@_gl

If it's not an issue, why fix it? It's part of the camera's flaw pattern and can be fixed in post. Every camera has SOME sort of issue that just can't be fixed. That's it.

Also, why is it SUCH a big deal to format a card in camera or delete a clip? Perhaps formatting a card in camera could be handy, but again we're talking about things that arent' deal breakers or never even matter in real world usage.

It seems like only the people that haven't invested a dime in the product or used it for any extended period of time have the most to complain about.

@jrd, I half-agree. Audio meters, no deal breaker. But the camera was sold as a RAW camera and they haven't delivered that yet. Hey, if RAW ships within a couple of weeks, I'm sure most will be OK with that. But if it takes 3 months?

Software isn't hard (if you're competent). OK so maybe they don't have the resources - so why not open the firmware?? They're revolutionising everything else here, they're missing a trick! Within weeks/months you'd get all kinds of cool new features, and even basics like formatting & file handling would be implemented for free by some enthusiast. People like me could finally write firmware that supports synchronised 3D shooting. People could add focus features for underwater/remote shooting/sophisticated timelapses and a million other things.

Yes, they would probably want to protect their trade secrets, like colour science and very low-level stuff. No problem, release parts of the firmware as encrypted binary only modules (or just don't allow flashing over those parts), but open everything else. And occasionally answer questions from modders. You listening BM?

... oh yeah and no RAW either (as promised from day one). Sure it will turn up eventually, but there's a pattern here.

@RRRR right, but the question is, why have they still not fixed it? Why can't you still format a card in the cam, or delete files? And (apparently) still no audio meters? They've had all this time since the BMCC, and it's just software issues that don't seem hard to fix (I'm a programmer).

I haven't bought their cams yet, but this does worry me a bit. Are they spreading themselves too thinly on all their different products? You'd think getting one good software guy in to sort this out quickly would be worth the expense.

@rlima

Optical quality varies a lot when it comes to panny glass and each have their own in-cam treatment / profile. You can check this yourself from proper tests that have been done. The 12-35 resolves a lot as it is but easily becomes butt-ugly (very video looking) in video mode on the gh2 because of the in-cam sharpening (especially in contrasty situations). It looks better on the gh3 as you can control sharpening a bit more. Sharpening doesn´t seem to be applied to stills or it´s applied differently than for video (on 1:1 pixel level, making it less obvious?), at least when it comes to the gh2.

Some, not all, are just poorly made parts put together.

I'm not sure if one exists with proper IR protection which is a HUGE deal.

They soften the image to a great degree, and produce artifacts (double edges, strange flares, etc.)

Using a Mattebox with Filters means you're probably using good filters, and you're not living with a polarizer for every shot. The less glass in front of your lens, the better. In the case of the Variable ND, you've ALWAYS got two slabs of glass in front of the lens.

No thanks. xD

Re: Black Spot

I've been using BV1 for about a year now, it should be a year in September/October... that black spot "issue" hasn't been an issue once... not once. Never. So overblown.

@kholi @vicharris What is the problem with using a variable ND filter? I mean, why is this so different from using a matte box with filters? If you want to shoot with a shallow DoF in bright sunlight, what other options do you have? Is it in relation to IR pollution, in which case why not use an IR filter too?

@RRRR don't want to start a debate here but this is the first time I hear that. So all Panasonic (and Olympus?) micro4/3 lenses will be soft on the Pocket?? Mmmm…. where can we confirm that? All lens reviewers, if serious, shoot raw (still) to avoid camera corrections that are applied mainly to distortion and chromatic aberration to see how they perform free of corrections. Of course I might be wrong, but never heard of sharpen applied to jpgs only… ok, maybe a bit, but not a lot... :)

@jrd absolutely. Not over sharpened, but not extra soft too. Anyway nice to hear your (latter) comment...

However, it seems it hold up well on CineMusic grading. I'm a bit skeptic cause I never sharpened my video footage so far… well, maybe this is a new paradigm (at least for me).

This guy sharpened Brawley's footage a lot:

I presume most of the posted samples of Pocket shots are not sharpened in post. So it is pretty normal to look a bit soft. They need and will hold much sharpen without problems.

I don't get it, guys. You've seen nomad's charts. The BMPCC resolves significantly more than the GH2, even forgetting its dynamic range and gradeability.

Have folks come to love the sharpened DLSR look?

Don't know if it's a camera correction problem. As far as I know the corrections are related to CA and distortion only. Both the P14 and P20 are known as VERY sharp lenses... Still waiting for a killer footage from the Pocket... My pre-order is on risk..... :(