So anyway, 4K
Skipping the hype and (yes) the debate, I know that a number of you are ACTUALLY WORKING with 4K and some 5K right now. What's the story?
-- Are you working with it in native 4K/5k?
-- Aside from the frame dimensions, what format?
-- What's your distribution? (theatrical, tv, non-broadcast, corporate, etc.)
-- How much did it cost for you to upgrade your systems to handle 4K/5K (computers, storage, etc.)
If you're not working with 4K/5K, don't believe in it, hate it, whatever -- please, on another thread. The fact that *I'm* trying to stay on topic should tell you that I'm trying to go in a different direction than usual...but I think it's important to those other threads to START with the experience of people who are ACTUALLY doing it.
For the rest of you, if you ARE interested, will you be looking at NAB? What will you need to find in order to make you act?
Again, if you're NOT interested, please save that for another thread.
Although what the hell do I know? This forum has thrived on chaos. So take my request under advisement, and do with it what you normally do with my requests. LOL But I honestly am more interested in stories from the trenches than missives from the pulpits. This time. LOL
I'm working with 5.6-6k Red Dragon material for a theatrical doc. I love the camera and the extra DR, sensitivity, and resolution.
I'm presently in the early stages of a multi-shoot production. At those resolutions I transcoded to DNxHD 175 to make post workable with existing hardware rather than spending a lot of money to upgrade for little additional return. I don't expect to conform and grade for another 9 months or so. The offline online workflow seems to work well in Premiere and I expect it will be even better when it comes time to go online.
David, what about the final product? What will be your resolution for projection?
I should also mention that we put the Dragon on an octocopter and shot a lot of aerials even though we had an Epic that came with the copter. The additional resolution above 4 and 5k allows stabilization and cropping without resolution loss.
Working with native 4K. RED Scarlet.
Format: R3D acquisition,, dimensions 3840x2160, finishing in Prores and H.264 4K.
How much did it cost us?
Well, we were working with very old (2006) Mac Pro's and a system of SATA disks connected trough eSATA and enclosures.
We upgraded to Retina Macbook Pro's and a Mac Mini Server with Pegasus Promise RAIDS. We had also transitioned to a completely FCPX workflow.
Most of our work is HD, but our company is doing a couple of tests in 4K, and also finishing some promo's and stuff that we shot with the RED in 4K.
We had to do the upgrade anyway, 4K didn't change anything. For us it was a transition to new hardware (those 2006 Mac Pro's were getting too old), a server-system instead of local disks (sometimes we connect the Pegasus Promise raids locally trough Thunderbolt though, but mostly trough a Mac Mini Server and 10GB Ethernet card) and upgrading to new software (FCPX).
To be honest, working with R3D and finishing in 4K is really easy if you have FCPX, a retina Macbook Pro and a quick raid.
We often make Proxies inside FCPX just for quick editing, and being able to quickly skim trough material, but even working with the native R3D's is not difficult.
Doing color correction inside FCPX and rendering out in 4K, it's not *difficult* at all. That being said, until now - this will change in the future - we just use our Scarlet and 4K for quick promo material, so no long form material in 4K as of yet.
I don't have any experience with 5K either.
We have a 4K Philips 65" screen. When we view our 4K Prores or H.264 on it, really sometimes seems like looking trough a window.
Most 4/5k work for me has been RED Epic and grading R3D after the edit was done with either DNxHD or ProRes HD files. I have just gone halves in the new Blackmagic 4k camera so looking forward to cinema raw.
To handle grunt I built my own rack mount i7 WIN7 PC with onboard RAID5 (12TB) which is fast. SSD system drive, NVIDIA GTX680 card, 64 gig RAM and no red rocket and I just get 25fps in da Vinci at half res. Output is still to an 1920 x 1080 monitor for grading. Looking into the 4k Decklink card and hoping for some more 4k OLED options that are affordable and available soon. Mostly I want to be able to work in 4k for future proofing, reframing for 2K/ HD. More important that 4K is raw workflows for grading.
Output is to Pr for finishing timeline and usually downscaling to either 2k for DCP or 1920 x 1080 for broadcast. Never been asked for a full 4k output yet.
Yeah, I was working as a freelancer for a broadcast network. All their original shows were shooting 5k RED. The network was broadcasting in 720p but they asked that we build the master at 4k so that in the future they could un-archive the shows and play them back at 4k. Like someone said earlier in this thread with FCPX I just worked in HD 1080p. When I was ready for output it was a simple as duplicating the online project and changing the project resolution to 4k. Checking it and exporting. Easy peasy.
It's much easier now then it was when the industry went from SD to HD. I was still an AE watching all the senior editors go crazy over mixed frame rates and up resing. Now it seems its just a matter of storage space for those 4k files. With the nMP's It doesn't even require that much of a system upgrade.
Jordan Mena | Editor | Colorist | Producer
Los Angeles, CA
I cut a 4K RED spot last summer on an i7 iMac. No issues back then other than slow renders since we didn't convert to Prores. Ran on a Thunderbolt GRAID. Finished spot aired at 1080p.
I purchased a GH4 for my corporate and personal work and will continue to use it just as I have been with the GH2/3... except now everything will be "4K-ier" ;). GH4 shoots 100mbps h264 @ 4K. This work will go to the web. More than likely in HD for corporate for now.
When the work warrants it, I'll upgrade. But for now, I'll most likely keep my current drives and see how long I can "suffer." I have been purchasing $100 1TB USB drives for most projects and everything has been fine as they run at 90MB/s.
I expect to get a Mac Pro in the future-future. Not sure when I'll go with 4K monitoring. Depends on what's announced by Apple and, being completely practical, what I can fit on my desk. My edit suite might need a re-think by that point.
Cost for initial upgrade of the camera is 1700 + 250 per SD Card that can support 4k.
8-Core Mac Pro + Client Monitor + Color Grading monitor + Additional drives: Priceless.
5th Wall - a post production company
My Moviola Webinar on Color Correcting in FCP X
My Moviola Webinar on Cutting News in FCP X
In my conversations with LA based facilities catering to television finishing, that mastering at 4K is an additional 25%-30% more budget wise, but would be at last 100% or more if they had to do a 4K master down the road. This is due to additional cost of archival retrieval from all different service providers, and trying to remember why some things were done a certain way for some processes (mainly VFX), etc. It was also noted that the budget increase was when working with R3D and XAVC - other 4K formats, even ProRes are big files and the costs is in moving them, storing them, etc.
But you will see more 4K finishing because it is just easier to do it now when you look at what it takes to do it later.
I have been cutting 5K Epic files for commercials. Finished to HD for distribution. Since this company uses FCP Legacy, we down-convert everything for edit and then link back for color and finish. The director loves to re-position in post, so Epic is his friend ( I would rather see him move the camera or change the lens, but I am just an editor...).
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
Professor, VCU Brandcenter
So far, for me, I have only dealt with 4K+ as an acquisition format. None of my clients have yet expressed a need for a 4K master. Cameras have included 35mm film, RED One, RED Epic, Canon C500, GoPro and time-lapse sequences from full-frame DSLRs.
The general desire by the client is to use the camera for its features, the "look" or the ability to punch-in for reframing on the oversized frame, not necessarily to end up in 4K. These are for commercials, corporate videos and indie feature films. The target distribution is TV, web, DVD and theatrical. So far all delivery has been 1080p, 1080i, 720p or SD.
My usual approach to post is to transcode. Either once to a master format, or twice - a proxy for edit and then later to a master format for final. Editing software involved, includes FCP 7, FCP X and Media Composer to date. Also After Effects, Redcine-X Pro and Resolve.
I will be at NAB and will be looking at 4K options. Since I generally freelance, my inquiries are mostly so that I can advise my clients, rather than a personal purchase.
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
We (at a corporate level) got into 4K back in 2009 with our RED MX.
I for one love it since it really helped with my workflow (Maya and After Effects).
We were stuck with Avid MC and had to learn and re-learn the AMA battles.
In the end we got good at it but with recent FCPX/Premiere Pro workflow as well as Resolve, I myself drifted from Avid.
Perfect timing since I went and dipped into the RED Cool-Aid back in Oct 2012 with the BT-Scarlet :)
Most of our projects are Corporate and Digital Signage.
My personal is fun and more fun with eventual real work like shorts and music vids.
I guess I can honestly say that we/I were in full 4K mode around when FCPX finally started to work for us/me.
We will still shoot high and deliver low (DVD being the lowest) but our corporate level deliverables are HD and up (future Christie Microtiles installations) even the web is HD.
There is no looking back now, even though we are still an Avid facility first everything else piece meal.
We are not holding our breath on Avid but we are at least ready for anything 4K and up.
I'm curious what deliverable format will become a standard. HDCAM has been an HD deliverable for network shows for a long time and Extreme Reach does not do full length programming. The file format deliverables are all over the map.
We need an organization (SMTPE?) to come up with standards for file deliveries.....how much slate, bars, black etc. Everyone wants something different. It's going to get worse with 4k. Is there even a 4k tape delverable?
The wild west gets wilder!
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
[Rich Rubasch] "We need an organization (SMTPE?) to come up with standards for file deliveries.....how much slate, bars, black etc. Everyone wants something different. It's going to get worse with 4k. Is there even a 4k tape delverable?"
No, there is no "4K" tape recording format. HDCamSR tapped out in its later versions at 2048. My SRW-5500 'only' does 1920x1080 (and capable of 720P, but never used it for that).
But. True enough. I did respond with some more Resolve-centric points on this thread in the DaVinci Resolve forum.
SMPTE does have recommendations for how channels should be assigned, order of program elements... they're good for legal documents and quoting official-sounding references like SMPTE 320M-B. Some of these things, no one knows what they are, most are just plain ignored, and most of them you have no control over, anyway.
Like, are you sure you are supplying time code at SMPTE 12M standard, and your video conforms with 274M?
I feel the "deliverable" pain. I have a stack of binders from a couple of dozen broadcasters -- sometimes even from subdivisions of that broadcaster where the deliverables have their own sub-variants. The worst part of these is usually audio channel assignment, not even basic leader/slate requirements. Really, who even cares about that stuff any more? Its probably not even digitized at the pickup point.
I do agree that things are going to get even worse, plus, the expectation is that most of us will have to start paying for extremely fat pipes to upload all this stuff. Not to mention the issues that we are already encountering with portions of the file disappearing.. like, you know... the captions and stuff. I see the final encoding of all the VANC data, like captions, plus Dolby E, &tc., getting beyond the control of those people who, really, just wanted to upload their show. And textless elements, and separate titles, and every audio stem known to man, in a variety of frame rates, resolutions, bitrates...
Tape was easy, and, with an insert-edit... revisable. Now you have to re-compress and re-upload the whole shebang, even if you wanted to change one pixel. So is all-or-nothing really such a great idea-- because that is what we have with file-based anything no matter what format it is.
"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.
Your post really gave me some confidence. I am new to the Red Epic 5K - FCP X workflow and going to start the edit of a feature film from tomorrow on a machine which doesn't have a RED Rocket card. My final output will be for Theatres, TV and DVD. Expecting some helpful insight from the forum and wish the absence of the Red Rocket card doesn't create a big problem for edit.
I finished a long edit this past summer with 4k & 5k RED as the main format (there were many). Everything was transcoded to HD ProRes (via Red Rocket) for the edit (FCP7) and we delivered a Resolve project to the lab with original media for finish. Distribution was theatrical, DCP 2k.
(The people I worked with bought a 2011 MacPro and Red Rocket and that was the entire "upgrade".)
I also recently did a one minute spot for broadcast with 5k RED material. I worked in PPro with camera orig (monitoring HD) and delivered same to lab for finish. Distribution was HD.
(There were no "upgrade" costs as it worked on everything I had.)
[Franz Bieberkopf] "(The people I worked with bought a 2011 MacPro and Red Rocket and that was the entire "upgrade".)"
Frankly, a 2011 Mac Pro with dual 7870 Radeons running Mountain Lion/Mavericks would be the ideal upgrade for this kind of workflow, considering you'll be able to utilize the entire power of the Rocket/Rocket-X card.
You wouldn't get as much GPU RAM, but outside of that, I would think it would be very comparable if not a bit faster for straight transcoding vs. neuMac Pro.
[Gary Huff] "Frankly, a 2011 Mac Pro with dual 7870 Radeons running Mountain Lion/Mavericks would be the ideal upgrade for this kind of workflow ..."
Thanks for the suggestion. I'm wondering why you would recommend more graphics power.
I typically recommend "no upgrade" as the ideal.
Everything else has to justify itself in light of the workflow.
Considering that almost everything I've worked on the past decade has had it's own unique workflow, any upgrades are an open question right now (and it wasn't my system), but that set-up (above) worked just great for that workflow, and would do so again. I certainly wasn't ever waiting for graphics power. (Also note that I can't remember what MacPro it was exactly but it was purchased in spring 2012 if I recall correctly, and I think we used all the PCI slots; maybe one left empty).
[Franz Bieberkopf] "Thanks for the suggestion. I'm wondering why you would recommend more graphics power."
Because GPUs are being used in conjunction with CPUs now for processing video content. With a Red Rocket, it won't be as needed at the moment (though I'm hoping for a RedCine-X workflow that can use both in tandem).
[Gary Huff] "Because GPUs are being used in conjunction with CPUs now for processing video content."
My approach has always been that hardware upgrades should be geared to workflow, and workflow is often quite specific.
As an example, additional graphics cards aren't going to benefit a FCP7 ProRes edit. It's unclear what the particular demands on that particular system will be next. Still, I appreciate the suggestion and may come back to if and when appropriate.
[Franz Bieberkopf] "As an example, additional graphics cards aren't going to benefit a FCP7 ProRes edit."
Yes, you're right. Nothing to be gained from going the GPU route for a Final Cut Pro 7 workflow. Curious as to why a 2011 Mac Pro would even be purchased, as a 2008 would be more than enough.
My biggest question is how are people delivering 4K? And is that 4K being presented as 4K, and how is it being shown?
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
I've been cutting off and on for quite a while now on a Doc that is mostly 4K Red with a smattering of 5K and a lot of DSLR 1080 and uprezzed news and archive footage. We've been transcoding all the 4K to 2K ProRes 444 1:85 masters and cutting those. All 1080 footage is being scaled to match 2K timeline - not ideal but it's working. I use 5DtoRGB to batch all DSLR and XDCAM footage to ProRes 444 and HQ depending of the situation - it's a great tool for DSLR shooters.
I plan on shooting my next feature in 4K - possibly even the new GH4 but will have a better idea after NAB next week. I do believe 4K will be the theme at NAB this year and thankfully NOT 3D! Can't wait!
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
[Lance Bachelder] "I plan on shooting my next feature in 4K - possibly even the new GH4 but will have a better idea after NAB next week."
Ideally it would be after Atomos comes out with their 4K HDMI recording unit that is heavily rumored to be announced (unless you plan on using the YAGH, but that will require 4 SDI connections to get 4K, which seems a bit much compared to a single HDMI cable).
Internally, 4K on the GH4 is basically just AVCHD.
There are many solutions for recording 4K including the company I'm working for at NAB - AJA. Knowing that the GH4 actually sends 10 bit 4K out via the HDMI, I expect to see a lot of new gear at NAB...
If I was to actually shoot with the GH4 I would want to test the 200Mbit 1080p vs. the 100Mbit 4K - which in camera is a lowly 25Mbit per 1080 quadrant. Which means the 1080p recording has 8 times the data of the 4K internal!
For the most part there is no current reason to master/deliver in 4K unless you have a theatrical run and a 4K delivery requirement. This will change obviously in the future when there are more 4K outlets...
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
[Lance Bachelder] "If I was to actually shoot with the GH4 I would want to test the 200Mbit 1080p vs. the 100Mbit 4K - which in camera is a lowly 25Mbit per 1080 quadrant. Which means the 1080p recording has 8 times the data of the 4K internal!"
I would rather record out the HDMI to ProRes HQ at 10-bit 4:2:2 than 200Mbps 8-bit 4:2:0. That sounds like overkill.
Of course - hopefully we'll see something like a Ninja Blade 4K at NAB....
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
Planning on switching our 5 camera PBS cooking show to SONY F55s this spring. Will record some single camera inserts in 4k internally, and use directly in PPro for ability to reframe. All the multi-camera stuff will be recorded externally as 1080 ProRes using our trusty KiPros. Distribution is still 1080 ProRes.
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf
[Herb Sevush] "Planning on switching our 5 camera PBS cooking show to SONY F55s "
Great camera, fantastic images, very happy with ours!
I'm different, coming at this from design rather than editorial, and from staging rather than video.
[Tim Wilson] "-- Are you working with it in native 4K/5k? "
Yes, and beyond. The largest raster I've dealt with this year was nine times UHD.
[Tim Wilson] "-- Aside from the frame dimensions, what format?"
Mostly synthetic footage. Lots of image sequences, a bit of CineForm and ProRes intermediates.
[Tim Wilson] "-- What's your distribution? (theatrical, tv, non-broadcast, corporate, etc.)"
Large-format events and installations.
[Tim Wilson] "-- How much did it cost for you to upgrade your systems to handle 4K/5K (computers, storage, etc.)"
I didn't really upgrade for 4K as I've been doing large-format work for a while. Beyond what most folks here may generally have (nice workstations and rast RAIDs), I've invested thousands of dollars on top-spec CPUs, piles of RAM and solid-state PCIe storage.
[Tim Wilson] " I think it's important to those other threads to START with the experience of people who are ACTUALLY doing it. For the rest of you, if you ARE interested, will you be looking at NAB? What will you need to find in order to make you act?"
I'll take this as an invitation to discuss the challenges of high-res work as I see them today, and why we are doing some 4K but not all-4K-all-the-time.
4K monitors are rare in the real world. Those 2160p30 Seiki monitors don't count.
High-res deliverable standards don't really exist yet. I'm more concerned about UHD (3840x2160) than any other flavor of 4K at the moment -- but HEVC and Rec. 2020 haven't really landed yet.
The biggie: engineering (at least in the staging and rental space) hasn't caught up with acquisition. The current generation of routing and switching hardware in the channel are largely 3G-SDI or single-link DVI. This means that there's still a bit of rocket science involved in high-res applications. I'm still mainly measuring my work in split and synchronized channels of HD and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
What I am primarily looking for at NAB (or since I'm not going this year, what I am hoping to primarily look for vicariously through others) is DisplayPort/6G UHD-SDI signal distribution and processing hardware. Other interests include broader 4K monitoring support and more resolution-independence in software.
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events
I've looked at a number of examples fro the GH4 and despite increased resolution, it exhibits the same "issue" for serious work that I found with the GH3 (that I picked up as an inexpensive 60p camera) - skin tones and depth of the codec.
I haven't seen anything from it regarding people - which are my main subjects vs cats and city traffic at night - that comes close to the image from even my BMPCC. I'd so much rather have 10 bit ProRes in camera than more detail wrapped in AVCHD.
To me, at 1080p where all my work ends up and most will for quite a while to come, less DR (BMPC) or thinner "negative" (GH4) doesn't win the argument. Now, an F55 is another issue. But honestly, regardless of it's simplicity/lack of features, the image from even the $1k BMPCC wins the day for my work.
Have you seen any original files? Most stuff is on youtube and is heavily compressed. It is also recorded in camera at 4:2:0 8 bit. I can imagine the 10 bit 4:2:2 4k footage from HDMI will be better but you'll need external recorder.
There's not a lot of footage out there so it is kind of early to tell what it can or can't do and how the footage will handle in post production.
I must say I agree that I also love the images I see from the bmpcc. I've been thinking of trading in my GH3's and get the bmpcc's instead but I haven't quite been bold enough to do so.
Of course youtube and all online video is heavily compressed, but while compression can smooth some faults, create moire where there may not be on the original file, and reduce actual resolution; it's still easy to judge relative depth of color, dynamic range, skin tones/handling, etc.
I also just looked at a 2 GB GH4 from Vimeo.
It only confirmed what I see in the other stuff I've looked at - great, detailed image but it just has a look that never worked for me as anything like an A camera.
While the camera itself is really fun to use, and I'm sure the GH4 will be even more so, it just doesn't have the kind of "negative" I've grown to love with BM cameras. There's also something different in the way they implement 24p that just works for me, BM vs GH.
I'm sure I'll get a GH4. I've got a lot of MFT glass I use with BM and for the $ it's a no brainer.
But for narrative and commercial work...people, the BM cameras can capture a native 800 ASA image that's just silly good for the money...10 bit 4:2:2 ProRes...to an SD card
The BMPCC also now does raw with a firmware upgrade. A bit silly on the internal cards though.
Sorry I'm late to the party.
I just finished a estimated $1 Million upgrade to my facility for 4K production using FCPX and the Blackmagic 4K Cameras. We dropped in about 1PB of SAN storage as well as a MAM from Levels Beyond ( REACH ). Like others have said in FCPX 4K work is really easy. And if you enable proxies your just working with HD footage which we all have done for years. Or delivery format is Broadcast but we are mastering everything in 4K for future distribution. While it's a bit overkill what we did and if you're interested in it Part 1 of a 3 Part series is up here ( http://www.loudyeti.com/archives/567 ) The reality if you want to be in 4k all you need is a macbook pro with a Pegasus Raid and A BM4KPC, decent lens and some SSD's
So $2000 for the computer $1500 for the storage - $3000 for the camera - $900 for SSD's - $1300 for a set of cinema lenses = $8700 total
This is all we used to test out the workflows and make our decisions to move towards it.
And if your looking to trick out your cameras we use ViewFactor.net for cages and support gear. AMAZING quality, priced great and great people to work with.
Entry to 4K is insanely inexpensive cheeper than most current HD rigs. And if you're using FCPX its really easy too. If you're on the fence go 4K and that money you spend today will last you years to come.
I put a couple of VF Contineo cages on the BMPCCs...really great gear. Also using the Kinotehnik VF which is great with the BM.
FWIW - ARRI has officially acknowledged developing a 4K Alexa. Although they seem reluctant about it.
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
I think the pressure to provide a 4k camera is unavoidable for any camera maker, especially when you've got people like Sony with a $2k consumer 4k that's got pretty amazing resolution.
I try and just keep it in perspective to my creative and deliverables. I really never thought of the web as viable a media outlet (for our work) even a few years ago, but I'm booked producing work directly to web as much as anything else. Most of my work of the last few years is for web and TV (cable and satellite.) In neither instance do I see bandwidth and compression mandating 4k delivery.
But hey, things change and I could be very wrong in a year or two. Good news is 4k camera s are already ridiculously affordable.
Right now, while I'm editing on my Retina at night and the TV is on I regularly turn my monitor to my wife and say "does anything you're seeing in that HD broadcast looks as detailed as what I shot today?" Not even close. Last night I was watching the Godfather and commenting on the same thing after working on a two camera BM edit all day. I was stunned at the lack of detail in Directv "HD". At the end of the credits they actually had a card that read "digitally transferred and restored in 4k..." It certainly didn't show in broadcast.
It isn't just the old "the story rules" argument. I think, for viewers, the story rules and is better told with cameras that can provide a powerful, emotional image, and resolution is just one part of that. And unless you're comparing 4k and 1080 side by side, I don't think it's nearly the most important factor.
[Jim Giberti] "And unless you're comparing 4k and 1080 side by side, I don't think it's nearly the most important factor.
Other than for future-proofing your content, which does count for something.
[Chris Harlan] "Other than for future-proofing your content, which does count for something."
We started shooting in HD much earlier than we started to get asked for HD masters and it proved to be very useful for us. We are now doing exactly the same thing with 4K wherever possible.
And that's what most of the big guys are doing, protecting for future syndication. Until Mega HD comes along (two years?) As I've always said, we are working our way back to film resolution.
[TImothy Auld] "we are working our way back to film resolution."
We're pretty much there.
Frame size ≠ resolution, but the latitude of these isn't so far off film (these are all 12-ish stops or more), and of course lenses can be identical. It's just the quality of the sensor to consider, and obviously a lot of previously hardcore film guys are coming around on the look and feel of some of these cameras.
If you want to have some real fun with the numbers at their most basic, our friends at Abel Cine have put together a dynamic field of view comparison page. Flip between cameras and lens lengths, and compare what's being captured. Very, very informative visually, plus a lot of fun numbers too, including the sensor sizes I quoted above, and a nice visual overlay of sensor size comparison.
They're not comparing picture quality or latitude of course -- it's strictly field of view, but no kidding, I think you'll really get a kick out this.
We have been shooting with Sony F55 (and F5 as second camera) and recording more and more in 4k as opposed to shooting in 1080.
Our deliveries are mostly 1080, so we use QHD as a tool in reframing and post. It has worked really well for us.
While onboard 4k was a consideration in the F55, it was more for the higher frame rates, larger gamut, nicer sensor, and global shutter.
We have been shooting with SGamut3/SLog3 mostly in MXF wrapped XAVC, but looking forward to the ProRes upgrade option being offered by Sony in the near future. I hope to find out more about that with NAB approaching as I don't know if this option is going to allow a 4k record on SxS or not.
Shooting RAW on the F55 requires a snap on accessory and different media cards. I love working with Raw media for grading, but Sony Raw MXF hasn't exactly taken off in post quite yet. There is enough software support to make it worth it, it's just not as easy as using compressed media and a flat gamma curve for our purposes. I am hoping that NAB brings a Sony Raw workflow to more video editing applications.
The Sony SR codec workflow is also not as convenient as the SStP support requires a batch conversion to something else. You cannot shoot 4k in SStP either, so, there's that.
I am one of the stupid that has decided Apple knows better than I do, and have begun a migration to Thunderbolt 2. It has cost real money, but our post gear hasn't been updated in quite some time, so we are fortunate (or unfortunate, depending on your world view) to be investing in a technology that has current development support. Newer ≠ better, so I expect a few hurdles. At the very least, we will maintain our fighting weight from all the running and jumping.
Our storage should be more than adequate for 4k, as it's already working now.
Also happening now, and in to the foreseeable future, there's no reason for us to monitor in 4k. Once broadcast calls for 4k, we will then consider 4k broadcast monitors. But COMPUTER monitors, yeah, I could always use some more pixels there.
I would prefer more latitude over more pixels, more lens choice over more raster, p over i, and blue over red.
For smaller shops like mine, I just don't think it's a smart time to make a major investment in 4K. I'm not talking about a camera like a GH4 - it's a no brainer because it's a write off on a project. I'm talking about my next big camera. Canon is going to do something different, Sony definitely as well. BM is always an adventure, and as rudimentary as their systems are, I'm in the middle of a production using them w/ all MFT glass and it's some of the best footage I've shot.
Aside from a GH4 for when I need it, I'm going to wait to see how things shake out in the coming months. I'll bet there will be a pretty different range of interesting options and I've really grown fond of smaller cameras, ProRes and cards that I can off load and check on a Retina in the field.