SteveV4D

33 minutes ago, tupp said:

Your P4K should closely match your P6K if you use a speedbooster with your EF lenses on your P4K.  As you are likely aware, a speedbooster (or focal reducer) is just an adapter with optics that condense the image circle and character of a lens to a smaller size.  Most M4/3 speedboosters will yield a Super35/APS-C frame and look, plus give an extra stop of exposure to boot.

 

Here is a video comparing a Metabones speedbooster with a recent Viltrox focal reducer on the P4K, cued to the section comparing autofocus speed in lower light.  To me, the Viltrox is good and the Metabones is better.  Neither seems to have any prohibitive problem with their electronics.

 

Was the AF performance of your adapters as good as these speedboosters?

 

 

I have the metabones and Viltrox.  The latter is the most temperamental, particularly with the Pocket, though that is as much down to the camera.  With the viltrox, I can't get IS at all on my IS lens; despite updating the adaptor.  It also struggles the most losing aperture control. The metabones though is more reliable, though still prone to quirks, mostly in cold weather, so I am experiencing it more now.  I know I won't necessary see that much difference in area of view or even low light.  Still I'll be intrigued to compare anyway.  

For me it's quite simple, with EF lenses and a desire to have at least one non MFT camera after 10 years, the Pocket 6K was a better choice when I needed a 2nd Blackmagic camera to compliment my Pocket 4K.  That said, I took over a year to decide this and then having it on order, cancelled after last year's lockdown.  

Now the Pocket 6K Pro is the obvious choice as it gives me the 6K with better screen and ND filters.  My 2 adaptors can be used on my Pocket 4K and GH5s when needed.  Though I have plenty of MFT lenses as well.  Though I may look to sell some of them, and only keep a few for my GH5 and 2 GH4rs I still use when I need 5 or 6 cameras for event filming.

1 hour ago, tupp said:

The most important thing is that one can control the aperture (and view a scope).  The aperture readout is not crucial.

Most cinema lenses are completely manual for good reasons.  There is too much riding on the line in larger budget projects to rely on decisions made by the camera or lens.  Furthermore, any IS glitch could bust a take and/or force a cut in post, which could prove to be expensive and detrimental to the piece's impact.

Additionally, it is likely that most cinematographers want lens manufacturers put their efforts into optical performance rather than into automatic electronic features.  Nobody buys a Master Prime to shoot handheld at Bar Mitzvahs.

It's not easy to handhold a narrow non-IS lens, but it can be done with success.  Back in the film days, there were no IS lenses, so one had to learn how to be smooth when handheld.  The non-IS results generally do not posses the same look/feel as handheld with a modern IS camera/lens, but I wouldn't say that handheld without IS is generally worse the with IS.

Of course, a tripod eliminates a lot of stability problems, and one really should disable IS when using a tripod.

If there is a nearby rental house, it might be wise to go there and test your EF-S lenses on a P6K or s P6K Pro prior to making a purchase.

Not sure how "consuming Humble Pie" is relevant, but getting a camera that works for you is more important.  By the way, I prefer the Small Faces.

Again, it would be useful to actually see how your lenses work with any camera in consideration (if possible), prior to a purchase.  In the case of the C70, try it with an official Canon adapter.

Full frame lenses are a wise investment if they have a deep mount, and especially if they are completely manual.

One of the great benefits of having FF deep-mount lenses is the ability to use them with speed boosters on shallow-mount Super35/APS-C cameras.  Such a combination gives an extra stop of exposure along with almost the complete full frame view and character, plus the image is usually sharper than using a full frame lens with a dummy adapter.

I've already made the purchase.  Surely it makes no difference to my situation.  I'm not buying to fix an error, I'm buying because the Pocket 6K Pro has features I need.  I was planning to buy a Pocket 6K to compliment my Pocket 4K for my work.  I didn't do so to eliminate a serious problem.  I merely speculate that doing so will potentially resolve the occasional annoying issues I have with the adaptors.

I appreciate the lecture on the use of non IS Lenses.  I'm not buying expensive primes.  I'm buying standard EF-S lenses on Pockets for event filming, corporate Promos, the odd music video and some personal travel videos.  In such cases, the odd handheld use is needed and IS on 1 of my lenses is there to help such work when needed.  Mostly for my own personal travel videos as my actual work tends to rely on a Monopod and the odd use of a gimbal.

I'm not looking at a C70 purchase just yet.  Aside from the cost, the lack of any RAWlite bothers me after enjoying BRAW on my Pockets.  There is the extra cost of an adaptor for my EF lenses and frankly I prefer Blackmagic colour science to Canon.  Always have done.   I've spent several years wishing to own a Blackmagic when all my camera gear was Panasonic and only when the right camera at the right price came along, I seized it and have never looked back.  

For AF alone I may consider it in the future or something else Canon if the price is right and the specs suits my needs.  Or maybe Panasonic will fix their AF and release their own version of a C70; that is for the future; but right now, the Pocket 6K Pro meets my needs and I am excited to receive it and work with a S35 sensor again after so long.

8Nothing wrong in wishing for AF.  Nothing wrong in wishing to win a million pounds in a lottery.  And Blackmagic giving us brilliant AF is as likely on my opinion.  I'd rather they focus their efforts in improving quality control first before attempting things like AF, which Panasonic still has failed to deliver on after a decade of hybrid cameras.  Is there anything to suggest if Blackmagic had attempted AF, it would be any better than Panasonic.

Poor AF can be worse than no AF.  The GH5 has some AF and I would find myself lazily relying on it because 8 or 9 times out of 10, it would work for me.  The problem is that time when it didn't and the image would shift badly out of focus.  Often at the worst moment.  

Not having AF has meant I must rely on manual focus and whilst this can lead to issues with missed focus, it's less obvious than a total out of focus moment that catches you off guard.  Also I find my manual focus skills improve from practise and thanks to Blackmagics large screen and punch in focus, manual focus is a lot better than the GH5.  

Yes, an AF as good as Canon and Sony would be lovely.  But is it possible?  Can Blackmagic borrow PDAF from Canon and impliment it just as well?   If not, then its a dream wish no different than one winning the lottery. 

At the end of the day, if you need reliable AF buy Canon or Sony.  

45 minutes ago, tupp said:

 

Never experienced that.  Are you shooting manual exposure or is the aperture automatically controlled?

Never experienced that either, but I would tend not to use IS on a cinematography camera such as the P6K.

On the other hand, do you think that your EF-S lenses would perform on the P6K just as well as they perform on Canon EF-S cameras?

Do you think that your EF-S lenses would perform on the C70 with a Canon EF-to-RF adapter just as well as they perform on a Canon EF-S camera?

Do you realize that most M4/3 lenses can be used on Cameras such as the C70 and the P6K with no vignetting?

It doesn't offend, but I truly hope that your preference is informed.

Aperture is controlled manually.  You can lose the aperture control in some cases and not get a readout of the aperture on the camera screen.

Why not use IS on the Cinema cameras?  Is it a rule?   Did I miss the no IS on Cinema cameras instruction in the manual.  I have one IS lens which I use when I wish to handheld the camera for more travel video use on my Pocket 4K.  Shooting 105mm on non IS lens isn't advised.  Having paid for the camera, I feel I can use it as I like. 🤣🤣🤣

As I don't yet own the P6K Pro or a Canon camera, I can't comment on your point there.  Only on my situation where I have had issues with 3 adaptors.  No doubt I shall see how they perform when I get the P6K Pro and then be able to clarify if the issue is with the adaptors or not.  Don't worry, I will consume humble pie if they are not found to be at fault.

Maybe an adaptor would work well with the C70.  I'm not ruling out adaptors in the future if required.  However having had no issues with my MFT lenses and several issues with my EF lenses via the adaptors, I am biased towards non adaptors.  Maybe once I've enjoyed using a S35 camera for the first time in 10 years with my S35 lenses, I will look to something like the C70 and try again with adaptors.  For now, they're pissing me off too much to give it thought.  Assuming they are the problem.  If I'm wrong, I'll quickly tell once my P6K Pro arrives, and I'll happily concede the adaptors aren't at fault.  

Yes I was aware MFT lenses can be used, though rarely seen as encouraged by others.  Again I'm keen to take a step away from adaptors for now.  And also to invest in fullframe lenses to compliment my S35 ones for future proof.  Unless the GH6 comes out soon, I don't see much future for MFT.  Though I prefer S35 now certainly, fullframe may well be my future if video pushes that way.  MFT won't be much use then.  I don't need to use MFT lenses as I have enough EF lenses to cover my needs. 

My preference is informed but as always subject to new information and experiences.  

7 hours ago, tupp said:

Why?  Do you actually have EF-S lenses?

 

 

Your EF lenses should basically work on all of those shallow mounts with adapters.  If your lenses are electronically controlled, the most important thing is that the electronic aperture can be set.

 

 

Why?  Have you actually had a problem with an adapter?

 

If not, please get over the notion that adapters are "bad."

 

 

That is why it is important that cameras such as the BMP6K have a shallow mount -- it makes it possible to use your M4/3 lenses on the BMP6K (especially in the crop modes).

 

 

 

Yes.  I mentioned the shallow EF-M mount in my posts above.  I believe that Canon is currently on the eleventh version of the M camera.

 

By the way, the EF-M mount is large enough to handle a full frame sensor.

 

 

The main problem with many EF lenses is that they rely on electronics.  Such lenses are useless on many cameras and special effect adapters.

 

Furthermore, because the electronics have to be incorporated, it takes longer for EF adapters and EF speedboosters to appear for new shallow lens mounts.  Nikkor F to EF-M focal reducers and tilt-shift adapters appeared a couple of years prior to the EF versions.

 

Of course, Nikkor F lenses can be adapted to EF cameras and adapters, but not vice versa.  So, lenses with the Nikkor F mount are more versatile than the those with an EF mount.

 

Additionally, one must occasionally contend with the problem of Canon's wonky "stopping flange" that prevents EF-S lenses from being mounted on EF cameras and EF adapters.  One generally has to modify the rear of an EF-S lens to get around the problem.

 

 

 

It appears that you have already gotten over your aversion to adapters in the span of a single paragraph.  That was quick!

 

 

 

I mostly agree, although adapters on cameras with shallow mounts mostly accomplish this same goal.

Wow so many assumptions and false conclusions in 1 post.  

Most of my lenses are EF-S

I have had issues with adaptors.  Loss of aperture at key moments.  Loss of IS at key moments.  This is from 3 adaptors I own for MFT mount.   Not a promising start.

Noting the C70 has an EF adaptor isn't endorsement of adaptors.  Merely an observation.  I'm not buying the C70 or its adaptor.

Using MFT lenses on a S35 sensor is not something I would ever consider.  Selling them maybe.  

Personally I still prefer S35 to fullframe.  I prefer not to use adaptors if I can.  My own personal preference.   Sorry if this offends you.

19 minutes ago, EphraimP said:

There are lots of interview situations that don't call for a chair, or where one isn't even possible. I, for instance, shoot mainly doc-style pieces for environmental nonprofits as a solo shooter, which means 70-85 percent of my works happens outdoors, in the field. Thus, standing interviews are a must almost all the time for me.

And even if you tell someone to stand on a mark and not move their body too much, most of them are going to move in some way or another as you get deep into the interview, especially if you get them comfortable with the camera and really into what they are talking about. And if possible, I'm running two cameras in these interviews, so I can cut between different angles to add interest to the piece and hide cuts that would be obvious I only had one camera angle.

 

If you are trying to get non-pro subjects to say scripted lines, I find you're going to get a pretty wooden delivery most of the time, no matter if your subject is sitting or standing. As a former journalist, in my experience I get much better results if I do a traditional interview and get my subjects really talking about the topic at hand, even if I have some very clear bullet points of information I need them to say. I find getting people comfortable enough with the camera that they forget in the moment that it's rolling is key to getting an good clip. People getting animated and moving around a bit and talking with their hands gives me the most impactful interview material. Basically, if I can film interviews that feel like the subject is just talking to someone (off camera) with all the normal ticks and motions and conversational gestures people expect in a real conversation, the end result is many times better than having someone say scripted lines to the camera.

And there are lots of times in doc work where you want to see your subject moving around while talking. It doesn't have to be an interview necessarily; you might want your subject inspecting a logging site or in a burnt-out forest and talking about what they see, or walking along a river that's the subject of your piece telling a story that is relevant to your video. Or maybe you want your subject talking while driving or riding in a car to an important destination, or through a critical scene. Or you might be recording a protest or town hall meeting or some other live event where you can't direct who is speaking or how they are moving.

In all of these situations, having really good AF-C, especially with face tracking, can be extremely helpful for a single shooter or a small crew without a dedicated focus-puller. And none of them has anything to do with what a pack of self-referential YouTubers recommend or another dreadful blog about someone making coffee or riding a One Wheel around Toronto or LA. They are real-world situations that professional shooters encounter every day. If they are not situations you shoot in, great. But it would be silly to discount them.

My interviews range from the spontaneous to the scripted.  The former can be easier with coaxing, the latter can be more problematic.  Alas Company Directors often wish to speak, but aren't always good at it.  And oddly being Directors, they don't always welcome direction.

As for your examples.  I'll ignore the driving a car one as a need for good AF. 🤣  I confess I don't move much when I am behind the wheel.  Do yours dance the jig when driving???

Most interviews for me, whether indoors or outdoors hardly needs solid AF.  Even slight movement is easily accommodated and I've filmed interviews with 3 cameras on my own with very shallow depth of field.  Some of your examples are not interviews themselves, but B footage of the subject.  These I've filmed rather well with manual AF. 

Only when we move to things like your protest example and other real World scenarios you allude to that I will concede, and it is the sort of work rather outside what I'd buy and use a Pocket Cinema camera for, even with passable AF.   There are just so many better options for such situations that to criticise the Pocket for not being one of them, whilst ignoring what it can do at the low price it offers feels like missing the point.   

These cameras are not run n gun nor do they have to be.  Let others carry that flag and let these be what they are designed to be.  If your budget can't stretch to such cameras, then this is hardly the fault of Blackmagic.  

So whilst a usable AF is a desire, I'm not surprised or disappointed by its exclusion.  I feel more annoyed by Pansonics failure to reward its loyal customers with something more than the worse AF amongst Fuji, Nikon, Sony and Canon.  

55 minutes ago, hijodeibn said:

Looks like you only interview people in a chair, in my case the most interesting is to interview people meanwhile they are doing something, moving around, the AF is really very helpful, of course all depends of your shooting stile, anyway, this new BM camera looks good, the lack of AF is the only complain, and the reliability is the big question mark.

I interview people who are not actors.  So if they moved and talked, they end up doing neither very well.  Trust me, to get these people to sit and say their lines is hard enough.  Add movement to the scene and it would quickly descend into a farce.  

Plus I see on TV interviews with moving subjects and it looks funny. 🤣

1 hour ago, chadandreo said:

what applies to one person doesn’t apply to everyone. 
for interviews in which the subjects move around, good AF is invaluable, especially if the production decides to shoot with a more shallow aperture than f8. 
 

the way people have responded to cinema cameras adding AF, reminds me of when people thought seatbelts and abs weren’t important. 

I've shot plenty of interviews with non AF cameras and they are a doddle for this lack of feature.  I've never had focus issues even with shallow depth of field.  They're not leaping about the room.  

For other situations like moving people, AF is very useful.  For interviews.  No.  Even if I had it, I would disable it.  I've yet to see an AF that is fool proof.

5 minutes ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

I've gone to Fuji - but, remember, I'm an amateur.

But in the midrange bodies, comparing the X-S10 to the E-M10 MKIII and GX9 (the bodies that I have), the Fuji is vastly superior. Miles better video AF, great colors, and when I saw that you can punch-in focus during recording (one thing that I've ALWAYS wanted)...

I like Fuji.  For a hybrid I make well consider it as fullframe still leaves me cold.  I still favour Pockets for pure video.  Its integration with Davinci is an all in one system that Fuji can't replicate.  

4 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

Exactly! Looking to move on from my GH5 and GH5S

Me too.  I'm going witb S35 until I've made my mind up about fullframe.  Pocket 6K Pro will be first non MFT since Canon 60d I owned 10 years ago.  

You can still transcode BRAW footage in Resolve.  I did it to supply footage to clients and it took no time at all.  Depends on how quick your turnaround is.  You'd might have better luck simply familiarising yourself with the cut page in Resolve.

4 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

A quick thought, will they make a 4K MFT version?

MFT, yes I do recall that.  I remember Panasonic once supported it and so did Olympus... 😢

17 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

Yeah but a C70 is out of my price range! Especially with less work in 2020 and so far this year.

All the more reason to use that extra time to learn to use Davinci cut page.  I've been using my extra time to learn more about colour grading and how to use nodes and the various selection and mask tools.

As for a camera.  Even if the C70 is out of your price range, there are other options.  Pocket 4K, Panasonic S5, Sony A7sIII isn't that much more expensive than the 6K Pro.  

Seriously if you keep giving yourself reasons not to use something, you'd end up not using anything at all. 

8 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

I just love how FCPX's timeline works for quick stuff. Just personal choice.

Well if you don't want BRAW, or to use Davinci for much of your work, I wouldn't advise you to pick up this camera.  Thankfully there are other choices, which will work better for your needs.  C70 for instance.  Its more designed  for quick turn around jobs.

11 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

I use FCPX, Premiere and Resolve but I much prefer FCPX for any quick turnover stuff. It's just a really slick experience. I dislike Premiere and I'm only really starting out with Resolve but it seems quite good but just overkill for most of my jobs.

Resolve is overkill.  How?  You don't have to use all of it you know.  There's a cut page for basic edits and quick turn around thats very good.  I've delivered same day 10 min videos at Weddings with BRAW much faster in Davinci than I did with Premiere and H264 files.  I agree initially it can look complicated, but that's not true once you're familiar with it.  

3 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

That's a shame because using raw for quick turnover projects could become a problem.

Not for me.  Try to not think of it as RAW.  It's closer in some ways more to ProRes than genuine RAW.  Yes you have access to Davinci RAW controls, but unless you're changing ISO and White balance, you can handle the file quite easily as you would ProRes.  

The only issue of course would be if you used another programme other than Davinci, though Premiere supports BRAW.  Given you get the Davinci software included, it's only an issue if you wish to make it so and not use the free Profesional software.

1 hour ago, Thpriest said:

I don't know if has been noted or not but can the camera record 6K in Prores? That would be another importante factor if it is really a "Pro" line. Same with Raw in 4K.

No, ProRes is limited to 4K crop.  To get 6K you need to use BRAW.  Just like the original Pocket 6K.  It's a limitation, but for me a minor one.  The URSA 12K to my knowledge only records on BRAW.   I guess we are not yet in the position to have that sensor which can do full sensor lower resolution such as 8K and 4K in a Pocket size body.

Since I have EF lenses, I am delighted it has an EF mount.  All these other mounts is why I struggle to upgrade to fullframe.  It means choosing between RF, L or E or any others.  I prefer to avoid adaptors if I can.  Having so much invested in MFT only for Panasonic to cut their MFT almost dead in favour of FF makes me reluctant to invest totally too much in 1 system.  Didn't Canon have a M series of lenses too. 

At least with EF lenses, there is plenty of them and at good 2nd hand prices too.  Even the C70 has an adaptor to use them.  The future should be cameras with interchangeable mounts, so you're not limited to just one system.  

47 minutes ago, kye said:

Sounds to me like you're not aiming high enough.

I'll leave you to your comfort zone....

If learning from Internet forums is aiming high, what's aiming low?  😉  

Then again, seeing how you responded to a clearly more experienced person trying to answer your question on clamping a camera to glass, I am not surprised your learning is more conflicted than my own. 🤣🤣🤣

3 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

I mean, is it something "reasonably " common. Because with my GH5 and GH5S I haven't had any real problems nor with the Canon C100. But I have heard other scary stories with BM, which is a shame as the camera looks interesting. 

* I use dual recording all the time. Don't want a card ruining a one chance shot or interview.

There were I recall lots of issues reported on Facebook when the GH5 came out.  Freezing being the common issue.  I've had a few GH4s I owned freeze up and need the battery removed to unlock it.  GH5 hasn't played up for me.  GH5s froze a few times.  Variable frame rate can be touchy I find.  

As for Pocket 4K, I don't know.  Only Blackmagic will be able to answer and I doubt they would if asked. 🤣🤣

As for dual recording, you'd pick the C70 or any other camera with this function.  Dual recording only protects you from card issues.  I've had camera issues, not card issues and I shoot hours of footage in a single year.  We'll until last year I did. 🙄  I have my GH cameras for dual recording when needed.  Different tools for different jobs.

10 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

How common are "lemons"? A serious question.

How would anyone here actually know the answer to this question?  If only I bought 100 Pocket 4Ks back in the day, I could easily tell you something like 1 in 20 are faulty. 🙄 

3 minutes ago, kye said:

Commenting on the highlighted sections...

It's not about being an idiot - it's about asking questions about things that you don't understand.  You and I can tell that this isn't a handheld camera in the sense that it is specialised for the task, but people who don't know this will get distracted and confused by it, and a conversation between people who know it and people who don't will just be confusing as they won't be able to tell who is right and who isn't.

Another way to say this is that it's not a problem if you already understand the topic.  That's great, if all you do is talk to people about things you already understand.

I'm different.  I spend a good amount of my time trying to learn things, things where I am the idiot who doesn't know things.  I've tried on dozens of occasions to ask questions and had the threads completely derailed because of confusion about words and phrases and people with differing skill levels not effectively communicating with each other.

It's not a theoretical phenomena, it's even cost me money.  I've bought expensive books or pieces of equipment because somewhere in some confusing as hell thread on it those things got mentioned.  I get them and they don't help.  Later, after I have struggled through learning this stuff the hard way (have a look at how many tests and stuff I do myself - I do this partly because it's not possible to get clear answers about this stuff online) I have revisited the confusing conversations to re-read them and now I can see who knew what they were talking about and who didn't.  

Unfortunately I spent the money and the time and the confusion while I was being an idiot, thinking that these things might help me, which is what you have to be to learn something new.

Saying that terminology doesn't matter because only idiots can't tell, is basically saying you don't care about learning and anyone who dares to read about new material is an idiot.

Well, I'm an idiot, but the real idiots are the people who don't ever try to learn something new.

It's odd that my learning process isn't quite as riddled with confusion as yours.  Yes I bought some items I ended up not needed.  That is normal and had nothing to do with misleading advertising or comments on the Web.  It's just that what sounded good in theory didn't work for me in practise.  Or maybe it didn't fit my way of working.  No one but me will know that, so there was nothing anyone else could say or do to change that.  It was my mistake to make and to take ownership of.  I don't blame others for it.

Again if I or Panasonic described the GH4 as a handheld camera, I doubt I'd hear a peep from you.  Assign the same term to another camera brand and its suddenly a bone of contention.  Would you describe the GH5s as handheld?

If Blackmagic advertised that you could film stable footage handheld, then yes, it is misleading advertising.  Describing it as handheld, just means it's small enough to be held in one's hand whilst working with it.  In this case, it is true.  As born out my those of us who do so.  To me the Pocket cameras are handheld tools in the same way my GH4 cameras are and my GH5s.  I can hold and operate them entirely with my hands, without any additional straps or support.  Therefore Blackmagic isn't being misleading.  They even have a handgrip.... 

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

Yeap.. I wish they would put PDAF and IBIS in this baby. Probably no going to happen as BMD is too small for that. 

I've been wishing better AF with Panasonic for nearly a decade.  They've still yet to deliver on it.  Blackmagic feels like a leap too far to expect decent AF.  

59 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

I mean... that is a boat. I shoot handheld with my Pocket 4k all the time. Mostly with unstabilised lenses like the Sigma 18-35. It just depends on the look you want.

With the announcement, the thing that got me most excited is the firmware for the other pockets. The new histogram is alright I suppose, but Gen5 colour inside the camera will be great.

I also noticed the new camera shoots more versions of Braw, with Q1 and Q3 being added, so for now I'm assuming that will also come to the other cameras. Making my 2 main hopes a reality.

 

Yes the camera update for the Pocket 4K is welcome and overdue.  I've used a bit of Gen 5 via Davinci RAW controls and like it.  However it is hard to apply to all files easily without applying other settings as well.  It will also help matching with my P6K Pro when I get it.   

It's a good announcement and one more relevant to me than last year's.  All I need is the work to resume and I'll be very happy.  

14 minutes ago, kye said:

I'm picky because it's just misleading.  People went completely bananas when the P4K was released about it not fitting in a pocket, also because that was misleading.

I think that over time words get used, then misused, then appropriated, and then they become meaningless and just confuse people.  Think about the word 'cinematic'.  Once upon a time it used to mean something, but now, any time there is a conversation about film, someone who thinks the word cinematic means something will use it, and the people who know it doesn't mean anything then talk about the word, then the whole conversation goes sideways and the only thing that people learn is that conversations on the internet are frustrating and go no-where.

In terms of this being a "handheld" camera, sure.  According to what criteria?  We used to talk about cameras that were particularly good at stabilisation, but now apparently the criteria is to be light enough to hold, and accepts OIS lenses.  Great, so now the phrase "handheld" means every camera under 3kg made in the last decade.  

The next time that someone who shoots handheld in extreme situations where great performance is really required asks a question they will get met with a sea of numptys who think that handheld means basically any camera on earth, and if the person shoots in a situation where an the P6KPro wouldn't cut it and a camera with excellent IBIS / OIS integration is genuinely required then they are going to have to wade through the people who don't understand that OIS doesn't truly distinguish a camera.

Effectively it just creates noise and more hassle to have real conversations about things.

The way that I would summarise a camera like this would be "you CAN use it for handheld work, but I wouldn't call it a handheld camera" and this kind of statement represents some nuance and context.  Unfortunately when the manufacturer themselves calls it such, it's just one more thing getting in the way and not being helpful.

I'm happy to drop the subject and not hijack the thread, but it's kind of equivalent to Apple calling the latest iPhone a 'cinema' camera and then forums like this being full of random Apple fanboys who fill up every thread discussing cinema cameras arguing with people about why the iPhone should be on their shortlists, because "it's a cinema camera too"!

Wow, I think you're over thinking and worrying over this kind of thing.  Sure the Pocket was an issue for some with no sense of humour.  I find it funny and like the name, despite the fact its not something you'd put in a pocket.  They could of called it Mini, which would have been a better fit.  Or do what Canon did and just give it a number.  Marketing is full of stuff like this.  As long as you're not an idiot and believe it literally, there's no problem.  It's just a name.  Internet makes more fuss of things than it's worth.  I could call my camera 'Bernard 4K' and it makes no difference to its functionality. 🤣🤣

As for handheld, again, I viewed my GH2, GH3 and GH4 as handheld.  In fact, if Panasonic had marketed these cameras back in the day as such, you would not object to the description surely and agree its a useful distinction between those larger cameras you mount on a shoulder to one that you can work in your hands.  Given I do a lot of handheld work with my Pocket 4K, why isn't it a handheld camera.  Is a GH5s not a handheld camera whilst the GH5 is?  

13 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

 

If the BMPCC6K Pro has got rid of those reliability problems it could be very interesting as everything else looks good. Can it do dual recording? I mean, I know it has various ways to record but could I record on SD and Cfast at the same time?

No it doesn't.  To be honest, I've never used dual recording on my GH5 and GH5s, even though it has it.  So not an issue for me. 

I fo agree that reliability is BM biggest weakness.  However its not consistent and if you're lucky, then like me, you get a great camera. 😁