Skip77

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. 
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.
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.

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.
How you get that script in from of Netflix is different then Hollywood but what they look for hasn't changed.  Good story wins. 
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. 

The post you just made is trolling.  
I made no comments directed at you.
You guys don't like AMERICANS and that's all this is.  You all ran off @webrunner5 because of his views and you attack me for saying the same-things camera related comments that other people post about. 
 
You might want to create a few more new click - bait titles for your You Tube channel instead of bothering with me. 

Since reading comprehension I lacking with you I'll clear this up.
I think (EF mount is better) and have seen better argument for EF mount and lens for the P6k then the other way around.  
 
Did you see more detail in the P6K?  Most side by side comparisons show the P6K resolves more detail.  Other then that the image quality looks identical ( the P6K does look better in low light even though other have said the P4K with booster would be better),

What Sony and Nikon models are you looking forward to?
MFT lens won't cover the APS-C sensor, right?  
I think and have sen a better argument for EF mount and lens for the P6k then the other way around.  MFT P4K users are more vocal but the side by side samples sow better detail and clarity on the P6K EF mount.  You can't get detail back if the P4K can't capture it. 
The P4K looks great until you compare it to the P6K.  (detail wise). 

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.

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.

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. 

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.  
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. 
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. 

The post you just made is trolling.  
I made no comments directed at you.
You guys don't like AMERICANS and that's all this is.  You all ran off @webrunner5 because of his views and you attack me for saying the same-things camera related comments that other people post about. 
 
You might want to create a few more new click - bait titles for your You Tube channel instead of bothering with me. 

Interesting. 
I speculate this.... Apple wants to sell a shit load  of Mac Pro’s by putting the power of ProRes RAW and FCPX at the core of pro workflow. So they want more pro cameras with ProRes RAW capability. RED have said “you can’t” so Apple have said “erm...we will”, as Apple wants the pro market, no matter what. 
Just for fun of speculation, I hope Apple get ProRes RAW clear, more cameras shoot with it, RED make their cameras more affordable (Komodo?) and Apple allows RED to use ProRes RAW as part of the deal. 
For what it’s worth, the RED image is awesome and REDcode is awesome - so I hope it’s a case of “everybody wins”, whatever happens. 

You only have to use Resolve for color grading, then edit down and transcode the footage out to ProRes HQ.  Then FCPX or PP.  
It's not the issue most make it out to be. 
Resolve has killer color grading set up that blow FCPX and PP away.   But for editing Resolve is not fast enough for me. 
And I love FCPX.

I found this on a site about h.264 license.  
Q: Is it safe to use such patented algorithms?
A: Patent laws vary wildly between jurisdictions, and in many countries patents on algorithms are not recognized. Plus the use of patents to prevent the usage of a format or codec on a specific operating system or together with specific other software might violate antitrust laws.  So whether you are safe or not depends on where you live and how judges interpret the law in your jurisdiction.

Frame grabs from a shoot yesterday, 1080p 120 fps upscale to 4K in Resolve.

I found this on a site about h.264 license.  
Q: Is it safe to use such patented algorithms?
A: Patent laws vary wildly between jurisdictions, and in many countries patents on algorithms are not recognized. Plus the use of patents to prevent the usage of a format or codec on a specific operating system or together with specific other software might violate antitrust laws.  So whether you are safe or not depends on where you live and how judges interpret the law in your jurisdiction.

As I'm intrigued by all this I felt the need to register and take part in it.
Nikon India is trying to say something.
https://nikonrumors.com/2019/08/16/new-nikon-india-video-teaser-nikon-has-something-exciting-for-videographers-and-filmmakers-a-revolution-is-coming.aspx/
 

No problem bud.
My original statement was easy to understand.
It's great you're in the m43 camp and will defend that camera and mount all day long. 
But lots of people welcome the P6K and see the advantages.  It boggles the mind to think a NEW BM 6K camera can be released and at the same time has this group of m43 P4K owners have horrible, mean spirited, non factual and brutal half a page long comment on why the P6K is not for them.  It's like the P6K is the enemy and they have to tell everyone not to buy it. 

Since reading comprehension I lacking with you I'll clear this up.
I think (EF mount is better) and have seen better argument for EF mount and lens for the P6k then the other way around.  
 
Did you see more detail in the P6K?  Most side by side comparisons show the P6K resolves more detail.  Other then that the image quality looks identical ( the P6K does look better in low light even though other have said the P4K with booster would be better),

Living in America doesn't mean you like Americans does it?
The question you asked the EOS wasn't what I commented about and you seemed flustered and triggered in your last 3-4 post. You commenting on how RedCode is great and Canon can't do RAW shows you don't know much about RED or Canon. 
Why do you keep taking shots at me?  I haven't posted comments directed at you, I didn't start any new conversations with you. 
 
Why do you take issue with me defending the P6K?  
Why take personal shots at me?  Did I ever post comments to you that offended you? No, so why get nasty with me?

The post you just made is trolling.  
I made no comments directed at you.
You guys don't like AMERICANS and that's all this is.  You all ran off @webrunner5 because of his views and you attack me for saying the same-things camera related comments that other people post about. 
 
You might want to create a few more new click - bait titles for your You Tube channel instead of bothering with me. 

The post you just made is trolling.  
I made no comments directed at you.
You guys don't like AMERICANS and that's all this is.  You all ran off @webrunner5 because of his views and you attack me for saying the same-things camera related comments that other people post about. 
 
You might want to create a few more new click - bait titles for your You Tube channel instead of bothering with me. 

Living in America doesn't mean you like Americans does it?
The question you asked the EOS wasn't what I commented about and you seemed flustered and triggered in your last 3-4 post. You commenting on how RedCode is great and Canon can't do RAW shows you don't know much about RED or Canon. 
Why do you keep taking shots at me?  I haven't posted comments directed at you, I didn't start any new conversations with you. 
 
Why do you take issue with me defending the P6K?  
Why take personal shots at me?  Did I ever post comments to you that offended you? No, so why get nasty with me?

I am not a former EOS member. Sorry to burst your bubble.  How many other people did you have issue with?