Skip77
-
Posts
456 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Skip77
-
-
-
On 8/10/2019 at 12:13 PM, RubanCam said:
The crop factor will be 1.26 ( 1.9 X 0.64) vs 1.56. So if you have FF EF lenses, P4K with SB could be better choice. $1000.00 cheaper too.
As for the image quality, P6K downsample from 6K to 4K for better image quality, but don't you think the speed booster when it concentrates the light/image comes through the lens on the m43 sensor will increase the final image quality closer to 6K downsampling 4K ?
Does the speed booster happen to come FREE when you buy the P4K? If not then why the $1,000 cheaper comments from P4K owners? This is not correct information to be spreading.
-
4 hours ago, drm said:
@Skip77 "Sucks for P4K owners"
Why exactly? This is a complementary camera for the P4K, not a replacement. In many ways, the P4K is *better* than the P6K.
Here are just a few of the ways the P4K is better than the P6K:
- The P6K files are more than *double* the size of the P4K files. The P6K is 323 MB/s vs. the P4K at 135 MB/s (at highest recording rates)
-
Many people have trouble with their computers and workflow editing 4K footage. 6K footage is going to crush their dreams
- The P6K can not record 4K or DCI 4K footage in BRAW, only ProRes.
- The P4K + Speed booster gives you an extra stop of light and a field of view wider than Super35.
- The P6K field of view (crop) is less than Super35, despite Blackmagic calling it a "Super35" sensor. The P6K has a diagonal crop of 1.63 vs. 1.39 for Super35 relative to a 36mm x 24mm "full frame" sensor. Based on sensor width, the P6K is 23.10mm vs. 24.89mm for Super35, so the crop based on width is P6K: 1.56 vs. Super35: 1.45. So, based on width, the P6K is close to Super35 size.
- The P4K + 0.71x Speed booster has a width based crop factor of 1.35, wider than Super35.
- I will be researching this next week, but I suspect that the P4K + Speed booster will do better in low light than the P6K.
- Cost: The P4K costs $1295, the P6K costs $2495.
- The P4K has a better lens selection because most lenses can be adapted to the Micro 4/3 mount used by the P4K, including the EF lenses used on the P6K.
I have a P6K that will arrive tomorrow. I have no intention of replacing all of my P4Ks with P6Ks, even though I could easily do so. They will work together and make an excellent team as they should cut perfectly together with each other.
It seems like GH5 and P4K owners love to tinker with the adapters and metabones this or that. All trying to see how one lens works and gives you the best picture and results. On one side I understand this because you want to get more from your camera. I have the same mind set and we all do. But that's a big waste of time if you think about it and it limits what you can do.
The P6K gives you a full frame look right out of the box compared to the P4K.
The m43 sensor is the bottle reck with the Gh5 and P4K and owners of these cameras know it. You can argue all day that it's not but APS-C is the sweet spot for sensors. You's go from APS-C to Full frame and not backwards.
The P6K will do better in low light. This happens when you move up to a bigger sensor. The P6K also has better processor and gives you upgrades across the board in what it can produce. Yes the P6K and P4K can work perfect together and that's great.
It sucks for P4K owners because they might have waited or bought the P6K if it was released together with the P4K.
The Canon to m43 metabones adaptor is $649 - How do you justify that when that closes the gap to the P6K? Once you let people know the real cost of adapting lenses for the P4K they cost is much closer to the P6K.
The P4K is still a great camera for great price but the m43 put a lot of people off including me.
If I get the P6K and 3 EF Canon prime lenses, then I have invested in glass that I can use on the RED and ARRI systems or the C200.
1 hour ago, Emanuel said:What a lesson man with this one addressed to that smart dude... ; -)
You say this but you claim to have pre-ordered the P6K. Why did you do this if the P4K is the better buy and just as good?
Read my comments above and you will get educated. The speed booster cost alone with getting away from the m43 sensor is worth the upgrade from the P4K. This is easy to see unless you don't have the funds to afford the P6K.
4 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:This. Unless you are shooting 6K BRAW exclusively (the Pocket6K doesn't do 6k in ProRes) then the Pocket4K at half the price is the better buy IMO.
Also, with the SpeedBooster on the P4K, all my full frame lenses are closer to their proper FOV than what they will be on the P6K.
The Canon to m43 adaptor is $649, right? The math says it's not the better buy and you have issues with speed boasters and m43.
You guys should argue and justify your P4K purchase. I would but it's also why the P6K sucks for P4K owners. Good luck unloading that P4K for close to what you paid. No one talks about the price being so low that resale value will be next to nothing. ( This is if BM keep producing the P4K in numbers that keeps it form being back ordered).
People jumped on the P4K for the price and knowing nothing would come out to match the cost to value. That's changed with the P6K.
And no adding adaptors is not what 90% of people want to have to do. The only reason to do it is the m43 is limited and this makes up for it's shortcomings.
-
You are 100% correct in suggesting that people get caught up in the tech side instead of creating art.
Two reasons why this happens.
1) Most major cities don't have camera stores that we can physically see and talk about what we're buying. We used to rely on very knowledge camera professional that worked in camera stores for years and years. It used to be a great place to explore and find out about gear.
2) Most photographers and videographers (this includes DP's) do not look at the gear they have or want, in a way to create anything at all. Not art. Not content like the "dark Side of The Lens". This is understandable. I am guilty of this my self. I use my gear to make money and support my family. I do take photo's of the family and always try and capture who they are in the photographs. But I rarely create art like I did when I was an art student. The art of creating art is lost in the confusion of You Tube and gear talk and debates. Creating art is a secret club and it not talked about.
My daughter is a true artist and naturally wants to explore and create. Phillip Bloom comes off as an artist. Why? Because he's not just pointing the camera and hitting record. Wherever he's shooting at he's capturing the moment but it's intentional and thought out. You can tell he's inspired by the masters of film.
I went into a real art supply store last week and it had been 20 years since I had been in one. It was great to see they were still around.
Everyone can learn and create art. You just have to be honest enough to admit what you don't know and honest enough to learn.
-
41 minutes ago, kye said:
You're totally right, that is the issue. No-one can understand my argument without understanding mathematical equivalency. Or, you know, logic
No your test wasn't right. You show two video clips and say one was cropped in. Redo the test the right way and maybe you have point. Math is also not on your side. Use RAW footage and see what happens. The footage you used is not very detailed and very little areas are in focus. That was not a real world test and the footage looked the same.
- mercer and EthanAlexander
-
2
-
38 minutes ago, kye said:
Did you watch the video I posted? Please tell us all how you can see that the reframed shot is visibly less quality.
Quoting the 'rules' when they are contradicted by actual footage is a bit of a strange argument, wouldn't you think?
You're using compressed GH5 footage to make your case. That right there is the issue. Go get 6k RAW footage and then make your case. People reframe 4K to 2K all the time and not loss in quality. Yes you have rules to go follow but you would rather try and be right and hypocritical then wrong.
You also need to show footage before you reframe it. Show the footage as shot and then reframed to match the same framing. Your test does not work for reframing. It's confusing because it's not the a complete test.
-
31 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:
It’s sweet! Let me just get my credit card out and pay for this bad boy....$60,000 a bargain! Why isn’t everybody shooting on this! ?
Pretty sure that there something more to that image than 8K.
I assume it has to do with how much data is captured at 8K and them squeezed down to 2K. This makes me think the P6K down to 2K delivery will look better then the P4K. How does the Canon 1 DX look better then it's completion at the time? Canon's bloated files have more data information in them.
-
You can tell the EF mount was the original design for the P4K body. Tooling a new mold cost 10's of thousands of dollars.
The 6K was ht original design and BM planned this all along. Sucks for P4K owners.
-
40 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:
A shite ton because I would buy one. But you are throwing out a dream spec camera and not some incremental improvement with a smallish resolution bump.
I think Canon could release a stripped down C200 version that has C200 specs and also relate a C200 upgrade with 6K. Canon won't do that.
-
22 minutes ago, kye said:
I suggest you carefully read my post again - many of your points are arguments against points I didn't make, but you obviously thought that I did.
Therefore the argument that 6K is required for reframing and keeping similar image quality doesn't really stack up.
It's funny when discussing things like this - you and @thephoenix both went to the extreme and then criticised that. That is called a 'straw-man' argument, and although neither of you did it explicitly, you both reacted like I had said things I didn't actually say.
WOW!
So you say you say "many of your points are arguments against points I didn't make" and that I made a "straw-man" argument. And then you go on to say "Therefore the argument that 6K is required for reframing and keeping similar image quality doesn't really stack up."
I never said 6K is required for 4K reframing and keeping the same quality. What I said was "Reframing from 6K to 4K is a valid argument for 6k and you must not edit much if you're using this as an argument. You always have limits when you reframe and you have to follow the rules. 6K shooters will also be delivering content in 2K so you have even more options. "
Which means you have rules to follow when reframing. And one rule is having higher resolution then what you're delivering too will allow reframing with the same quality. Ie. using 4K to reframe to 2K.
So you called me out for supposedly a straw-man argument but you do the same-thing? What's that called? It starts with an H
You seem like you're reaching to try and be the hero that makes a valid point as to why we don't need 6K.
We have more advantages for 6K from the BM P6K then we do against it.
12 hours ago, DBounce said:I'm not spitting on it, but I'm not buying it. I do this for fun, it's just a hobby for me. I'm a prosumer... a enthusiast that will buy pro gear. But the P6Ks cameras plastic build, lack of good AF, bulky proportions and absence of any weather sealing makes it a pass for me. It's also doesn't help that it's been beaten hard with the ugly stick.
The Panasonic S1H, Sigma FP or the Komodo(pending specs) are more my speed.
The S1 has horrible AF. How can you depend on that?
-
9 hours ago, Video Hummus said:
I see GAS all over the place. Happens every time a new product is released. If anything it will help keep the companies afloat ? (this comment is brand agnostic). As long as BM releases better products at low prices (even if I don’t buy them) it’s a win down the road.
Could you imagine if Canon released a C200 replacement for $ 3,500 that did what the BMD 6K could do? How many of those would Canon sell?
-
14 hours ago, kye said:
This isn't click-bait BS, let's actually talk about why 6K RAW cameras aren't really needed.
I see two main reasons:
- Many cameras already shoot 6K downscaled to a 4K output (and the GH5 even has a lower-processed 5K anamorphic 4:3 mode) so the resolution benefits of 6K debayer resolution for a 4K delivery are already being enjoyed by many people
- For those who are claiming you need 6K to reframe for a 4K output, it is likely you don't know what reframing actually looks like
There is a third reason - that resolution has absolutely nothing to do with how good your film is, but I'll just assume that people who are desperate to get more resolution are probably not yet ready to hear this and I'll move on and pretend it somehow matters.
Much analysis has been done of the 6K -> 4K downsampling cameras, so I won't replicate those conversations, but instead let's look at the reframing argument.
If you're shooting 6K to reframe and get a 100% 4K crop out, you can reframe into the image up to 150% . ie, if you want to match the same re-framing with only a 4K source, you must scale up that 4K source to 150%, effectively using a 2.5k source. It sounds terrible, and despite people repeatedly saying that ARRI cameras capture at 3.2k and upscale to 4K (a 125% upscale) people still dismiss upscaling out-of-hand without actually knowing what difference this scaling makes, and being too lazy to actually test it themselves.
So I did it for you....
I look forward to people arguing their point in the face of overwhelming evidence.... ???
That is, unless you're delivering in 6K and also want to re-frame heavily in post, but seriously - who would be doing that?
One -The cameras that shoot 6K downscaled to a 4K output like the A6500 still does not deliver a 6K file. Sorry but that's the truth.
Two - Reframing from 6K to 4K is a valid argument for 6k and you must not edit much if you're using this as an argument. You always have limits when you reframe and you have to follow the rules. 6K shooters will also be delivering content in 2K so you have even more options.
All the other stuff you said is not overwhelming evidence that we don't need 6K. It's only your opinion and unless you give us your background and work history your opinion is just that.
If BMD gave us 100Mbps and crapping image quality and only wanted to deliver 6K as a gimmick then I might agree with you. The P6K is not a gimmick camera and actually looks amazing on paper and the sample footage we've seen so far.
6K is not that far from 4K and the same distance away from 8K, so it makes sense that this 6K footage will be relevant when 8K starts invading the market.
And the Gh5 test footage is apples to oranges compared to 6K footage reframing to 4K. try again.
I would much rather all the cine companies continue to improve 4K and make it better and better with each release but that's not happening. It's also not - let's have BMD 6K that's crappy vs really good 4k from another company. For the price of the S1 you can get the BMD 6K that blows away the S1 and S1H.
-
7 hours ago, JordanWright said:
I thought Netflix just go around to festivals buying a lot of the content regardless of what its shot with for there 'Netflix Original's'
That could be but why does it matter how they get content? You already know what they prefer when they buy a original series to be shot and delivered.
13 hours ago, User said:This is how one says very little about nothing. Congrats.
How you get that script in from of Netflix is different then Hollywood but what they look for hasn't changed. Good story wins.
48 minutes ago, nathlas said:Great looking footage.
I like how some say "great wedding video for a fake wedding". It's nice to wake up to nice negative / positive comments about the 6k camera. That fence feels nice.
For the price this camera looks amazing. I will get one. The EF mount was great choice and go look at the P4K comment page / section and see how much effort they have to do to get the right adaptor with the right lens. That's insane. You get "better' with the 6k with no effort at all.
-
7 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:
It still seems like you haven't fully understood. The Netflix 4K requirement is for productions made by Netflix. I can use whatever I want and if it's good enough they will accept.
To this day almost half of all the movies at the Oscars etc are shot on film or HD. And they all go on Netflix.
Netflix even still pick up TV shows shot on s16.
This has been talked about to death on this forum in the past. So let's get back to the real subject.
I said the EXACT same thing. Please don't say what I said and say I didn't understand.
I said Netflix ORIGINAL content that they produce is required to be 4K. Maybe you don't understand. Netflix hires you to produce a full season tv show. They will require you to film and deliver it in 4K. End of story.
And I'm not talking about content or tv shows already filmed that they option and buy.
4 hours ago, odie said:+1
...and I hope they pick up my film which is being shot on a super 16 Arr sr 2
They difference is you filmed it first and want Netflix to but it. So the demand to film and deliver in 4K doesn't apply.
+2
12 hours ago, leslie said:i'm going to play devils advocate momentarily, they may demand 4k but what do they deliver ? I live a long way from any broadband connection so my viewpoint is extremely biased, however you try pushing 4k down through the internet to everyone, that sucker is simply going to melt. i notice tv stations are falling over themselves to present us with hd content let alone 4k, where i am 38 channels of 576i compared to ( lets be optimistic and ) say 4 channels of hd hmm thats like an excellent ratio dont you think ?
Australia at least, is a long way behind the eight ball where hd and 4k are concerned. How other countries have it sorted i have no idea. It maybe true you can easily buy a 4k tv but getting or steaming content to play on that beastie is another issue all together i feel. Unless you live in a city 500 meters from a broadband hub, lucky you. What sort of data plan would you require for 4k or 6k anyway ? HD can chew through the gigabytes, 4k or 6k will be epic and next level, and require superconductors and still probably melt both polar icecaps, but they were melting already so its no big deal.
There is 29,614 people on this forum, 6 billion on this planet and counting. Where video is concerned, i think that makes us a bunch of elitists. Notice i include myself in this description as well. If you can afford 4k, 6k, 8k cameras and everything that equipment entails i say awesome. If you can send receive or stream all that then your doubly awesome and must be living in utopia. Planetary wide, i'd say hd is probably a drop of water in the bucket. Personally i love my tech when i can afford it and playing with it. If you get paid to play with video and can claim it on your tax thats also awesome. But if i think on it really deeply then there is a bunch of people out there that would say my 4k pictures taste like shit and a can of baked beans would taste better and they would be right.
Ultra HD and 4K is already streaming on Netflix.
I said over and over 4K demand from Netflix and other providers are for the future.
5 hours ago, mercer said:Good point, Jordan. Thank God Skip will inform us of this in his next post.
And because you'll ride the fence until you get blisters I see. You keep doing your life and I'll do mine.
And next time don't add in comments that I never made. Got it.
-
49 minutes ago, Kisaha said:
The Avengers movie only, did something like 2.6 billions in tickets. You have no clue how big the industry is, and where, and how.
https://www.businessinsider.com/avengers-endgame-box-office-might-not-surpass-avatar-2019-5
Edit: 4K is great, 6K even better, 8K even more, 16K angelic. I do not disagree with what you say, but the way you say it, and I would be glad to make a masterpiece in 720p, than a stupid iMax nothingness.
We are talking productions shot in 4K not box office success.
I'm sorry the tone of my comments offends you but it shouldn't.
32 minutes ago, User said:It's alright (not great) for what it is... a portrait of some folks living in a big city which had not been done before and I think that's why Netflix took it. No idea how much they paid or how the filmmaker was able to approach Netflix unless it was through an agent or well established producer... word is that one doesnt just call up Netflix. Maybe you could expand on this?
Pitching scripts to Hollywood has not changed and it's the same with Netflix
-
2 minutes ago, Kisaha said:
Wow! Who chooses those words "no argument because I'm right", to start a sentence on an internet forum, or any forum for that matter !!
Indeed, Netflix requirements is a very popular topic, and not only in this forum.
Funny thing is that people worry too much about the requirements, and not for the fact that they won't ever produce anything worthy of Netflix distribution, even though it seems like they are accepting almost anything these days.
Netflix is just a bleep in the the whole industry worldwide.
..and this is a thread about a 6K camera by the way!
That was a response from a comment made to me. And it's about 4K content being future proof for the streaming content studios like Netflix.
"Netflix, set to spend upwards of $8 billion on content in 2018, will have in the neighborhood of 700 original TV shows".
Sorry but that not just a bleep in the whole industry worldwide. That's one company and go count the hours produced from these original 4K tv series on Netflix.
Yeah this thread is about 6k and that turned into 'why 6k' when we don't need 4k." Someone needs to educate people on why studios want 4k and not 1080p. The short answer is when 4K streaming and viewing catches up and is standard these studios and network don't want a movie or tv show filmed in 2018 to be 1080p. It simple. Somehow people keep commenting that "I don't want 4K so why are we getting 6k".
I bet you your house I make Netflix content. You might have low goals and talk big about people on this board never making content that's worthy of Netflix distribution, but I don't. I'll help anyone on this board get on Netflix and which them all the best in trying to reach that goal. I'll have my work on Netflix and you'll be the first one I tell about it.
9 minutes ago, User said:Fuck most people.
I know someone who recently sold a doc to Netflix shot on a 5DM2.
All these sods constantly tripping over themselves for the 'best' image while regurgitating the same tired shlock.
Story and form trumps all.
C100 or die!
Hahah. Yes sir my friend. Go have beer with your friend and tell him way to go. ( is it a good doc?). That's some of the best content on Netflix.
Doc's can get buy based on Netflix specs. Story is king and trumps 4K in that case.
-
14 minutes ago, mercer said:
You are not right. The majority of Hollywood produced TV shows and films are shot on an Alexa Mini... which shoots 2.7K.
Netflix Originals account for a very small percentage of Hollywood Productions and BTW... almost everybody on this site knows about Netflix’s requirements for their original productions because there are about a half a dozen threads about it over the past couple of years. But thanks for playing.
Good Lord... how old are you? By your name, I would think you were born in 1977 but by your responses, it’s like talking to a teenager.
I’m sure you’ll reply by cherry picking one of my sentences and distorting it but please don’t bother wasting your time... this is boring.
Your full quote is above. You have issues owning what you comment and then trying to take credit for what I said about Netflix original content being 4K.
"Netflix, set to spend upwards of $8 billion on content in 2018, will have in the neighborhood of 700 original TV shows on the service worldwide this year, according to CFO David Wells."Do you know what 8 billion is in dollars? and 700 original tv shows which are multi season series.
Your post come off like you RIDE THE FENCE on everything. You have zero conviction because you play both sides and talk from both sides of your mouth. You also like to put word into my mouth and make claims that I never said. Case in point I never said 2K was dead or that I preferred 2K or 4K.
I'm 50 yrs old, and how old are you butthead?
What was ever your point when you commented back to me the first time? did it go like this " 4k is sweet and nice but 2K not dead and I"m just a writer guy and a amateur."
Stop riding the fence on every post.
-
APS-C is alive and well. To bad BMD doesn't make lenses.
-
2 hours ago, mercer said:
No.
Are you the most argumentative for no reason whatsoever?
As far as Netflix... umm... yeah that’s what I said.
As far as 4K? I don’t think anybody disagrees with you about future proofing. That is a solid argument in favor of 4K and the argument has been around for 5+ years, yet 5 years after the advent of 4K into the consumer market and over 10 years since Red released 4K into a cinema camera, most US Network Television is still broadcasted in 720p.
So, I don’t see people pushing against it, I see some people choosing not to use it.
Obviously, 4K is the future, but it doesn’t mean that 2K is obsolete because a small percentage of content ON (not created by) Netflix is in 4K.
No argument because I'm right.
Netflix makes a lot of original movies and series that are Hollywood production level. So add up the content shot in 4K and you have different story then what you said or claimed. That's cool because most people didn't know Netflix demands 4K content and why they do that.
-
8 minutes ago, Mako Sports said:
Ursa Mini Pro G2 would like a word with you, 15 stops of DR upto 3200 ISO (claimed) and 4.6K up to 120 fps, 300 fps at 1080p.
Oh I do like that update. The outside is old.
-
1 hour ago, mercer said:
Thanks.
Sorry, no most films are not shot in 4K. The Alexa is the most used camera in Hollywood and it is basically 3K with the intent to deliver in 2K. Netflix only requires 4K for their original content.
As to why not... read my above post. But everyone’s different so if you need/want 4K... that’s great, you have a lot of great options in the marketplace.
Netflix demands original content be filmed in 4K.
Question:
Why does Netflix require 4K on Netflix Originals?Answer:
In 2014, Netflix made the decision to begin shooting and delivering all Originals in 4K. This decision was made for several reasons, the most of important of which is to future-proof our content.
4K is here, and adoption of 4K in the home in increasing. In just a few years, it will be harder to find an HD television than a 4K television. For this reason, we feel it only makes sense to shoot natively in the format that most of our customers will see for years to come.
The experience for customers viewing HD is still fantastic. Our encoding pipeline takes a 4K master and produces beautiful HD (and SD) streams for all those customers who are viewing on smaller or older displays.------------------------
Please read my post again. I never said I needed it. I said it's basically bizarre that people on here push back against 4K. I honestly can't understand how film makers (anyone shooting video) doesn't understand how the market works or why they wouldn't want 4K. I understand whee the market is right now and how many can view 4K content but I already addressed why 4K is needed.
SO YES - original movies created for Netflix are 100% shot in 4K.
15 hours ago, Emanuel said:Have anyone noticed the video in the middle of that page? Shot on P4K, I wonder how this camera can be available right now if seems they don't have any footage to show up yet...
How we forget the web of misinformation that was spun.
And you SAID you pre-ordered the 6K? Why?
-
2 hours ago, mercer said:
I almost wonder if BM functions day to day from the money they make from preorders... joking.
I actually think this is a strange camera release and they’re banking on the desire of enthusiasts and up and coming filmmakers to drink the Kool Aid. If I’m being honest, I’m almost offended that less than 2 months ago, people were still waiting for their pre-ordered P4K and then they release this. Also, what does this camera do to Ursa sales? I’m sure a lot of folks were planning or considering a jump from the P4K to the Ursa and now don’t have to.
Interesting.
Are you the cat or the guy in your avatar? Just kidding.
Am I the smartest guy on these boards?
It's like this:
The market is very scattered right now with Canon, Nikon, Panasonic and Sony all relaxing or about to release cameras that do 4K RAW or at least 4K 10 bit. Then you have the ZCam and P4K as great looking cine run small form cameras. BM knows that the P4K is a value and a lot of people bought that camera but that didn't mean they are exclusively BMD users and might never buy BM again.
BM released the 6K because it needed to fill the void in the $2-3K price range and also upgrade to ASP-C and 6K. BM doesn't want you to buy one cine camera from them but they want you to buy into the BM echo system and stay. That's also what us consumers are trying to do. We want one brand and we want to stay loyal and build our production gear around it.
Why did the people on this board pre-order the 6K? Do they already own BM gear? or do they own EF glass?
The Ursa mini line up is old in the tooth and needs a make over. It has value and is good but needs to be update from the inside out. This is probably what's happening. The Ursa sensors goto the 6K and a new better sensor for to the Ursa min replacement.
Is Canon or Sony introducing new cine cameras like BM or even the S1H? How relevant is the FS7 once we get into 2020 and it still hasn't been updated.
BM is the disruptor and value for specs is what they offer.
-
1 hour ago, Emanuel said:
Did you see anyone to cry over there? Deception?? Really? Where? I didn't. Just people wondering about where's the footage, myself included and I placed my pre-order anyway. Well, internet is a vast ocean in fact. Lots of fake news... LOL : -)
I can't say the same how easy certain type of people jump to presume anything out of their knowledge, with no wondering at all as fair and necessary principle, i.e., an efficient way to gather information.
But invariably based on nonsensical certainties to say the least : D
For some reason the word 'similar' is there. 'Identical' instead doesn't necessarily mean 100% identical as much as identical twins are not the same body either ; -)
The footage was on BMD website and you referenced the P4K footage in the middle and still made comments about no footage for the 6K.
Knowing how to navigate a website and gather information is easy.
Did you actually see 6k video footage on BMD website and still comment that we have no footage? C'mon tell us.
Sorry but the 2x bigger lens mount is giveaway that one is different camera. Am not sure why you keep commenting about the bodies being similar?
1 hour ago, mercer said:So only 120fps in 2.8K mode is windowed?
Not really. Most of the shooters on this site aren’t cinematographers by the criteria of the title, they’re videographers. But for the point of your argument, that’s just semantics.
So, I digress... if you look at professional cinematographers and the films/tv shows produced and released, only a very small percentage is captured in 4K and higher and even less is distributed in 4K and higher. So the argument is that if it’s good enough for an Alexa and your local multiplex, 9 out of 10 times it’s good enough for a smart phone distribution.
With that being said, technological advancements are great and hopefully the major players will get hit hard by these smaller camera companies releasing bleeding edge features that us mere mortals can afford. I’m sure the C500 Mark II’s price tag won’t look so great at IBC when BlackMagic is showing off their $2500 camera.
Yes only 120fps is windowed and that's 2.8K.
I think most films are filmed in 4k. Doesn't Netflix require everything to be delivered in 4K? at least it's original content.
My questioning was connected to content providers wanting 4K deliverables for the future. That answers the "why we need it" the other answer should be "why not?"
-
41 minutes ago, Emanuel said:
Yes, I didn't know it yet. Posted on reduser too and someone else have linked here as well:
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicpocketcinemacamera/workflow
They could restrict that page to only the new P6K for a total of 9 clips as included there in many different shooting scenarios, but they've also added 2 videos from P4K (the 1st and 4th) which made me to think they don't see each version as individual models. Well, if we take a look on both bodies, they are pretty identical or similar as Andrew nailed in his introductory article : -)
It says a lot about the people that cried wolf over and over about the P6K not having footage. The descriptions are easy to read for each video. The show all the specs and which camera was used. No deception at all.
You actually went further and added your little twist about now having 6K footage for its release date. It just shows what some people are about. Instead of adding important information and seeing the positive about the 6K you added incorrect information and ran with it. Not only making cuts with the knife in the back but twisting it is you cut.
BMD developed the 6k for various reasons and I really don't think they are done yet.
5 minutes ago, sanveer said:A huge portion of the world is living on fake news. They would believe anything and anyone, regardless of the startling evidence to the contrary. They've become zombies, and you probably couldn't change their mind, if you tried.
People reported fake information about the BMD 6K not having footage that was released to the public. And as this was posted other people jump on and post replies and speculate as to the reason why. This is what causes doubt and mistrust towards new camera releases and companies. It is was false. It might seem like a big deal and just a mistake but it wasn't.
52 minutes ago, Emanuel said:Well, if we take a look on both bodies, they are pretty identical or similar as Andrew nailed in his introductory article : -)
The front lens mount area is twice as large on the 6K vs the P4K. Not the same.
Blackmagic to announce new camera related news at 12 noon PDT (8pm London)
In: Cameras
Posted
What's the name of the tv shows you shoot with the GH5?
Why do you feel you need to tell everyone that you have money to buy gear?
I said if one couldn't afford the P6k then the P4K is the best option.
And you actually have people crying over the P6K for $1,200 more. So in your world you can afford any gear and money is not an issue but for P4K users that say the P6K is not worth the extra cost, that's talk and has nothing to do with not being able to afford the extra cost?
What TV shows do you film with the Gh5 again?