Canon RF lens w BMPCC4K ???

The future for Canon is clearly with their new mirrorless line up. I am sure they will support the EF lens for the near future but the “holy trinity” is already released for RF (all w IS) so we can see where they are headed.

So, is there any way to use an RF lens on a BMPCC4K? As far as I can tell no.

Anyone have an idea how it could be done or do we just need to wait on Metabones?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What can a FF lens do that a native M43 lens can do at less cost, size and weight.

It's unlikely you can go from mirrorless to mirrorless, due to flange distance. The future is mirrorless for sure, but in this day and age, lots of EF lenses are around, and native MFT ones, so you don't need the RF ones too. In the future, who knows, maybe BMD will create an RF camera.

The RF camera is exactly what I would like. I currently have the 4K for video but use Canon for photo. I need to update my “holy trinity” lenses at some point but we know a high end R mirrorless is on the way so it makes more sense to invest in an RF lens system rather than an EF lens system long term. The missing link is the BlackMagic Pocket Cinema Camera 6k RF but maybe by that time it will be 8k


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The canon RF mount has a flange to focal plane distance .75mm thicker than M43 so it's an absolute certainty that there will never be any adapter to enable the use of RF lenses on a M43 sensor camera. I would also say that EF lenses are a much better long term investment as they are adaptable to jsut about any other camera system and format whereas if you invest in RF lenses you will only be able to use them on Canon R cameras.

But the EF if for the mirror line of cameras. In the long run that is a dying system. The R camera line is the future. Now you can buy the EF lens and use it with the R via an adapter but why would you? My point is that the R system is clearly the future for Canon. There is zero doubt about that if you look out a decade which is not long in the life of a quality lens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The most important question is:
How many manufacturers of quality photo cameras will survive the next ten years?

They are all under heavy pressure from smartphone photography.

But the EF if for the mirror line of cameras. In the long run that is a dying system. The R camera line is the future. Now you can buy the EF lens and use it with the R via an adapter but why would you? My point is that the R system is clearly the future for Canon. There is zero doubt about that if you look out a decade which is not long in the life of a quality lens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I expect EF lenses to still be in use with just about every camera in 10 years time and Canon RF lenses to be only usable on R series cameras - a pretty limiting and possible dead end choice for anyone....

There is no doubt that the EF len will be around for a long time. I still cherish my "holy trinity" system although they are mostly the older generation. The question I have to ask myself is what should i replace them with? None of them have image stabilization and clearly that is something I would like. Some of them do not even work well with the Metabones Speedbooster because they are the older generation. The simple solution would be to upgrade to the newer EF lens.

However, we it is Canon is expected to release and mirrorless equivalent of the Canon 5D Mk ? series in the future. The Canon EOS R was already part way there. Couple that with the R series lens and you have the future of Canon photography. Throw on the adapter and you can still use your old EF lens while you save up for the new R series lens.

But have no doubt, if you shoot Canon your future in terms of cameras will be mirrorless. And with that the R series lens will offer new options that were simply not possible with the EF lens. But as you say the EF lens will be sticking around. But will I be investing in any new EF lenses? Probably not.

The most important question is:
How many manufacturers of quality photo cameras will survive the next ten years?

They are all under heavy pressure from smartphone photography.

The interesting thing coming out of Google and Apple is "computational photography". They are literally creating images that were not there. Even Annie Leibovitz is playing around with a Google phone.

That said the I thing the hybrid mirrorless camera has saved the day at least in the short run for the "camera". Photography and Video have merged at the professional and prosumer level and that trend will only expand. The next wave will be the high wattage HMI lights. Then we have almost everything professional film makers use at a budget price. The potential is incredible and there is a market for those companies that get it right and keep the costs down, the quality super high and the user interfaces super friendly. There is zero room for companies to be arrogant and those that are may was well give up today. Those that deliver have a bright future. I think the BMPCC4K is a good example of what is possible although perhaps a little better quality control would help their brand image. But hey, I give them an A for trying.

The canon RF mount has a flange to focal plane distance .75mm thicker than M43 so it's an absolute certainty that there will never be any adapter to enable the use of RF lenses on a M43 sensor camera.

It is actually possible if additional glass is added between the lens and camera to compensate for the flange offset, or if it is mounted at an intentional offset to function as a "macro tube" and allow close-focusing with the lenses at the expense of distance focusing. Either way you would be sacrificing something to do this, so I consider it highly unlikely... but not strictly impossible.

I hit a major flaw in the the entire logic in thinking the RF lens was the way to go for the future and I would like your thoughts in general. Unlike the EF Lens the RF lens turns out to be “fly-by-wire” focus and people report that these are a nightmare for follow focus systems. So is this a deal breaker for the RF system when it comes to video if you want good follow focus? Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Adam, with respect, the RF lenses are designed for photography and just because a camera with a RF mount can record still images and video images, doesn’t make the lens a good choice for cinematography.

I hit a major flaw in the the entire logic in thinking the RF lens was the way to go for the future and I would like your thoughts in general. Unlike the EF Lens the RF lens turns out to be “fly-by-wire” focus and people report that these are a nightmare for follow focus systems. So is this a deal breaker for the RF system when it comes to video if you want good follow focus? Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fly by wire can actually give quite good control when they are programmed to respond linearly and very incrementally, like some manufacturers allow you to do in their settings. It still doesn't beat tactile smooth focus pulling, though.

Rick, that is what I am coming to realize. I clearly come at this from a photography background, so perhaps you could point me in a better direction.

I currently like the Canon 5D MK IV / EF lens as a hybrid photo/video system. Now I get that the video capabilities are limited. The hope was that those would be overcome with the mirrorless EOS R Pro (or whatever it will be called) and the EOS RF lens system. But as I mentioned that lens system is fly-by-wire unlike the EF lens system

So Rick, knowing my background and logic perhaps you can point me in a better direction for a hybrid system (Sony is out for color management at the moment and I would actually prefer to stick with Canon because I do prefer their flesh tones).

I am currently exploring the BMPCC4K for video which is how I learned about the down side of fly by wire lenses (I have the Panasonic 12-35mm which is fly-by-wire - a nice lens other than that).

I hit a major flaw in the the entire logic in thinking the RF lens was the way to go for the future and I would like your thoughts in general. Unlike the EF Lens the RF lens turns out to be “fly-by-wire” focus and people report that these are a nightmare for follow focus systems. So is this a deal breaker for the RF system when it comes to video if you want good follow focus? Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fly by wire can actually give quite good control when they are programmed to respond linearly and very incrementally, like some manufacturers allow you to do in their settings. It still doesn't beat tactile smooth focus pulling, though.

I have heard mixed reports on this - I guess it depends on your standards. When it comes to “professional” something either works or it does not in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

While on EF you already have the choice with quite a few lenses, I'd suppose that some manual lenses will come to RF too if the format get's wider acceptance.

While on EF you already have the choice with quite a few lenses, I'd suppose that some manual lenses will come to RF too if the format get's wider acceptance.

I do not seem to be getting across the core logic here. They key in the traditional Canon photography EF line up was the "holy trilogy" of 3 lenses. Wide zoom, medium zoom and long zoom - all f 2.8 and all geared focus. So these worked reasonably well for both photo and video.

I was looking forward to the same thing with the RF f 2.8 "holy trinity" RF series that Canon just released (all of which have IS which is a nice benefit (some of the EF have IS but not all).

So, I was thinking that with better video and better lenses the future Canon R (Pro) camera would be good for video. (Sorry Rick, I had to explain this again and you have already pointed out the flaw in this argument.)

The problem is that it appears that the "holy trinity" series which is the very core of what any Canon photographer is going to buy is fly-by-wire and thats severely limits their potential use when it comes to professional video work that requires follow focus.

Perhaps it is expecting too much of a hybrid system to "do it all" but it feels like one step forward and one step back. I feels so close to a break through and then the entire thing comes crashing down.

In any case I am very happy I made the decision to get an BMPCC4K and experiment while the dust settles on all this stuff. Looking forward to feedback from ya all. And Rick, I especially want to hear from you since i have always respected your opinion on this discussion board and know you really understand what you are talking about.

Just had a conversation today where the RF lenses were praised as being better than EF equivalents. Said to be much sharper.

So I’m all for Blackmagic creating RF Mounts for the URSA Mini Pro since it’s easy to switch out the lens Mount. But the Pocket 4K and 6K should definitely get RF Mount versions. Or at least the next version of the Pocket 6K should definitely get RF Mount.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Only if Canon issues a license for the RF Mount, which is highly unlikely for the next few years, if ever.
Same with Nikon Z and Sony E mounts. The only new mount that might be available will be the Leica/Panasonic L mount, https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news ... nd-of-2020. While these mounts are protected by their patents, cameras with unauthorized mounts will not likely happen.
Cheers

Just had a conversation today where the RF lenses were praised as being better than EF equivalents. Said to be much sharper.

So I’m all for Blackmagic creating RF Mounts for the URSA Mini Pro since it’s easy to switch out the lens Mount. But the Pocket 4K and 6K should definitely get RF Mount versions. Or at least the next version of the Pocket 6K should definitely get RF Mount.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But since when has ‘sharper’ been any quality people want in cinema.......

Canon is a smart company so I suspect the R system will allow them to go places the could no go in the SLR / EF system. One thing I would like to see is neutral density filters but so far no sign of that. Ironically the adapter to fit the EF lens to the R camera can hold a neutral density filter but when you use the native R lens you have to use the screw on type.

But again my issue w the R lens for video is fly-by-wire focus. It is less than ideal for follow focus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

By the way if you are wondering what i have against the fly-by-wire of the the RF type lens system watch this video. It does not talk specifically about the RF but you will get the idea of the issue we I am talking about with this style of lens as opposed to a geared lens.

But again my issue w the R lens for video is fly-by-wire focus. It is less than ideal for follow focus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well EF lenses with AF are not exactly ideal for good follow focus compared to a proper cinema MF lens and a well damped focus helicoil.

But again my issue w the R lens for video is fly-by-wire focus. It is less than ideal for follow focus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well EF lenses with AF are not exactly ideal for good follow focus compared to a proper cinema MF lens and a well damped focus helicoil.

Oh, I certainly did not mean to imply that. This is one of the dilemmas the "hybrid photo shooter" faces. You have your "photo EF lens" collection and you really want them to do what you need in the hybrid video world. But as time moves on that "hybrid" world is turning into some pretty "pro" video shooting so perhaps its time for us all to become more familiar with the cine lens line up. I am not even sure if there is a cine line up for R cameras yet, or if the Canon cine line up is still in the EF camp. I guess I should check on that.

But these are certainly fun times even if they require continual re-learning. But thanks to everyone for their input. I think we all come at these things from different places so we all bring different skills and perhaps different “history” to the discussion. Sometimes we have to leave behind old ideas and start afresh.

For me the BMPCC4K feels like that. At the moment i only have one native lens. I am now trying to decide my next move. My EF lenses are older so do not have IS and may not work well with a Metabones Speedbooster (according to their spec sheet) but I do have a good collection. On the other hand I could get a new native lens with IS for just a little more than the cost of the Metabones. on the other hand maybe after bashing fly-by-wire lenses in this post i should put my money where my mouth is and get a cine lens rather than a fly-by-wire. Any thoughts?

Adam, what is your budget to satisfy wide, medium, long and is your very strong preference to shoot that with a zoom or are prime lenses acceptable? I’m assuming you want a zoom. Is in-lens image stabilization mandatory or could you often be shooting with the support of a tripod and fluid head?

Adam, what is your budget to satisfy wide, medium, long and is your very strong preference to shoot that with a zoom or are prime lenses acceptable? I’m assuming you want a zoom. Is in-lens image stabilization mandatory or could you often be shooting with the support of a tripod and fluid head?

I am not exactly sure what camera your question was in reference to so to fill you in on my background:

This is mostly for fashion stuff so mobility is definately a factor. I currently have a Ronin S and I am thinking at some point I will have a camera with IBIS (although I get that that comes with its own issues. I have not updated my equipment in some time so I am still shooting with the Canon 5D Mk III mainly because I was waiting on a 5D with better video or more recently thinking of moving entirely to the Canon mirrorless R system (which is where i might see IBIS - its a big might).

So as i mentioned in the interim I have been playing around with the BMPCC4K. In many ways that has me wondering if in some cases two systems are not better than one. It does such a good job of handling the video.

So when it comes to money the dilemma is that I still need to upgrade my Canon photo system which is where if you recall all this started with my discussing the transition to the Canon R system. But OK lets for the sake of it take the budget for that transition and look at what could be done with that. Now, it would probably take me years to buy everything and i would probably get better sales prices on things but i am guessing in the $8000 - $12000 (i tend to buy one item at a time as i can afford them)

I personally have not used prime lenses a lot but i do see them discussed a huge amount in reference to video. Back in the film days I used to intern at a gear rental place so i know the reverence given to those prime lens rental kits. This is all part of the learning curve I am on as his hybrid shooter become move semi-pro video shooting (not sure what else to call it - the 2 field seem to be merging).

As for tripods, i do use them when appropriate. They are definitely more important to video than photography today but with the Ronin S and shoulder mounts we have a number of options to get interesting shots and image stabilization comes in handy at times.

I should add that over the past two years i have viewed many options from the GH5 GH5S to Panasonic and Sonys full frame sensors. In the end I went for the BMPCC4K. This might be the best place for me to actually expand and learn so this might be where I should invest at the moment.

My only current BMPCC4K lens is Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 II

I was considering getting a Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm f/2.8 at some point in the future to complete the range and give me IS over the full range. However this discussion over fly-by-wire has be re-thinking that. Also for this price I could get a Speedbooster and use my EF lenses but then i would be giving up the IS.

I have a 3 great f 2.8 EF Soon lens for the Canon but none of them have IS and they are the older generation so they have issues with the Metabones Speedbooster so I have not yet purchased one.

Is in-lens image stabilization mandatory <— This is a super hard question to answer. Recently I was watched a number of videos about some really fabulous non-IS lens on YouTubes. They look great. My only issue is that on a I want to cover my home bases first. That is the run and gun stuff that we tend to fact today. That is why i started out with a zoom with IS for the BMPCC4K. Its a solid lens that can do a lot. It is something I can build on. I think primes and no IS are fine at some point. In fact they are desirable. But right now I am just trying to get up and running. Maybe I should have one prime just to learn what it is all about.

Adam, that’s a very thorough summary of your requirements. You have the BMPCC4K which can work with wired lenses but will never have IBIS. You may use a tripod, but you want to be free to shoot fashion, run-n-gun, and use your Ronin S. You would prefer to have OIS.

Your budget seems reasonable, but now you want a place to start that will cover wide-normal-long.

Everything I do is manual, often on a tripod, and without any other stabilization such as the Ronin S. Maybe one day, but not yet for me.

When you say fashion, I don’t know how close you are to your subjects, but everything else points to you going wide as a first priority. Then normal lenses and possibly long, but you may never need to go very long with what you’ve described.

Interesting you have described situations where a ‘variable prime’ may be fine. By that I mean a zoom designed for photography that is not parfocal. Cinema zooms are usually going to be parfocal. They usually cost more and don’t include OIS. A variable prime can be used for what you’ve described but it’s not ideal for video unless the camera is not recording as you change focal
Lengths and refocus. A cinema prime does not need to be refocused just because you zoomed in or out. So you need to think about which is really best for you: cinema zoom or photography zoom. You’ll find cinematographers that use photography zooms so that may suffice for you. A true cinema zoom may be highly desirable.

Having a relatively small but capable zoom may allow you to use the Ronin S. A cinema zoom may not.

You know one lens may not be right for all your requirements. Are you rarely on the Ronin S or plan yo use it often. You may need a wide zoom lens for that.

To be continued...

Yes, I agree with Ridk, and your Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 II is a good starting lens, with I think the most useful focal length range for hand held shooting. Before you buy more lenses, try some different ones out, by renting them. Companies like Lens Rentals will ship lenses to you, if you do not have a local rental house. This way, you get to “try before you buy” and see what works best for you.
Cheers

Adam, here’s three zooms that fall within your budget. None have image stabilization though. The Tokina hopefully can work with the Ronin S but need to confirm.

Run-n-gun/wide:
Tokina CinemaATX 11-20mm T2.9 mFT/EF/PL/F...
2/4/6 stops IRND 86mm filters
99.5mm and 1.1Kg
$2,400 sale

Fashion/Normal:
Fujinon MK 18-55mm T2.9 mFT
$3,300 B&H Photo sale $500 reduced

Long:
Fujinon MK 50-135mm T2.9 mFT
$3,500 B&H Photo sale $500 reduced

Both Fujinon bundled
$6,400 B&H Photo sale $1,400 reduced

Features
- manual lenses with no worries about the compatibility of wired lenses;
- parfocal;
- minimal to no breathing;
- lower contrast cinematic lenses (not clinical high contrast razor sharp);
- bokeh on the Fujinon superior;
- the Fujinon zooms with 82mm thread can be used with the SLR Magic 1.33x-65 Anamorphot adapter does their angle of view would compare to 14-41mm and 38-102mm.

I own the Tokina and want to add the Fujinon but must resist for now... maybe buy in 2020.

If you only buy one lens to begin, get the Tokina 11-20mm first if you priority is run-n-gun and possibly Ronin S. If your priority is fashion, the Fujinon 17-55mm would be your first choice. I’m salivating at the thought of using that lens for a December shoot and throughout 2020 on a feature project.

These lenses are all a good match with the SLR Magic APO and Micro Primes for your consideration as prime lenses someday. But I’m thinking you would be very happy with the ease of use and quality of these three cinema zooms and you may not need additional primes unless you wanted even wider (SLR Magic 10mm or Laowa 9mm) for effect.

Sorry, I can’t quite come up with your holy trinity that suits all purposes. But I only recommend lenses I want to use. Photography lenses may appear to suit some of your needs, but once you’re used to cinema lenses, you’ll know when each is the better choice in a given situation.

If you only wanted a single zoom to cover most of your needs today, at a modest price point, the Olympus Pro series such as the f/4 12-100mm $1,150 on sale at B&H Photo; with image stabilization it may do, but it might be too slow a lens and its image stabilization works best when paired with an Olympus camera with IBIS.

Thanks for those excellent comments. They will take a while to digest. In an interesting coincidence i have just watched an excellent YouTube video on that Fujinon series of zooms so at least I am researching some of the right stuff. You tube is a great resource if you know what to look for and you have given me some excellent new ideas to look into. The things we salivate over are the things worth paying a little more for.

I still debate the MFT mount vs the EF mount a little bit. There is something to be said for going native MFT but once you start sinking a lot of money into a system you have to think of the future. I may end up just getting the EF Metabones Speedbooster but all the other decisions currently hence on that one so in the mean time I will look into the lenses you.

Incidentally the Ronin S is magical for getting motion shots but you can over do it. It takes a good mix of shots to create good video. In the Fujinon video I watched they has a video that reminded me of the value of a locked down tripod shot where someone walks through the shot. Sometimes we forget about the simple things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FYI - here is the Fujinon video I was talking about

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For wide angle I have looked at that Laowa 9mm. The SLR Magic 10mm looks like an interesting alternative. Going native MTF for wide angle might make good sense and experimenting with a cine style lens at the same time might make a good sense.

Do you have any thought between these two options?

Interesting you have described situations where a ‘variable prime’ may be fine. By that I mean a zoom designed for photography that is not parfocal. Cinema zooms are usually going to be parfocal. They usually cost more and don’t include OIS. A variable prime can be used for what you’ve described but it’s not ideal for video unless the camera is not recording as you change focal
Lengths and refocus. A cinema prime does not need to be refocused just because you zoomed in or out. So you need to think about which is really best for you: cinema zoom or photography zoom. You’ll find cinematographers that use photography zooms so that may suffice for you. A true cinema zoom may be highly desirable

This is a rather tricky topic and one I just became aware of in part via the Fujinon video posted above. It all goes back to the merging of photography and video. A year ago I would have said that the "photography zooms" were good enough. Now i am less sure.

We always want tools that are best for the work we do, but on the other hand we do not want tools that limit the work we do. Again this gets back to the direction photography zoom lenses seem to be taking (and i certainly need to look more into this).

Not only do we have the parfocal issue but at least some of the lenses made for mirrorless camera are fly-by-wire. Now there are some that offer this click out feature to expose more manual control but its not exactly clear what is going on there.

I am beginning to think a cine lens is a cine lens and you get what you pay for. On the other hand I am used to the convenience of auto focus and all the benefits that brings. However when i look down at the lens i got for my BMPCC4K: Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm and there is no sign of "focal distance" something just seems missing. Now don't get me wrong. I think this lens will get me started, it covers a nice range, has IS for handheld and will work nicely with the Ronin S but I just cannot get used to the idea of not looking down and seeing my focal distance and setting manually via distance if i choose to do so. Ok, i am old school, shoot me:)

All of that is a bit off topic but my point is that all this stuff is in flux as we see photography and video literally collide and into the mix we have the autofocus, IBIS and other technologies that on the surface make out life easier but require designs that in the end sometimes make our lives harder (looking at you fly-by-wire).

A lot of people are making photography lenses and zooms work for them and that’s good. I use my cinema cameras and lenses to do photography now. Mind you I don’t do anything that requires 50 megapixels and printing in a magazine.

I still love being manual all the way and in control of what I get and solely responsible when I screw up focus or change an aperture or pan the camera. Often those automated features in lenses can work against you. Or the fly-by-wire lens isn’t compatible with the camera.

For wide angle I have looked at that Laowa 9mm. The SLR Magic 10mm looks like an interesting alternative. Going native MTF for wide angle might make good sense and experimenting with a cine style lens at the same time might make a good sense.

Do you have any thought between these two options?

I haven’t seen them side-by-side but both seem to be received well.

For wide angle I have looked at that Laowa 9mm. The SLR Magic 10mm looks like an interesting alternative. Going native MTF for wide angle might make good sense and experimenting with a cine style lens at the same time might make a good sense.

Do you have any thought between these two options?

I haven’t seen them side-by-side but both seem to be received well.

Thanks for your feedback. Thankfully we have YouTube. That is just a wealth of people willing to share their feedback.

And yea, the trend seems to be towards handing over more and more control to "auto features". "Computational photography" is an extreme example of that - where the phone camera processor actually creates something that was not even there. Its a crazy world. But the world of old school cinema reminds us of the value of control and in a way I am glad the BMPCC4k is forcing me to re-think a lot of thing. I think i will try at least one fully manual lens and see how that goes before deciding on a direction. I am sure it will be a shock to my system but no pain no gain as they say.

A lot of people are making photography lenses and zooms work for them and that’s good. I use my cinema cameras and lenses to do photography now. Mind you I don’t do anything that requires 50 megapixels and printing in a magazine.

I still love being manual all the way and in control of what I get and solely responsible when I screw up focus or change an aperture or pan the camera. Often those automated features in lenses can work against you. Or the fly-by-wire lens isn’t compatible with the camera.

I have come to love the option of using autofocus and digital applications to control lenses via wifi or bluetooth. I used to be a full manual only guy and then once I figured out how to do the whole remote control thing while lighting and shooting interviews completely solo I got rid of my manual only lenses in favor of digital. Being able to stand by the lights, see what it looks like, adjust the lighting as well as aperture to dial in exposure while also being able to reset focus while in the interviewer chair... its just wonderful. Not required if you are working with a crew of course, but very nice when you are minimizing labor cost.

[quote="Dune00z]I have come to love the option of using autofocus and digital applications to control lenses via wifi or bluetooth... Being able to stand by the lights, see what it looks like, adjust the lighting as well as aperture to dial in exposure while also being able to reset focus while in the interviewer chair... its just wonderful...[/quote]

Absolutely can work well for you in that situation and no doubt in many others.

And one day of course we will all be replaced by robots, including the talent. In fact they maybe the first to do in some cases. So yea, it is still nice to see that we have crafts people around who can do it old style. There are days i even miss film.

I think the beauty of the BMPCC4K is that it has brought some of the magic of film back to a world that had become overly automated and overly compressed. Its not film of course but it has some of the qualities of shooting with film and that is why it is so loved and respected.

Ok, this is slightly off-topic since it does not involve the BMPCC4K directly but it does involve the EOS R camera and an EF lens and a new Metabones Speed Booster, so it fits to some degree.

Canon EOS R + Speed Booster = FIXED 4K CROP! (Metabones EF to RF adapter first look)

Given that Canon is now producing a great line up of RF lenses perhaps Metabones will eventually get around to thinking about the BMPCC4K but i won't be holding my breath. It just would be rather interesting, particularly if someone can eventually figure out how to make fly-by-wire play nice with a follow focus system. My guess is that this could be done with an "all electronic system" but again, I am not holding my breath for that to develop. We might be looking at 2022-2025 for something like that.

Does anyone see any logical reason that you could not build something like that given modern electronics? And remember, i am not talking tomorrow but in the not too distant future. You have autofocus that tracks an eye. You mean to tell me you cannot build a wireless electronic control system for fly-by-wire lenses? Someone has to be thinking in that direction because while these mechanical ones look impressive, by todays standards they are really "clunky".

And one day of course we will all be replaced by robots, including the talent. In fact they maybe the first to do in some cases. So yea, it is still nice to see that we have crafts people around who can do it old style. There are days i even miss film.

I think the beauty of the BMPCC4K is that it has brought some of the magic of film back to a world that had become overly automated and overly compressed. Its not film of course but it has some of the qualities of shooting with film and that is why it is so loved and respected.

Well put Adam, I share your thoughts on using BMD cameras to get back to the feel of film and workflow.
Their are times when I enjoy the full manual experience when shooting some subjects.
For covering events, I also agree using the new digital systems with continuous autofocus to follow a presenter on stage is a grand way to shoot situations where the subject is not static. I enjoy using both my BZmD cameras and the Nikon Z6, whose digital zoom is parfocal on the Z6 Camera.
Cheers

An RF mount would allow the turret length to be greatly shortened on the Pocket 6K, which benefit its compactness.

Interchangeable LPL and Positive Locking RF mounts on the 6K and URSA Mini's would be the ultimate!