As was noted, if you play a little with image, the strange position of the sensor make sense..

It would be good to see some images/video which shows the distortion on some of the wider lens options for the BMPC as some of the BM team seemed to think there was no correction for either distortion or CA in cam..

@kodakmoment

By idea it must not correct any distortions. At least in all RAW modes. All it can do is set proper data for software correction.

Where does BMC's Pocket page say their RAW is lossy?? It only mentions "lossless CinemaDNG RAW", including in the specs. Nowhere does it say 'visually lossless' or anything else. Lossless compression means no data is thrown away at all (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless).

Red do compress, but they call it 'visually lossless' which tells you that it's lossy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REDCODE). That's exactly what Cineform call one of their codecs because again, it's lossy. Yes, 'visually lossless' is what the BMC rep at NAB said, but I'm pretty sure he was wrong. He clearly checked the RAW codec details as the first rep got RAW support completely wrong, so I doubt he pulled the 1.5:1 compression ratio out of his ass. And that's exactly the kind of ratio you expect from lossless audio/video compression (eg. FLAC, UT Video, Huffyuv, Lagarith).

Thanks @TrackZillas, the BMC CEO confirms that they're initially using true lossless compression on the Pocket cam as expected (2:1 - 1.5:1 rates), and a lossy compression on the 4k model. But they will probably offer the lossy version on the Pocket cam later.

watch the video @ 9:00:

@fatpig , at least one disadvantage of this vs GH2 that I see, is that it is more cropped. This means it is harder to find wide angle lenses for it. Also, you are going to have more storage costs, and will have to buy faster/larger/more expensive SDHC cards, and maybe a faster editing machine. Also, it is more expensive than a used GH2. Nonetheless, I am still very interested.

Peter123456, the 3.x crop actually means it will be easier to find lenses for it...

@Vitaliy_Kiselev ProRes is not RAW though, so corrections could be done in camera. Which software would correct lens distortion automatically, based on camera meta data? Resolve? No matter whether the correction is done in camera or by external software, it should result into resolution loss since the camera does not down-sample to generate 1080p. I think Black Magic put the active mount on the wrong camera. It should be on the cinema camera where as the pocket camera would be fine with a passive mount for Super 16 lenses. It annoys me that Black Magic seems hobbles it's products with lacking features and justifies it with the lower price (hyper deck shuttle without control monitor, BMCC with a passive mft mount etc). I am pretty sure that BM would sell more pocket cams for a price of lets say $1500 if it the full sensor resolution of the 2.5K sensor, for my sake down-sampled to 1080. Heck, I would even pay 2000 if it included Resolve. I am not willing to wait until BM upgrades the BMCC to an active mft mount. I can't imagine technical reasons, it is just marketing to not piss off the people who have been waiting for months to get the passive mft mount version.

3d potential- I was thinking with a pair of these flip one over they would make a good 3d rig since the lens could be placed close like that... not sure the exact distance they could be fit but from pictures it looks idea if you just flipped one cam over. Thoughts on the 3d potential? I know 3d is dumb blah blah....but some people want it.

@No_SuRReNDeR, I shoot 3D with 2 GH2s, works (mostly) great. The problem is rolling shutter, if you flip one cam they will jello in opposite directions. Useless with motion.

Would be funny to see Panasonic come out with similar specs for the GH5.

@Sangye Thanks... that method of calculating what you'll see is quite convoluted.. when you're used to full frame reference.