GH5 Now with the BM Pocket 4K the GH5s seem expensive and obsolete

[combatentropy]

if Prores is easier to process in-and-out of camera then why do the major (Sony, Panasonic) camera manufacturers resist to implement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here

I'm not sure ProRes is fast to encode in camera just because it is fast to decode in computer. Codecs often are asymmetric. Further, a lot of ProRes's ease of decoding is because it lays out the track in a way that's easy to pick up by multicore processors, which a camera may not have.

I myself am actually not a fan of ProRes, because I don't like standards put out, and then held close, by corporations. I would rather just have CinemaDNG, maybe with the option to compress it according to the standard. That's only until the singularity (the one when cards become fast and cheap enough for there to be a single format: uncompressed CinemaDNG).

Even with compressed RAW you see the Not Invented Here Syndrome in effect. CinemaDNG has published a way to compress RAW in its spec. But Canon: no, we will make our own RAW Lite. But Apple: no, we will use our own ProRes RAW.

 

[Thomas Smet]

Sorry, but that's bunk. You have to kit a BMPCC 4K *less* than a GH5s. Add an external monitor and the audio unit to the GH5s and then compare it to the PMPCC 4K.

I wasn't aware the GH5S was missing a screen or audio.

By your definition the Pocket also needs to add those things since the monitor is fixed to the back and the audio is mono only. The displays on both cameras have compromises that may require adding an additional display. Same thing with the audio. If one needs two channels of XLR audio they are SOL with the Pocket and need to invest in a device to provide more audio options.

 

[Thomas Smet]

I would agree that the GH5 is squarely aimed at a different market, but not the GH5s. From the moment Panasonic revealed it, they trumpeted it as a filmmaker's tool. And they decided to charge a premium for that distinction. The GH5 is the better all around camera if you need stills, etc. The GH5s is an attempt to weigh-in at a higher weight class, and well, the BMPCC 4K (on paper) does so better, for less.

Couldn't agree more that the MFT mount makes it practical, affordable and to have a GH5 and a BMPCC 4K. But it also is what makes it practical to *not* have a GH5s.

So by your definition the C300 and EVA1 are not film making cameras because they don't support raw or internal ProRes? If award winning content can be created on the EVA1 with 150mbps and 400mbps then the same can be true of the GH5S. Still not convinced the Pocket is better. There is a lot more that makes a camera appealing to film makers than just the recording format. Thats why so many still insist on loving the Canon DSLR look. I personally think the Canon fans are bonkers but they are living proof that not every film maker views things the same way.

 

[John Brawley]

We are finally getting SD cards capable of ProRes recording although the cost is higher and still a bit out of reach of a lot of users. Maybe eventually we will get to the point where a $30.00 SD card can handle ProRes but that point is not today.

I think we get it Thomas. You don’t like the size of ProRes files. You’re complaining about the very feature that people want. Less compression.

But you’re wrong to say “SD cards finally capable of ProRes”

The first pocket cinema camera recorded ProRes to SD cards. (And RAW)

That’s hardly “finally”. That’s years ago. Like 2013. That’s 5 years I’ve been recording ProRes (and RAW !) to SD cards.

And here’s a card (version) I’ve been using since the first pocket was launched. For 36 bucks.

https://www.adorama.com/idssdxpv364...1wsxAmkUUlLPEulaO5WI1AHvyfNe5FBUaAk81EALw_wcB

JB

 

[TheDingo]

But it also is what makes it practical to *not* have a GH5s.

Assuming that you won't need any of the features the GH5s has that the BMPCC 4K camera doesn't.

I definitely want to see how the BM camera compares in low-light, as I really wonder if BM is able to match the NR of the GH5s. ( it's the GH5s NR that enables it to compete with the A7S II up to ISO 25600 )

 

[Thomas Smet]

I think we get it Thomas. You don’t like the size of ProRes files. You’re complaining about the very feature that people want. Less compression.

But you’re wrong to say “SD cards finally capable of ProRes”

The first pocket cinema camera recorded ProRes to SD cards. (And RAW)

That’s hardly “finally”. That’s years ago. Like 2013. That’s 5 years I’ve been recording ProRes (and RAW !) to SD cards.

And here’s a card (version) I’ve been using since the first pocket was launched. For 36 bucks.

https://www.adorama.com/idssdxpv364...1wsxAmkUUlLPEulaO5WI1AHvyfNe5FBUaAk81EALw_wcB

JB

You clearly don't know me. I never said I didn't like ProRes. I love ProRes and if you read my posts you would know that. I use ProRes all the time via an external recorder. I'm not speaking for myself here but for others.

Yes there are times I don't mind compressed formats but there are times I also prefer to have ProRes. Simple as that but to say I don't like the size of ProRes shows just how little you actually know me.

When I said SD cards and ProRes I meant for 4k video. Of course SD cards could handle ProRes HD. I'm not dumb and I think it is pretty obvious what could be done before. Since we are talking about a 4k camera here I assumed you could make the connection and realize I'm talking about 4k. Sorry if I needed to be more specific.

I honestly don't know what your point is about a SD card that worked for your first Pocket camera. I didn't think we were talking about HD recording here.

 

[Sage]

Can the Pocket 4k record to ProRes 2k (without sensor crop)?

 

[Denny16]

Unknown at this time, however, not currently listed in the specs.
Cheers

 

[Thomas Smet]

Can the Pocket 4k record to ProRes 2k (without sensor crop)?

As far as I know ProRes is always scaled. It is only raw that I believe has to be cropped since raw is directly from the sensor. Scaling is processing and once you process and scale the pixels they can no longer be raw.

Slow motion would be a crop due to sensor or processing reasons. Thats actually a good thing since even the GH5S uses an inferior method of scaling for slow motion. I would rather have clean slow motion from a crop and deal with the focal length then trying to pretend the slow motion from the GH5S is of high quality. I am ok with HD slow motion but not ok with a crude form of scaling to get to hat slow motion. I think slow motion will be superior on the Pocket.

 

[Bern Caughey]

I believe Grant Petty stated in one of the interviews that it will be possible to shoot full frame 2K ProRes to SD cards, & the Pocket 4K would downrez, which may help reduce ‘artifacts’

 

[Thomas Smet]

BMD does not implement internal noise reduction in its cameras, so if the pocket II follows in this tradition, the user can adjust temporal/spatial NR inside the included Resolve Studio. From experience, those chroma/luma noise removal tools are powerful, albeit slow.

Agreed. From a quality perspective noise will be better to handle with the Pocket vs the GH5S. Out of the box the noise may be higher but if one shoots raw they will likely yield better visual results with noise reduction in post vs what the GH5S can do in camera. The GH5 uses temporal noise reduction but its processing power is still a small fraction of what a beast of a computer can provide to the process. Plus the in camera noise reduction has to happen in realtime. Corners will always be cut. In post the noise reduction can take as long as it needs for optimal results.

So if a user wants out of the box clean then the GH5S may be better. If a user wants the best possible quality after post noise reduction and doesn't mind the extra time/effort then the Pocket may be better choice. All depends how much a user wants to fart around in post.

 

[Thomas Smet]

Exactly. I think this is one of the crucial factors that will separate both camps -- if speed is a necessity for you and require out-of-the-box efficiency, GHx is your camera, but if you're a fickle perfectionist with time on your hands (with a machine that can raise hell) and can appreciate the "film-like" luma noise inherent in all of BMD cameras, then the pocket II is your bag, if the sensor is tuned for that. We don't know yet.

Which has pretty much been my point from day one. I love the Pocket and think she will be a sexy beast. But I would never for an instant assume she's the right girl for everybody. I for one don't mind asking her for a dance when she comes to the party but I'm not going to divorce my wife just because a hot girl sends in her invitation to the dance.

 

[estarkey7]

Having just traded in my c100 for a GH5S if the BMPCC had been available I would have gone for it. One of my pet hates of the GH cameras is all the still photo stuff. I am not interested in shooting stills. I want all my buttons and menu controls to be about video. Also I never use the EVF and I find the LCD too small - plus the HDMI cable output restricts the rotation and positioning of the LCD. Also there are some very affordable and small SSD drives out at the moment. For my kind of work - Corporates, interviews etc the GH5S suits me but the BMPCC looks very compelling.

If you just got the GH5S, you may not be aware that you can customize every single button and the menu system to your liking. You can rid yourself of everything stills related and make this your mini video cam!

 

[estarkey7]

...95% of my videos end up being hosted on YouTube and viewed on PC's. Can't see HDR having an impact for me for some time.

You know YouTube does HDR video right?

 

[estarkey7]

Right, but if Prores is easier to process in-and-out of camera then why do the major (Sony, Panasonic) camera manufacturers resist to implement that less processor-intensive codec into their own systems? Wouldn't they open themselves to more innovative possibilities even sooner by relieving the processor of that task. Does the ability to record Prores internally cost the manufacturer more $ to license compared to h.264? It can't be as black-and-white as that, right? Is the grey area simply politics within the market?

Thanks for chiming in as well, this is all good stuff.

Engineer here. It has to do with the intended customer. That's why the Varicam LT uses crazy expensive P2 cards while the EVA-1 uses SD-Cards. If you had video files that were ten times bigger and needed special software to convert them before you can play on the computer, Joe Blow would complain and say the camera was crap.

Now pros (like us, I guess) understand the way these files can benefit us, and take the hassle of dealing with the files in stride.

I also believe the RED cameras use Peltier cooling on the sensors so they keep a higher dynamic range. I also think that is why Black Magic is claiming 13 stops while Panasonic only claims 12 for the GH5S, even though they probably both use the same sensor.

 

[estarkey7]

Atomos have a habit of talking up 'future' features on their products, only never deliver, and go silent if asked...

HDMI 2.1 has only just been announced, I don't think there is even any hardware that supports it yet, its just the 'next' standard. So for RAW to be supported it would be in the next iteration of the HDMI spec (2.2 or whatever) - 2019-2020 perhaps, even if it ratified..?

I would love to see my GH5s get it, oh yeah. But can't see it happening.

Raw is just data. HDMI already supports Ethernet which is just data, so they can support RAW, albeit at probably in a 4:1 lossless compressed form.

 

[John Brawley]

I also believe the RED cameras use Peltier cooling on the sensors so they keep a higher dynamic range. I also think that is why Black Magic is claiming 13 stops while Panasonic only claims 12 for the GH5S, even though they probably both use the same sensor.

As far as I know the only two companies that use solid state (peltier) cooling are Arri and Blackmagic. Red don’t as far as I understand. For example have a variable fan speed and you use multiple black shading operating temperature memories. I think there are 5 ?

Alexa and BMD use a constant speed fan (lower speeds so less noise) that simply moves air from a heat pump that’s connected to the peltier.

JB

 

[estarkey7]

Although I was originally considering the BMPCC4K, I've changed my mind because of the cost of managing two different systems. Two sets of batteries, two to three different sets of media, different cages, different run times, different features, etc. The only thing interchangeable between my GH5S and the BMPCC4K are my lenses. And this is the last thing I need on a multi cam shoot. Even with a possible reduction in quality, I'm better off buying another GH5S than the pocket 4K.

 

[joe12south]

Although I was originally considering the BMPCC4K, I've changed my mind because of the cost of managing two different systems. Two sets of batteries, two to three different sets of media, different cages, different run times, different features, etc. The only thing interchangeable between my GH5S and the BMPCC4K are my lenses. And this is the last thing I need on a multi cam shoot. Even with a possible reduction in quality, I'm better off buying another GH5S than the pocket 4K.

Yeah, if the primary use is for multicam shoots, I agree that your are better off with two of the same. The GH5s is close enough to "the same" as to count, so long as you are okay with the color being a little different.

 

[IronFilm]

Yeah, if the primary use is for multicam shoots, I agree that your are better off with two of the same. The GH5s is close enough to "the same" as to count, so long as you are okay with the color being a little different.

Far far less different though than if shooting with a BMPCC4K!

In fact the color would be the closest possible ever without actually shooting on two identical cameras.