Yurolov

Sounded so good, i got one . Pocket Rocket . 
 
 
 

This thread and quite a few others have some really bad taste comments in it which lower the tone of the forum, not just a bit but a lot.
And it is almost always you involved @jonpais
I will have to decide Jon whether you are still welcome or whether it would be better for the community if you used a different place.
You have no idea how tired I am of it.
Final warning.

Image speaks for itself. 

No, I don't own the lens but I am considering the systems from a cost analysis perspective for someone like me moving from canon who wants video and fast af for sport and wildlife. The Fuji is overpriced considering u can get a Canon 100-400 FF for the same price (not including rebate). I haven't seen the the eye af for Sony in action so can't comment on its usefulness. I'm sure the new Sony will be good but unless u already own the lenses they price themselves out by a fair margin. 
 
I personally wouldn't go adapted as the performance isn't there. If you are spending so much on a camera why cripple it. 
But yes the problem with Fuji is that you are tied to that system. 

And there is also a kit with the 1.4x teleconverter for just 100bucks more. Never saw anything similar with Sony. 

Sorry I meant if he switches to sony what lenses will he use for birding. I know canon have great options for cheap. 

Hows this for af. 

Even under daylight well exposed it was clear which camera was which with the gh5 having a rather pale green desaturated look to the skintones. The pocket had some vitality to the skintones but was a bit too sharp for my liking. And the alexa was head and shoulders above the others.  

s16 was the standard for indie film productions for the simple fact that it was portable, cheap and you didn't have to fuss around with focus. You put a wide angle lens on and put it in f5.6 and you are golden. Camcorders offer much of the same conveniences. But I can't help but feel the newer variants do look dedicedly more video. s16 should be max 2k like the digital bolex. 
Having said that, I have seen xc10 footage which I would say is filmic:
That would be my first choice. My setup for the kind of intimate filmmaking you are talking about is to have a s16 digital camera, and have my talent wired with a tascam dl-10 and team lav mics. Gives u great freedom and mobility. 

sareesh got a copy

Used to work for the BBC years ago - so, yes, i probably could teach him a thing or two about using a camera.
There was no need for him to go handheld as neither she or he moved to any great extent, so no need for shaky footage.
I'm having a go, cause no one is really putting this camera through its paces. And I'd really like to see some footage that is straight out of the camera & by this I mean ProRes HQ in video mode - lets see what the camera can do on its own & then we can decide when to use Film mode or RAW.

Shaky footage is shaky footage & I don't care who you are - it shows a lack of professionalism, there are no excuses for it & is always deemed unacceptable!
And your comments/excuses for him show just how arrogant people in this area are becoming - he wouldn't get or keep a proper gig pulling shit like that....

All subjective.
Don't think it's rubbish.
When you post clips  skin tones on the GX thread. I often wonder "what is the point? " but  each to their own

I'm unimpressed by this footage.

I'm unimpressed by this footage.

I am pretty unimpressed with the footage as well, it's not a good showcase for the camera. First problem is it seems to be shot like a stills shoot. I am sure in isolation some of the frames make nice photographs but as a video it doesn't hold up at all, there are no ideas or mood to it, or any purposeful camera moves or edits to support the content. Several shots underexpose the skin tones 2 or 3ev making her look about 20 years older, the handheld shots are wobbly and add nothing to the aesthetic, the tripod sections are shot like a stills shoot with the model trying to pose for stills, but the only difference is that the photographer has pressed the video button instead of the shutter release. Is this supposed to be an example of the "pro" approach to filmmaking? Is this supposed to be Blackmagic's strategy to put the camera ONLY in the hands of actual PROS rather than just reviewers? Because it's not speaking well for either their capabilities or the camera's capabilities.

I'm unimpressed by this footage.

I support andrew here and won't be buying the camera after these antics. 

I support andrew here and won't be buying the camera after these antics. 

I support andrew here and won't be buying the camera after these antics. 

I support andrew here and won't be buying the camera after these antics. 

My friend has the E-M10iii and loves it. I’ve used it a couple times and it was a blast to shoot with. I’m probably going to follow a similar path. I have my 5D3 for short films and all I really need/want is a second portable camera for fun/casual photo and video. As you and Webrunner said, chasing these disposable toys isn’t worth the time and trouble, for me an E-M5ii or a D5500 will get the job done.

Sorry to hear that, makes you realise what's really important!
Very true and it's so relentless, there's a new temptation around the corner every few weeks. Easy to get hooked. These companies are spending millions on getting us hooked. Just like us, they're never satisfied either.
It's like in home audio... Eventually you will end up with an end-game, which is perhaps 5 or 10% better than what you had mid-way through the spending spree.
I am going to review the E-M10 III next. $500 camera. I'm going to use that instead of the Pocket 4K, forget raw. I'm going to go out, have fun with strange Russian lenses, and appreciate how short life is and how the time is better spent with family than with disposable consumer goods.

BBC standards for HD are 4:2:2 50mbps. It's that simple.
Anyway... I'm a fuji fanboy now... screw canon... screw sony.
I don't work in broadcast... so don't really care. I actually agree that good 8bit 4:2:0 trumps bad 10bit 4:2:2 (though i disagree with your examples).
Broadcast doesn't take looks into consideration though... they have a fixed specsheet and that's that.

No one can answer it because the question is flawed. Sony simply do not offer high end specs in their mirrorless range. 8 bit 4:2:0 is not a professional broadcast standard.
They could offer 8K 480fps, but at 8bit 4:2:0.. no broadcast professional will touch it and Sony know this.
Btw.... i think sony mirrorless are very good for indie filmmakers and what not. They do include some really cool specs. Just that i link larger cameras like the fs700 with broadcast work... so the 8bit 4:2:0 becomes a serious concern when suggesting they spec these cams out to be B cams for production work.
Panasonic on the other hand do offer a legit broadcast capable B cam to their A cams. Even Canon do.