Skip77

1 minute ago, A_Urquhart said:

OK Skip.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/12/5/18127329/how-to-turn-off-motion-smoothing-tv-lg-samsung-vizio-sony-roku

 

And this is in the P6K footage on You Tube - HOW?  

Let me guess you watch You Tube on your TV?

1 minute ago, Emanuel said:

Mattias... a troll? LOL

 

You'd be the only one to probably back it, I bet : D I wouldn't dare to state the same about you, though ; -)

Yes a troll if he calls me out for not reading this comment as he clearly didn't read mine.  Even after I told him my comment was about "motion cadence".  No rebuttal and nothing to defend his comments except call me a troll.  

3 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Mattias... a troll? LOL

 

You'd be the only one to probably back it, I bet : D I wouldn't dare to state the same about you, though ; -)

How's that P6K that you supposedly ordered?  

1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:

Ok I'm calling troll now. No way you are this bad at reading even you own posts..

Just be careful, seems to be a very sensitive subject and one must choose the words very carefully. Even when saying that the camera is good

And I'll call you a troll.   You still haven't read my first comment that was with the video link.  It's about motion cadence and that's the cinematically better then the P4K. 

Please dispute this or shut up about telling me to read your comments.  Your replied comment was a back handed shot at the P6K at best.  You the "Mighty Mattias say you think the P6K will be able to produce cinematic footage".  What is the "might" in your comment?  You have officially became a You Tube influencer and can avoid backing up your comments.  

Good job brother.

36 minutes ago, A_Urquhart said:

Film motion is not like 'silk' at all. There IS a stutter to it.

Most modern TV's have features now that attempt to smooth the motion out and the results are a little like watching 1080i or 50p at realtime speed, it looks 'videoish'

I have a little mission in life whereby whenever I visit someones house, I try to secretly turn off image smoothing when they are up making me a coffee as most TV's seem to have it on by default.

They don't notice anything and it is back to how the film maker intended ?

You're as bad as the Mighty Matters.  There's not smoothing going on with today's flat screen tv's and certainly not across You Tube and back across my monitors.  

Motion films use the Arri and RED's and others and produce natural motion cadence.  Motion cadence is real and watching the RED or P6K at 50 fps gives you a slow motion smooth look. But the other thing the RED or P6K does is captures the natural motion correctly.  Be it the subject or camera movement.  The cadence on the P6K is not videoish in any way. 

I really think you don't have a clue about what makes great motion cadence and would bet you own the GH5.  

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

 

You are just making this up. Read the posts again. I have said more than once that I'm convinced that the P6K can capture cinematic footage.

I've got one for you to. Google "global shutter" and thank me later.

So now you think you're a snob and bring up global shutter? I know global shutter and it has issues or everyone would use global shutter.  

Again for the 100th time.  My link and post was only about cadence and motion.  Feel free to add actual comments to debate that if you like, I welcome that.  But don't insult us and make backyard comments about the footage looking videoish.  On anther post you'll praise the S1 for it's cinematic look. 

And stop the b.s. comments that you're making.  You said: "I have said more than once that I'm convinced that the P6K can capture cinematic footage." This is such a backhanded compliment that it's mind boggling.  What's the deal. I thought you were a straight up down the line guy?  Stop with the videoish and I'n certain the 6K can be cinematic. 

You're turning into a negative influencer. Look at the comment below your original one after my video. One of your sheep chimed in the same way.  

Again - cadence motion is better on the P6K then the P4K and that was what my link and comment were about.  

5 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Read the posts again when you have calmed down from what ever it was that triggered you.  Because you are clearly reading in stuff that isn't there.

My original post was about motion cadence and not cinematic look.  You of all people would know the difference and it's clear that's what my comments were about. 

You yourself post great footage that you bounce around and how different LUT's and color grades but you come on here and talk about curves and color on a piece of footage that I clearly stated had great motion cadence.   That blows my mind.  You're not a novice and have more experience then I do with various cameras including the P4K.  So I truly don't get the flat our trying to dog the P6K with the "videoish" comment you made.  That's such a You Tube influencer comment that's never seen in a good light. And this is a Blackmagic camera.

And clearly lots of footage is on You Tube and has been for days.

Here's a NEWS flash: 

If your camera (the GH5) has horrible motion cadence then NOTHING can bring that back and fix it in post.  And motion cadence covers everything to do with motion, including pans, push in, people in motion, and very subtile movements that has parallax background movement.  

This is what separates cine cameras from the lower end cameras. 

6 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

By being the only one Ive watched.. thought that went without saying.

Great, then you should buy it.

The motion, the clarity, the colors and the tones/curves.

So does mine.

Looks video to me.

Exactly, very smartphoneish. Not a fan.

Please note:

I have NEVER said that the P6K shoots footage that looks videoish and can't produce cinematic footage. All Im saying is that after reading your post about "proof" that the P6K is "more cinematic than the P4K" I was very disappointed after pressing play on that video.
But like I said there are most likely much better examples of cinematic footage out there.

What is 50fps supposed to look like? It's slower then reality.  You have a You Tube channel and that's the best way you can describe videoish?  Amazing. 

You saying any footage looks videoish is a put down that is left for people to thing a camera is sub par.  Your comments prove this.

The grade put on the camera can push the color and tonal values in any direction but you commented on that. The clarity is not over done at all and not "sharpened" or unnatural. 

You're nothing but biased and your word is not real.  I want to trust You Tube influencers but your response to the P4K is amateurish at best. 

4 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

I agree with @Mattias Burling, this doesn’t really “sell” the quality of the camera. In fact, the entire footage page they published doesn’t either. Could easily be filmed with a GH5 and I wouldn’t notice. 

This is mostly down to the filmmakers though and not the camera, however it’s clear that the gulf between camera quality is much less and pretty much every new release doesn’t have that “special sauce” to differentiate them enough. 

I like Blackmagic but they should go to a modular ZCAM box design. The poor battery, fixed screen and odd shape make it a no-go for me. This would be an absolute no brainer if you could just pull it out the box and shoot without having to bolt on a few bricks to make it work reliably.

Lots of options these days - but also in these days I’m thinking far less about my cameras choices than ever. 

And I just watched S1 with the new update look like iHone garbage compared to the P6K footage I posted. 

Nothing I said about the P6K footage had to do with the color grade and everything to do with cadence and how it handled motions, background and captured data information.  You guys need to read my comment before you use the word videoish.  Next time you pick out GH5, S1 and P4K footage make sure you watch out for the motion stutter because it seems like you all have a blind eye when it comes to admitting that those 3 camera have issues in that department. 

Motion in film is like silk because its capturing real like. Real life doesn't have stutter and jitters.

6 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

50fps looks like silk, film does not. That's why they're saying it looks more videoy.

You need to revisit film versus the low end motion and cadence. And then revisit the P6K footage. 

Motion in film is like silk because its capturing real like. Real life doesn't have stutter and jitters.

On 7/30/2019 at 1:25 AM, Geoff_L said:

Andrew's video test ! Hope it was not a "supposed to be hidden before the article is online" video accidentally released ? Maybe M83's We Own The Sky Track plays a big role in the feeling, but I really really love the image !

 

I can't get past the IBIS distortion that all cameras suffer from.  This also looks videoish. Not liking how it handle cadence.

53 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Thats the first video Ive ever seen from the P6K and I must say... it looked extremely videoish. Surely there are some really cinematic footage out there that would better illustrate the point you where trying to make.

 

There is lots of footage from the P6K.  How is this the first footage you've seen?

Nothing looks videoish to me.   Not the cadence movement or the detail or the color ( anyone can grade anything from one end to the other).

What looks videoish?  My machine plays that footage back flawlessly and no stutter or videoish qualities.  

54 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:

Yeah agree I think it is the 50fps playback on youtube which make it looks videoy though.  

The 50fps is like silk.  Be more specific?  

1 hour ago, A_Urquhart said:

You may be right, but it looks like komodo is using CFAST so $2-3K media shouldn't be an issue.

 

I'm just giving my opinions here like many others are. It's a forum.....I think its good to provide balanced information to counter some miss information that might be out there. You may call it hostility, I call it giving people something else to think about rather than just believing hype.

As I've said to you before, my Pocket4K has paid for itself a few times over and continues to earn me money. I have no reason to defend my purchase because i know it has been a good one, my accounts prove it. If I didn't have the Pocket4K now and had to choose, would I choose the 6K? Nope...what exactly would I be paying double the money for?

6K BRAW? Don't need it, it's file sizes or the extra overheads it requires to edit.

4K ProRes? Already got it! Yes, the 6K to 4K downscale in camera might provide a slightly better 4K image but from what I'm hearing, the difference is negligible. 

Now if the 6K sensor was in a body with a better mount, a good battery solution like NP-F, BP-U or similar, and had a tillable screen, I might see the need in an upgrade like that and be willing to spend the double (if not more) that they are asking for the 6K and I guess that is where my disappointment is here. BMD should focus on genuine improvements rather than play the Resolution game that only really serves to impress those who don't really know better.

I guess for the price of the 6K, i would expect BMD to fix issues like poor battery life, which are excusable in the price of the Pocket4K but really inexcusable in the Pocket6kifshootingBRAW.

 

 

Nothing wrong with the EF mount.  How many cine cameras use the EF mount?  

The footage from the P6K already has better cadence and a more filmic look then the P4K.  There has to be more data being captured at a better scan rate then the P4K. 

And what you and everyone else has been saying is who needs, who can work with and 6K is not better then the P4K with a speed-booster.  This footage shows the P6K is more cinematic then the P4K. 

1 hour ago, A_Urquhart said:

I don't know too much about Komodo. I do know that 'cheapest and better (specs?)' are not what those who make a living from these cameras always look for. If Red can get it to $5000 with the few specs that are currently available , then they will sell plenty of them. Reliability and workflow are what I personally look for and so do most of my peers. Sure, obviously image quality and other factors come into play but the Komodo will be popular not because it might be cheap or have the best specs, but because it is a relatively trusted brand from acquisition right through to post production.  While the Komodo body might be $5000, it will be interesting to see if you can use third party accessories with it like media and monitors etc which in previous Red cameras have always been the relatively hidden costs associated with owning one, or if Red release their own, more affordable proprietary touch screens etc????

The Komodo is not going to be $5,000 unless unless you own a Hydrogen and that's another $1,000.  RED''s media SSD's are what $2-3K.  I don't think the Komodo comes in at under $10K in a workable form. 

2 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

I used EF-s lenses back in the day when I had my 7D. All the Canon ones were pretty terrible to pull focus off and were not built all that well. Sure, you can use EF lenses but then you are dealing with harder lensing choices at the wide end considering this camera has more of a crop than most APC-C sensors. On the Red Epic with EF mount I used Sigma 18-35 and 50-100 which gave nice results but not many other great EF-s lenses out there IMO.

I often use EF cine lenses (Celere, Leica R etc) that cover FF and while they are EF mount, they will be better served by the Pocket 4K and a speed booster (giving it a 1.2x crop factor)  than the P6K with it's native EF mount and its 1.6x crop. 

Sure, it's not the end of the world, and plenty of people use FF glass on crop sensor bodies but when there is a cheaper camera out there that makes better use of all that glass, I know which I'm going with.

 

People want one mount system to invest in. EF fill that need. You seem very hostile toward the P6K. Why? Is it the P4K and because you own one?  The whole Braw and Pro Res and what you get at 6k and 4K is a silly argument.  On the one hand I'm many have said said "who needs RAW" and since that's the case for most people getting 4K Pro Res and 6K Braw should not be an issue at all.  

1 hour ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

More motion blur? What if you put the shutter speed a bit lower on the pocket to compensate? 

I'm talking about 120hz on your computer monitor and being able to playback 6K footage.

31 minutes ago, crevice said:

Possible. But again, I think my point is simply the eye test. I prefer the image straight out the camera with a quick grade more on the micro cinema than the pocket or any other camera in the price range. Im sure you can add Pro mist, more motion blur, vintage glass, film grain, etc. to get it close. 

All footage from the P6K has had better motion cadence then the P4K.  Can you post your P6K footage?

Part of good cadence is how well the sensor is scanned.  That's why global shuttler sensors look so good.

51 minutes ago, crevice said:

I’ve returned or sold many cameras in the past few years and have kept my micro the entire time. I agree with the quirks, but for me they are solvable. For example only shoot raw and manual focus lenses, so I have no need to ever even go into the menus - besides maybe to format a card once in awhile. So the menu buttons don’t bother me. I also have the NPF adapter, so battery life is great. So the micro is more compact, battery life is better, it has in my opinion the better raw codec, and a better filmic quality to it and also records to regular SD cards. Yet, nobody talks about it because of the way blackmagic promoted it as almost a drone only/go pro-ish brain. When in reality it’s an amazing filmic camera perfect for rigging. It’s truly one of the most insanely under-appreciated hidden gems in the consumer/prosumer film/video industry. Also, with resolve superscale - you can upscale it to 4k with amazing results. 

@Skip77

120hz only makes it look worse to me. It’s not the motion cadence being bad. Most starting out in the past few years won’t tell a difference. For us old timers, the motion cadence we are speaking of gives a bit more cinematic feel to it. For example the micros motion cadence seems slower, with more natural blur, which I find more pleasing. 

I'm a bg fan of good motion cadence and this is what cine cameras have that the lower end cameras do not do very well.  the 12ohz is your monitor being able to keep up and do some of the work. It makes a difference in how footage plays back on your computer. 

What system do you have to play back true 6K?

16 minutes ago, crevice said:

Here are my early impressions of the pocket 6k

 

- My camera came with scuffs and scratches all over the body. It looked like it has been used for months. Went on FB and saw several people complaining and posting pictures of very bad scratches and even dents all over the body. Check out the official Facebook group to see more info on this. 

 

- Vmount or some other solution is needed. I fall into the prefer pocket full of batteries category, as I like to keep it compact. But I am not even sure I made it 15 minutes before it died with an official canon batter (newest version). It was really bad. I need to do more tests on this. I was shooting 6k braw for what it’s worth  

 

- Motion cadence and overall look still doesn’t really do it for me. It looks fantastic, but it doesn’t have the magic older blackmagic sensors had. Maybe it’s the resolution bump and it’s just the way it is with these modern sensors. So far, nothing in the consumer/prosumer price range beats my blackmagic micro cinema camera as far as motion cadence and nailing the filmic look with ease. I feel cameras now days nail the specs on paper, but they lack feel/organic quality/smooth motion cadence, etc. Often people get up and arms when the word “cinematic” is brought up. Yes you can make cinematic footage with the pocket 6 or prob any camera for that matter. Yes lighting impacts it and proper grade does as well. And yes it’s a term that is overused and misused. But I think their is definitely an organic feel missing from these often sterile modern sensors. Sure you can throw a pro-mist filter on it, some vintage glass, and massage it to look great. The sensor kind of reminds me of my old Red Raven. Which isn’t really a bad thing (or great). Just has a slightly similar look and feel to it. 

- Having a dedicated ef Mount is wonderful. Much better not dealing with an adapter.

TL;DR Overall, it’s a great camera and just like the pocket 4k - it’s great when rigged up. Battery life seems much worse than the 4k when using canon batteries - but I need to do more testing. Overall look and feel is sharp and impressive, but lacks an organic quality which can be attributed by slightly video-esque motion cadence, modern sensor, and higher resolution. 

Have you tried 4K DCI or HD ?  

Do you think the cadence being off is the playback on your PC?  I'm almost certain you need a 120hz monitor to see the playback the way it's intended.  I have a 27' with and without 120hz and it makes a difference. 

4 minutes ago, socs said:

Not to get too off topic but you mentioned the blackmagic micro cinema camera.   Everytime I use it I think I should just throw all my other cameras (z6, xt3, etc) in the trash.  For me too it has the best look to it by far.  But, you really have to work to use that camera with all of it's quirks.  Folks say you can soften modern cameras in post, but I've never seen good examples of that to match something like the bmmcc.

I wish BM or another co. would just package that same sensor into a newer body with all the ergonomics and battery life of a modern cam.

What's the DR on the micro and what size sensor does it have?

13 hours ago, androidlad said:

Latest leak:

The 60MP mirrorless from Nikon obviously share the same sensor (variant) as Sony A7R IV. But it'll extract the full potential of this sensor in both stills and video department, by employing 16bit RAW mode (as in GFX100) and supersampled 4K video with various crop factors and aspect ratios.

Brother @androidlad when is 12 bit RAW goin going to be released for the Z6?

27 minutes ago, BenEricson said:

If you bought a C200 and the pocket was even on your radar, then you probably bought the wrong camera regardless. 

The benefits of the c200 are the ergonomics, auto focus, battery life, Internal NDs and reliability. The pocket can probably get close strictly image wise, but it’s a lot harder to get there. 

I would say the P6K will have better image quality then the C200 already.

That footage is awesome.  The cadence is amazing and better then the P4K.

20 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Yeah honestly the camera matters so little with a production. A crew is what makes everything happen. That said RAW is definitely nice for whoever is editing it lol 

Really ? 

I'm so disappointed that when you buy the P6K that you can never putt together a good crew.  I miss the days that a sucky camera and good crew created magic.

6 minutes ago, A_Urquhart said:

Where is the issue with using a speed booster. I personally haven't come across any issues and speed boosters live on my Pocket4K.

Yep, when I'm not working on larger productions I do shoot and edit my own small projects. My Razer Blade laptop, that I also use on set for transcoding proxies, cuts the 4K BRAW files in Resolve wonderfully. 

 

Its being requested and accepted as a B Camera to the Alexa Mini and Ursa Mini Pro as a cheaper alternative that works well on a Gimbal or in other situations where a smaller camera is required.

Like you say, the Pocket4K hasn't been out that long and most of what has been shot is still in post production. If you really want some proof that I'm using the Pocket4k alongside the Alexa Mini and UMP, let me know and I can PM you some stills.

 

 

 

DM sent over your way.

41 minutes ago, A_Urquhart said:

You may say that but people in Facebook Buy and Sell groups are still buying them for $1000.

Neither, I'm waiting for them to cost 'next to nothing' as you say so I can buy a few more ?

Looks like the cost are stable for now.   How much do you think used P4K will go for? 

4 hours ago, sanveer said:

And Ignorance is beautiful. Or it isn't. 

What does DR have to do with low light performance?  And you really think BM will relate the P6K if it's worse in low light?  

4 hours ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

I didn’t realize this was supposed to be the blind circle-jerk thread.

 

Are you ok? Do you need time alone?

BM has never lead with the spec sheet for any recent camera release.  

P4K owners are acting like this is a Sony release. And defending using speed boosters the gain this or that as being the way to go.  Well its not and it's an added step. All the cine cameras that use speed boosters are also not m43 and they never will be. You have a reason the EVA1 and other cine relates are not m43.

Here's the output that you get from the p6k.  And let's remember all the comments about "who needs RAW anyway" 

You're not stuck at shooting at 6k with the P6K.

1 hour ago, A_Urquhart said:

I'm not here to defend my purchase.....I'm here to hopefully make people who have the P4K feel better about their purchase after being told by you that their camera now 'sucks' or that it 'sucks' to be them.

--

Not once has the MFT sensor been a bottleneck, quite the contrary, it has meant that the camera has been more versatile.

--

Those same producers have never requested anything greater than 4K files so the P6K would have no advantages and I have used the P4k on everything from Netflix Docs to Sports documentary for National TV. FOR ME......I just don't see ANY advantages to the P6K. 

--

Also, you will need a beefier setup to edit those 6K files over the 4K ones so factor that in as well.

Maybe you can show me when I said the P4K sucked? 

I said it sucks that they didn't know the P6K was going to be available.  

Using an adaptors is a pain to use if you don't have too.  You bring up the extra cost like it's an issue that's not worth the cost. As said before if you're worried about the cost of the P6K then you need to get a Fuji or Sony A7III.

Do you edit your own footage? Do you have a computer that can handle 4K RAW footage? If you don't or don't have one you don't have a clue what computer you need. 

I've always support the P4K and think it's a great camera at a great price.  It was never in stock at the time I was upgrading or I would have picked one up. 

Again, no need to add you're own flavor to what you think I said or what you want people to think I said.  M43 is not the system people referee to work in but what choice did they have?  You say the P4K is being requested by procurers for what? It hasn't been out long and the Ursa Mini Pro would be requested over the P4K or the Arrii would be requested over the P4K unless that producer was wanting to save money and was on a limited budget.  You seem to be telling a tale fish tale that the P4K is being requested over the Ursa Mini and Arrii. 

Please send links of the sample footage and tv shows that you shot with the P4K.  I'm doing a feature next month with one also. Lol

1 hour ago, A_Urquhart said:

I've seen a few on eBay still go for near new prices even since the P6K was released. If prices of the P4K do drop to 'next to nothing' pick one up! Makes the price difference to the P6K even greater and even more of a no brainer!

B & H has the P4K in stock.  So that demand fever has dropped to nothing now that you can get one in two days. Do you buy a new one for $1,295 or a used one for $1,100? 

Just now, JordanWright said:

No, A larger sensor doesn't give you better low light performance... but I don't think its worth arguing with you.

And untrue: I don't think P6K is a step down. If I didn't already have a camera, it might be the one I would choose

I'm not arguing with you. I'm going by the low light performance being better from m43 to APS-C to Full frame sensor over the last two years.  

So you're saying the GH5 just has bad low light performance for no reason? That it was just an oversight by Panasonic and that they just some how improved it with the Gh5S?  Please post proof because I'm not taking your word for it. The trend in related cameras with the sensors above say other wise. 

5 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

call it whatever you want, just shocks me when i see people saying it "makes it ff". it just doesn't

 

They also say makes it "super 35".  Right?  

All you GH5 and P4K m43 users are talking smack about the P6K and that's bizarre because it's in the same P4K family.  It's not like this is a rival company and you're trying to advise people to go with the P4K.  

This P6K is a win win for everyone. 

Just now, thephoenix said:

it doesn't make it fullframe, please

it doesn't changes the sensor as far as i know

 

What?  But using a sped boaster in the P4K makes it APS-C or Super 35?  You lost your mind if you're arguing about semantics. 

10 minutes ago, JordanWright said:

This is incorrect. A larger sensor doesn't mean better low light.

There is no such thing as the full frame look. 

You know what I was talking about. And you know people have asked if it was possible on the P6K.

And the jump up from m43 to APS-C and then full frame sensors does give you better low light abilities most of the time.  Look at the Gh5 to Gh5s and them the A7SII and the new mirrorless S1 and Z6 over the GH5.  

You act like the P6K will be a step down from the P4K with sped booster.  You either have a P4K, GH5 or just want to talk down the P6K APS-C sensor vs M43.  

28 minutes ago, drm said:

This may not work for everyone, but I have bought more than one Metabones adapter on eBay for around $400-500. Much of the money that you spend on a Metabones can be recovered when you move on from needing it.

I certainly am a fan of not messing with a speed booster, but there is no denying that the P4K + the Metabones (and other) adapters are a great combination. You gain around a stop of light and your field of view gets wider, even wider than Super35. I think that Super35 is the sweet spot for video, not "full frame" sensors. The larger the sensor, the less depth of field, which causes lots of problems with video, particularly run/gun and corporate type work. I want to separate the subject from the background, I don't need to obliterate it

@Kisaha I agree. We also shoot tv shows, commercials, music videos, etc. using M43 sensor cameras (P4K, GH5, GH5s, etc.) without concern about the sensor size. People seem to forget that the camera is a *small* part of the overall gear budget.

Skip, if people are so price conscious where the Metabones is a problem, they should probably not buy the P4K, P6K, any of the Z-Cams, etc. anyway. With all of those cameras you will be spending an amount probably equal to the cost of the camera just to equip it where you can use it on a production (cages, batteries, etc.).

If someone is price conscious and they are asking me for a camera recommendation, I usually suggest that they pick up a GH5, Fuji XT3, or one of the Sony cams, like the 6400. Those will get you shooting video basically right out of the box, with minimal extra expenditures.

I believe that the point that @Kisaha was trying to make (and I agree) is that the cost of the camera is small relative to the rest of the gear necessary to do more professional work (sound & lighting can be expensive too, Skypanels are almost $6K each...). I have a silly amount of money tied up in gear to do what we do, and I am not running around with crazy expensive cameras like some of the bigger budget productions use (movies). I think that we are all looking for gear that gives us great quality images at affordable prices.

I mention the price difference because people complained about the P6K being $1,200 - You can take that anyway you want but if people are complain they the p6K is too expensive then that's what I take it has.  

Not sure why you turn this into a "they should probably not buy the P4K, P6K, any of the Z-Cams, etc. anyway."  That's not my point.  My point was once you buy a speed booster for the P4K the price becomes closer to the P6K.  The P4K owners leave out the added cost and time spent getting the right glass. 

Nothin in my comments or the following were ever about total gear and gear production cost. This is the reach people do the their post falls apart. You could say the same about the P6K in that it's cost is so low that it's not an issue. 

And you will be able to use an adaptor on the P6K, it's a matter of time. 

https://www.diyphotography.net/the-lucadapters-magicboost-will-let-your-blackmagic-pocket-6k-shoot-full-frame-raw-video-with-ef-lenses/?utm_source=jjd933d&fbclid=IwAR35DA-tmUN-TYFQwJ3ICyUhVXJ5SJZqpjO85Vmt1XJnBhl_P9inUNuNO94

13 minutes ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

I would argue that with a proper cage that has support for hard mounting a booster, the cine locking EF (or PL I suppose) booster actually makes the P4K MORE of a cinema camera than the P6K would ever be.

Please explain. ^^^

And what happens when the P6K get a speed boaster to shoot full frame?  

ZCam has already built the APS-C and Fullframe models.  M43 with it's little adaptors and small sensor if getting left behind by the same companies that everyone thought would champion them.