that look is more sensitive to. Would I recommend this?  
Yes and no.
Yes, but only if you're willing to put the time in.  If not then you're probably going to have a very bad time.  I tried grading some iPhone footage, with its auto-WB and highly processed 709 image, and I was half-way to rage-quitting within about 15 minutes.  I still had that sour taste in my mouth the next day, and it took me a few days to get over!  I've now realised that all practice is good practice and so I may as well grade more forgiving footage and leave the iPhone until my skills are significantly more developed.
I don't know what my long-term plans will be, maybe I will learn to grade well enough that I don't need to use a panel but will be able to use the knowledge I've gathered.  Maybe I'll always want one.  I will definitely grade real projects using colour management and LUTs, but having these skills will complement that.
At the moment, it's a learning tool, and damn - I'm learning a lot.

There has been a revolution in colour grading over the last 15 or so years with the invention of colour managed workflows.  These enable the automatic conversion of footage between various colour spaces, and enable things like colour matching between cameras.  
Prior to this, all colour grading was based on either manufacturer-provided LUTs (or other LUTs like print film emulation LUTs), or manually grading the camera files to create the desired output (typically grading log into rec709).  However, colour management doesn't negate the need for manually adjusting the image to get a desired look.
I've been working with colour management and colour grading for years now, but decided to up my game by getting a control surface and learning to do things manually, no colour management or LUTs - just full manual ruthlessness.  
Enter the BlackMagic Micro Panel!

which isn't actually that micro in real life....

After shipping delays (8 weeks!!!) it has arrived and I've put in maybe 6 hours over two sessions.  As anticipated, my skill level is "disappointing", but my plan is simply to put on some music and put in the hours, like building any other skill.
My first grading session was actually a bit of a revelation.
I started off grading C-Log footage from the XC10, and using on the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls.  My second session was grading HLG footage from the GH5, and including Contrast/Saturation/Offset as well as a bit of Lift/Gamma/Gain.
The three trackballs adjust the hue offset, and the three rings/wheels adjust the luminance.  At first I thought that the wheels were very insensitive, large rotations seemed to make small changes in the image - especially the Gamma wheel.  However, the more I used them a funny thing happened.  I found that there were all these little "niches" where suddenly a particular thing emerged.  Go a little bit one way or the other and you adjust the feel, but go a bit too far and the look dissolves.  These are so fragile that the whole niche might only be 1-2mm of adjustment on one of these wheels.  So when you find one of these all of a sudden the control feels like it's very sensitive, not too sensitive but you definitely don't want it to be faster.
These things are "looks" related to a colour balance, but can also be "textures" related to shadow levels and shadow contrast, or to do with highlight rolloffs.  They can be broader too, like "warm sunset glow" where the balance of the colour matches the contrast, or when I was grading some Thai temples there's a way to make the gold-gilding on the buildings and statues really glow.  These looks really seem to be based on combinations of various things in the image.
Here are my initial take-aways:
These controls are enormously powerful
There are dozens / hundreds / more? of looks that you can do with only the LGG controls - throw in the Contrast/Pivot/Saturation/Offset controls and it's almost limitless.
  Just using a surface is a revelation
I've used all the individual controls (LGG, Contrast/Pivot/Offset/Saturation, etc) literally thousands of times over the years, but I'm learning new things by the hour that I never noticed or never understood.  I genuinely have no idea why having a control surface has made this difference, but it really has.  Maybe it's being forced to concentrate on only one or two controls at once.  Maybe it's the tactile nature of it.
  Moving multiple controls at the same time is game-changing
Moving two controls at the same time and in opposite directions is game-changing and simply isn't possible without a control surface.  This is where the plethora of looks comes from, as you adjust multiple controls against each other the overall image doesn't change much (assuming you're balancing the adjustments) but the ratio between the two does and you can gradually dial in different looks by navigating up and down this balance point.  There's no way you can do this with a mouse because by the time you adjust one control (which throws off the whole look of the image) and then adjust the second control (to almost completely eliminate the impacts of the first control) you've forgotten what it looked like before, so you can't possibly dial in the subtle changes required to find these tiny niches in any reliable way.
  Muscle memory developed really early
This surprised me, but it was really fast to really develop.  The surface feels familiar even after a few hours.  I'm told that pros grade without looking down, maybe at all, and that's part of their efficiency.
  You can grade full-screen
This is perhaps a Resolve-specific thing (I don't know how panels work in other NLEs) but if you're adjusting things with the mouse then you can't do that with a full-screen image because the controls are hidden from the cursor.  I have an external reference monitor, but it means that I can put scopes on my UI monitor to cover the controls and I can still adjust things even though those controls are under the scopes.  Very useful.
  It's teaching me to see
I've spotted a few things happening in the footage (which I had seen previously) but because I was adjusting something at the time they emerged, I was able to play with the controls and see what caused them.  Now, I recognise that thing and know what is causing it.  I've learned what causes things I've been seeing for years.  Once you've found a look it's interesting to adjust each control individually to see how that control impacts the look.  That can help to dial-in the look too - you adjust each control to optimise the look and after a few 'rounds' of tweaking each control you'll have nailed it.  You'll also learn very quickly which controls matter to the look, and also which ones that look is more sensitive to. Would I recommend this?  
Yes and no.
Yes, but only if you're willing to put the time in.  If not then you're probably going to have a very bad time.  I tried grading some iPhone footage, with its auto-WB and highly processed 709 image, and I was half-way to rage-quitting within about 15 minutes.  I still had that sour taste in my mouth the next day, and it took me a few days to get over!  I've now realised that all practice is good practice and so I may as well grade more forgiving footage and leave the iPhone until my skills are significantly more developed.
I don't know what my long-term plans will be, maybe I will learn to grade well enough that I don't need to use a panel but will be able to use the knowledge I've gathered.  Maybe I'll always want one.  I will definitely grade real projects using colour management and LUTs, but having these skills will complement that.
At the moment, it's a learning tool, and damn - I'm learning a lot.

There has been a revolution in colour grading over the last 15 or so years with the invention of colour managed workflows.  These enable the automatic conversion of footage between various colour spaces, and enable things like colour matching between cameras.  
Prior to this, all colour grading was based on either manufacturer-provided LUTs (or other LUTs like print film emulation LUTs), or manually grading the camera files to create the desired output (typically grading log into rec709).  However, colour management doesn't negate the need for manually adjusting the image to get a desired look.
I've been working with colour management and colour grading for years now, but decided to up my game by getting a control surface and learning to do things manually, no colour management or LUTs - just full manual ruthlessness.  
Enter the BlackMagic Micro Panel!

which isn't actually that micro in real life....

After shipping delays (8 weeks!!!) it has arrived and I've put in maybe 6 hours over two sessions.  As anticipated, my skill level is "disappointing", but my plan is simply to put on some music and put in the hours, like building any other skill.
My first grading session was actually a bit of a revelation.
I started off grading C-Log footage from the XC10, and using on the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls.  My second session was grading HLG footage from the GH5, and including Contrast/Saturation/Offset as well as a bit of Lift/Gamma/Gain.
The three trackballs adjust the hue offset, and the three rings/wheels adjust the luminance.  At first I thought that the wheels were very insensitive, large rotations seemed to make small changes in the image - especially the Gamma wheel.  However, the more I used them a funny thing happened.  I found that there were all these little "niches" where suddenly a particular thing emerged.  Go a little bit one way or the other and you adjust the feel, but go a bit too far and the look dissolves.  These are so fragile that the whole niche might only be 1-2mm of adjustment on one of these wheels.  So when you find one of these all of a sudden the control feels like it's very sensitive, not too sensitive but you definitely don't want it to be faster.
These things are "looks" related to a colour balance, but can also be "textures" related to shadow levels and shadow contrast, or to do with highlight rolloffs.  They can be broader too, like "warm sunset glow" where the balance of the colour matches the contrast, or when I was grading some Thai temples there's a way to make the gold-gilding on the buildings and statues really glow.  These looks really seem to be based on combinations of various things in the image.
Here are my initial take-aways:
These controls are enormously powerful
There are dozens / hundreds / more? of looks that you can do with only the LGG controls - throw in the Contrast/Pivot/Saturation/Offset controls and it's almost limitless.
  Just using a surface is a revelation
I've used all the individual controls (LGG, Contrast/Pivot/Offset/Saturation, etc) literally thousands of times over the years, but I'm learning new things by the hour that I never noticed or never understood.  I genuinely have no idea why having a control surface has made this difference, but it really has.  Maybe it's being forced to concentrate on only one or two controls at once.  Maybe it's the tactile nature of it.
  Moving multiple controls at the same time is game-changing
Moving two controls at the same time and in opposite directions is game-changing and simply isn't possible without a control surface.  This is where the plethora of looks comes from, as you adjust multiple controls against each other the overall image doesn't change much (assuming you're balancing the adjustments) but the ratio between the two does and you can gradually dial in different looks by navigating up and down this balance point.  There's no way you can do this with a mouse because by the time you adjust one control (which throws off the whole look of the image) and then adjust the second control (to almost completely eliminate the impacts of the first control) you've forgotten what it looked like before, so you can't possibly dial in the subtle changes required to find these tiny niches in any reliable way.
  Muscle memory developed really early
This surprised me, but it was really fast to really develop.  The surface feels familiar even after a few hours.  I'm told that pros grade without looking down, maybe at all, and that's part of their efficiency.
  You can grade full-screen
This is perhaps a Resolve-specific thing (I don't know how panels work in other NLEs) but if you're adjusting things with the mouse then you can't do that with a full-screen image because the controls are hidden from the cursor.  I have an external reference monitor, but it means that I can put scopes on my UI monitor to cover the controls and I can still adjust things even though those controls are under the scopes.  Very useful.
  It's teaching me to see
I've spotted a few things happening in the footage (which I had seen previously) but because I was adjusting something at the time they emerged, I was able to play with the controls and see what caused them.  Now, I recognise that thing and know what is causing it.  I've learned what causes things I've been seeing for years.  Once you've found a look it's interesting to adjust each control individually to see how that control impacts the look.  That can help to dial-in the look too - you adjust each control to optimise the look and after a few 'rounds' of tweaking each control you'll have nailed it.  You'll also learn very quickly which controls matter to the look, and also which ones that look is more sensitive to. Would I recommend this?  
Yes and no.
Yes, but only if you're willing to put the time in.  If not then you're probably going to have a very bad time.  I tried grading some iPhone footage, with its auto-WB and highly processed 709 image, and I was half-way to rage-quitting within about 15 minutes.  I still had that sour taste in my mouth the next day, and it took me a few days to get over!  I've now realised that all practice is good practice and so I may as well grade more forgiving footage and leave the iPhone until my skills are significantly more developed.
I don't know what my long-term plans will be, maybe I will learn to grade well enough that I don't need to use a panel but will be able to use the knowledge I've gathered.  Maybe I'll always want one.  I will definitely grade real projects using colour management and LUTs, but having these skills will complement that.
At the moment, it's a learning tool, and damn - I'm learning a lot.

There has been a revolution in colour grading over the last 15 or so years with the invention of colour managed workflows.  These enable the automatic conversion of footage between various colour spaces, and enable things like colour matching between cameras.  
Prior to this, all colour grading was based on either manufacturer-provided LUTs (or other LUTs like print film emulation LUTs), or manually grading the camera files to create the desired output (typically grading log into rec709).  However, colour management doesn't negate the need for manually adjusting the image to get a desired look.
I've been working with colour management and colour grading for years now, but decided to up my game by getting a control surface and learning to do things manually, no colour management or LUTs - just full manual ruthlessness.  
Enter the BlackMagic Micro Panel!

which isn't actually that micro in real life....

After shipping delays (8 weeks!!!) it has arrived and I've put in maybe 6 hours over two sessions.  As anticipated, my skill level is "disappointing", but my plan is simply to put on some music and put in the hours, like building any other skill.
My first grading session was actually a bit of a revelation.
I started off grading C-Log footage from the XC10, and using on the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls.  My second session was grading HLG footage from the GH5, and including Contrast/Saturation/Offset as well as a bit of Lift/Gamma/Gain.
The three trackballs adjust the hue offset, and the three rings/wheels adjust the luminance.  At first I thought that the wheels were very insensitive, large rotations seemed to make small changes in the image - especially the Gamma wheel.  However, the more I used them a funny thing happened.  I found that there were all these little "niches" where suddenly a particular thing emerged.  Go a little bit one way or the other and you adjust the feel, but go a bit too far and the look dissolves.  These are so fragile that the whole niche might only be 1-2mm of adjustment on one of these wheels.  So when you find one of these all of a sudden the control feels like it's very sensitive, not too sensitive but you definitely don't want it to be faster.
These things are "looks" related to a colour balance, but can also be "textures" related to shadow levels and shadow contrast, or to do with highlight rolloffs.  They can be broader too, like "warm sunset glow" where the balance of the colour matches the contrast, or when I was grading some Thai temples there's a way to make the gold-gilding on the buildings and statues really glow.  These looks really seem to be based on combinations of various things in the image.
Here are my initial take-aways:
These controls are enormously powerful
There are dozens / hundreds / more? of looks that you can do with only the LGG controls - throw in the Contrast/Pivot/Saturation/Offset controls and it's almost limitless.
  Just using a surface is a revelation
I've used all the individual controls (LGG, Contrast/Pivot/Offset/Saturation, etc) literally thousands of times over the years, but I'm learning new things by the hour that I never noticed or never understood.  I genuinely have no idea why having a control surface has made this difference, but it really has.  Maybe it's being forced to concentrate on only one or two controls at once.  Maybe it's the tactile nature of it.
  Moving multiple controls at the same time is game-changing
Moving two controls at the same time and in opposite directions is game-changing and simply isn't possible without a control surface.  This is where the plethora of looks comes from, as you adjust multiple controls against each other the overall image doesn't change much (assuming you're balancing the adjustments) but the ratio between the two does and you can gradually dial in different looks by navigating up and down this balance point.  There's no way you can do this with a mouse because by the time you adjust one control (which throws off the whole look of the image) and then adjust the second control (to almost completely eliminate the impacts of the first control) you've forgotten what it looked like before, so you can't possibly dial in the subtle changes required to find these tiny niches in any reliable way.
  Muscle memory developed really early
This surprised me, but it was really fast to really develop.  The surface feels familiar even after a few hours.  I'm told that pros grade without looking down, maybe at all, and that's part of their efficiency.
  You can grade full-screen
This is perhaps a Resolve-specific thing (I don't know how panels work in other NLEs) but if you're adjusting things with the mouse then you can't do that with a full-screen image because the controls are hidden from the cursor.  I have an external reference monitor, but it means that I can put scopes on my UI monitor to cover the controls and I can still adjust things even though those controls are under the scopes.  Very useful.
  It's teaching me to see
I've spotted a few things happening in the footage (which I had seen previously) but because I was adjusting something at the time they emerged, I was able to play with the controls and see what caused them.  Now, I recognise that thing and know what is causing it.  I've learned what causes things I've been seeing for years.  Once you've found a look it's interesting to adjust each control individually to see how that control impacts the look.  That can help to dial-in the look too - you adjust each control to optimise the look and after a few 'rounds' of tweaking each control you'll have nailed it.  You'll also learn very quickly which controls matter to the look, and also which ones that look is more sensitive to. Would I recommend this?  
Yes and no.
Yes, but only if you're willing to put the time in.  If not then you're probably going to have a very bad time.  I tried grading some iPhone footage, with its auto-WB and highly processed 709 image, and I was half-way to rage-quitting within about 15 minutes.  I still had that sour taste in my mouth the next day, and it took me a few days to get over!  I've now realised that all practice is good practice and so I may as well grade more forgiving footage and leave the iPhone until my skills are significantly more developed.
I don't know what my long-term plans will be, maybe I will learn to grade well enough that I don't need to use a panel but will be able to use the knowledge I've gathered.  Maybe I'll always want one.  I will definitely grade real projects using colour management and LUTs, but having these skills will complement that.
At the moment, it's a learning tool, and damn - I'm learning a lot.

There has been a revolution in colour grading over the last 15 or so years with the invention of colour managed workflows.  These enable the automatic conversion of footage between various colour spaces, and enable things like colour matching between cameras.  
Prior to this, all colour grading was based on either manufacturer-provided LUTs (or other LUTs like print film emulation LUTs), or manually grading the camera files to create the desired output (typically grading log into rec709).  However, colour management doesn't negate the need for manually adjusting the image to get a desired look.
I've been working with colour management and colour grading for years now, but decided to up my game by getting a control surface and learning to do things manually, no colour management or LUTs - just full manual ruthlessness.  
Enter the BlackMagic Micro Panel!

which isn't actually that micro in real life....

After shipping delays (8 weeks!!!) it has arrived and I've put in maybe 6 hours over two sessions.  As anticipated, my skill level is "disappointing", but my plan is simply to put on some music and put in the hours, like building any other skill.
My first grading session was actually a bit of a revelation.
I started off grading C-Log footage from the XC10, and using on the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls.  My second session was grading HLG footage from the GH5, and including Contrast/Saturation/Offset as well as a bit of Lift/Gamma/Gain.
The three trackballs adjust the hue offset, and the three rings/wheels adjust the luminance.  At first I thought that the wheels were very insensitive, large rotations seemed to make small changes in the image - especially the Gamma wheel.  However, the more I used them a funny thing happened.  I found that there were all these little "niches" where suddenly a particular thing emerged.  Go a little bit one way or the other and you adjust the feel, but go a bit too far and the look dissolves.  These are so fragile that the whole niche might only be 1-2mm of adjustment on one of these wheels.  So when you find one of these all of a sudden the control feels like it's very sensitive, not too sensitive but you definitely don't want it to be faster.
These things are "looks" related to a colour balance, but can also be "textures" related to shadow levels and shadow contrast, or to do with highlight rolloffs.  They can be broader too, like "warm sunset glow" where the balance of the colour matches the contrast, or when I was grading some Thai temples there's a way to make the gold-gilding on the buildings and statues really glow.  These looks really seem to be based on combinations of various things in the image.
Here are my initial take-aways:
These controls are enormously powerful
There are dozens / hundreds / more? of looks that you can do with only the LGG controls - throw in the Contrast/Pivot/Saturation/Offset controls and it's almost limitless.
  Just using a surface is a revelation
I've used all the individual controls (LGG, Contrast/Pivot/Offset/Saturation, etc) literally thousands of times over the years, but I'm learning new things by the hour that I never noticed or never understood.  I genuinely have no idea why having a control surface has made this difference, but it really has.  Maybe it's being forced to concentrate on only one or two controls at once.  Maybe it's the tactile nature of it.
  Moving multiple controls at the same time is game-changing
Moving two controls at the same time and in opposite directions is game-changing and simply isn't possible without a control surface.  This is where the plethora of looks comes from, as you adjust multiple controls against each other the overall image doesn't change much (assuming you're balancing the adjustments) but the ratio between the two does and you can gradually dial in different looks by navigating up and down this balance point.  There's no way you can do this with a mouse because by the time you adjust one control (which throws off the whole look of the image) and then adjust the second control (to almost completely eliminate the impacts of the first control) you've forgotten what it looked like before, so you can't possibly dial in the subtle changes required to find these tiny niches in any reliable way.
  Muscle memory developed really early
This surprised me, but it was really fast to really develop.  The surface feels familiar even after a few hours.  I'm told that pros grade without looking down, maybe at all, and that's part of their efficiency.
  You can grade full-screen
This is perhaps a Resolve-specific thing (I don't know how panels work in other NLEs) but if you're adjusting things with the mouse then you can't do that with a full-screen image because the controls are hidden from the cursor.  I have an external reference monitor, but it means that I can put scopes on my UI monitor to cover the controls and I can still adjust things even though those controls are under the scopes.  Very useful.
  It's teaching me to see
I've spotted a few things happening in the footage (which I had seen previously) but because I was adjusting something at the time they emerged, I was able to play with the controls and see what caused them.  Now, I recognise that thing and know what is causing it.  I've learned what causes things I've been seeing for years.  Once you've found a look it's interesting to adjust each control individually to see how that control impacts the look.  That can help to dial-in the look too - you adjust each control to optimise the look and after a few 'rounds' of tweaking each control you'll have nailed it.  You'll also learn very quickly which controls matter to the look, and also which ones that look is more sensitive to. Would I recommend this?  
Yes and no.
Yes, but only if you're willing to put the time in.  If not then you're probably going to have a very bad time.  I tried grading some iPhone footage, with its auto-WB and highly processed 709 image, and I was half-way to rage-quitting within about 15 minutes.  I still had that sour taste in my mouth the next day, and it took me a few days to get over!  I've now realised that all practice is good practice and so I may as well grade more forgiving footage and leave the iPhone until my skills are significantly more developed.
I don't know what my long-term plans will be, maybe I will learn to grade well enough that I don't need to use a panel but will be able to use the knowledge I've gathered.  Maybe I'll always want one.  I will definitely grade real projects using colour management and LUTs, but having these skills will complement that.
At the moment, it's a learning tool, and damn - I'm learning a lot.

If you are good you can make a Barbie Cam look good, it has very little to do with the camera. Quit making excuses and get it done. You can make a full length movie with a R6.

Looks really good to me, hard to beat a BM camera for a filmic look. Well done.

don't really know if it's really worth posting this, but i dp'd a little short by a friend with this camera. it's a coming of age film about an immigrant high schooler kind of finding his place in punk music culture. to be quite honest i'm not quite happy with most of the shots we've gotten, but i've decided to post stills of ones i like the most. maybe some of you will like the images. all done with the meike mft set if that's of any interest. i still think this camera rocks, even if it has quite a few shortcomings. 

Peepz, I wanna enjoy your footage!
@bjohn  I just reread this thread a little bit and found your post about the 35mm Zeiss. Gee, you gotta treat us with some tasty BMMCC Zeiss footage. I promise I will post a bit of my little shortfilm as well. Also, I gotta see your 2MP portraits!!!
@webrunner5 Don, I know you are a tripod lover and that for great benefit to lovely footage. So that should please us with some footage from you combo b4 vintage Fujinon and your BMPCC. Good thing you would only have to lugg it around once for putting it on the tripod and a second time putting it back into the bag.:)
@kye we need some BMMCC goodness from you. Beachlife cinema verité! That would be awesome.

Yet another example of the importance of the new sensor...
https://ymcinema.com/2022/06/13/the-cameras-behind-cannes-2022-alexa-mini-still-dominates/

As lots of Alexa 35s get bought and the previous models become more affordable, it will only make getting into the top tier of images that much easier.

Yet another example of the importance of the new sensor...
https://ymcinema.com/2022/06/13/the-cameras-behind-cannes-2022-alexa-mini-still-dominates/

As lots of Alexa 35s get bought and the previous models become more affordable, it will only make getting into the top tier of images that much easier.

If you're using Resolve, you can convert from one to the other, so essentially zero difference.
In practical terms, both will be rubbish until you learn to colour grade.

I watched this video recently, which I thought was quite enlightening..
One thing it mentioned was that advertising / media / marketing deliberately do things that will filter out unwanted people from the pipeline:
spam makes copious amounts of spelling errors as they don't want to waste time trying to con educated people get rich quick types are deliberately assholes so that they can sell to people who care about money more than people etc..  

I watched this video recently, which I thought was quite enlightening..
One thing it mentioned was that advertising / media / marketing deliberately do things that will filter out unwanted people from the pipeline:
spam makes copious amounts of spelling errors as they don't want to waste time trying to con educated people get rich quick types are deliberately assholes so that they can sell to people who care about money more than people etc..  

There's a really 'funny' video ad on YouTube right now where the guy suddenly stops speaking (visually) but continues to talk...because of course it's an AI voice.
Claims 98% of people wouldn't notice.
Officially then, 98% of the planet are a bit stoopid.
This. Is. An. Artificially. Generated. Voice. It. Is. Impossible. To. Tell. Though. As. It. Is. Exactly. The. Same. As. How. I. Speak. In. Real. Life.

Picture of my motorhome taken with my Nokia 808
 

*Pocket (Pochet might work very well as name for that camera series too BTW... LOL ; )