nathanleebush

Gaaaagh! So close. If the A7s did 4K internally like the GH4 I'd be emptying my bank account instead of writing this comment.
 
This is a tough call for us stills and video hybrid shooters. The idea of a small, full frame, low light beast like the A7s is so compelling for stills, but for video, Panasonic is yet again one step ahead of the DSLR pack with the GH4, and we have to wait a generation while everyone catches up. I'm not willing to bring a bulky recorder around with me if I can get 4K in camera on the GH4. Sony was this close to the perfect camera for the moment. Oh well..
 
Also, still waiting for everyone to catch up to Olympus on IBIS, but that's a vent for another day..

Dunno. It's Canon we're talking about: the same company that used essentially the same sensor from the t2i to t5i. They have been coasting on brand recognition since the 5D Mark II.

spec wise it ticks all the boxes
super 35mm size sensor 4k and global shutter in a usable body form like an Alexa -
what more do you want
Blackmagic have listened to all the feedback off their other 3 cameras
 
indie film makers will jump all over this - superb!!

He's blinking Morse code.. "I'm being held prisoner by Sony's marketing department, help me."

Thanks for the test! Your blog is the most vital destination for budget filmmakers on the web, IMO!

I've been stewing about what lenses to invest in with my upcoming BMPCC order and thought maybe you guys could weigh in with your collective wisdom.     I was leaning toward Nikkor AI-S glass because it was the pinnacle of manual lens tech in the manual lens photo heyday, has long focus throws, is relatively portable, and is flexible if I want to jump up to larger sensors in the future (does anyone think this 16mm sensor will stay around indefinitely?). Also, I could then hack an APS-C and a FF Canon for RAW and have three focal lengths for each lens, effectively. Or I could get the Metabones Speedbooster essentially making it a Super 35mm equivalent, more or less.    Then I read one perspective that since using FF glass on the Micro Four Thirds BMCC and BMPCC sensor is cutting into the center of the glass means it will magnify all the imperfections of the lens. A friend I trust on technical matters agreed with this, saying Nikon glass would look bad no matter how good the original optics and the Speedbooster just adds more glass distorting the image. He seems to think the better approach is to get super 16 C-Mount glass designed for the sensor size, and then sell it if I change to a larger sensor camera .. kind of a "get what you need now for optimal results, and don't think about five years from now" mindset.    I'm now leaning this way, thinking that the super wide focal lengths I'll need for the BMPCC and BMCC will be useless to me anyway if I decide to go with a larger sensor in future (I'm not into superwide lenses).   Anyway, any thoughts would be much appreciated!     TL;DR: I want future proof and flexible glass that will still shine on the BMPCC. Is this possible or should I go with optimized C-mount or M43 glass?   

I think it is sweet in some twisted way that clearly, people here have an obsession about BMD. Unless you work for one of the big guys, relax and be happy that someone is trying to challenge the status quo. If you are indeed a competitor, relax for a little while at least, as this small company figures out this business..

I think this is a nice move by BMD. It is normal that prices go down. People who are still in line for cameras will get the new price. It makes a better differentiation between the 4K and 2.5K models. People who bought into BMD to a large degree did so because the pricing was great to begin with, so it is not like they overpaid. (unlike people buying cameras from the  protectionist Still/Video giants (Sony & Canon, I'm looking at you..).
 
<G> who would have thought people would be so negative about a cheap camera getting even cheaper... 

Yes, ProRes works great in Premiere Pro. Cinema DNG can not actually be read in Premiere without 3rd party solutions, and even then it kinda stinks.

I made this video yesterday with a Sony RX100 to see if I could approximate the look of a MoVI or Steadicam when tracking a walking subject.  Active image stabilization enabled; no rig at all.
 
https://vimeo.com/63511215

Another famous voice to add to the argument that TV now has the upper hand.
 
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE94R0HF20130528?irpc=932

It only took a year of living in LA to understand why the industry is headed in this direction: nepotism. And not so much literal nepotism... but more-so the broader idea of "who you know-ism". Your only chance of landing a job in Hollywood is through a "connection"... ESPECIALLY in the business/executive roles that make the financial decisions.

It's all very simply. The people in charge are the kids (and friends of kids) of the last generation who only learned THE BARE MINIMUM requirements to take over these positions. Now that there are so many other options for entertainment... and the system has to be reworked to adapt... nobody has any clue as what to do. Basically, these people have learned how to do a "job"... not how to "make films". The couldn't innovate if they tried.

But, hey, it's not all the execs faults... there is a such thing as "workers greed" as well... and it also runs rampant through Hollywood. Let's say for a minute, that somehow a producer or executive DOES have a genuinely good business idea... can he/she execute it? Nope. Not really. The unions are still going to demand the picture be made to union standards... i.e. hiring 8 people for a 1 person job. Why do the unions do this? Well, obviously, the more jobs they can keep around... the more pockets they can take union dues from. And the longer it takes to make a film... the more they can justify taking. Unions benefit from throwing wrenches into the machine, and then demanding you hire "thier workers" to pull it out... for you know, oh, about 100x the labor value. This is why the execs are taught it's better practice to kill films... then to green-light them. It's a circle of destruction from both ends.
 
It's top-to-bottom corruption... and the ones who are getting screwed are the audience, the next generation of creatives who might actually be able to make better material for 90% less $, and the industry/art form itself. The film execs want million dollar salaries for having nothing but their arbitrary titles they earned for networking/sleeping their way to the top... and the union workers want $1000/hr for jobs, that more often than not, don't need to exist. Things have to adapt. They're basically using the same film-making model since the last overhaul in the 70's. Innovation needs to happen. We have the technology and capability to make films for about 80% less money and require 80% less labor... better start putting it to practice soon.

The last JVC product I encountered were VHS tapes my parents used to record TV shows in the 90s.

Each moment I read this article I felt more optimistic about my own future and the future of humanity :)

4K may catch on - in about 25 years... just look at the Redbox Top 20 any given week - there are currently only 3 Blu-rays in the top 20 - Argo, Zero Dark Thirty and Skyfall - which are #1, 2 and 3 via DVD! Outside of those of us who do this for a living, no one really cares about 1080 let alone 4K and are very happy watching standard def DVD's on their HD screens.
 
Almost everyone I know is still watching stretched SD broadcast on their shiny new HD TV even though they're paying for HD! Unless you have DirecTV, the HD channels are still hard to find for John Q. Public and they're not gonna go searching for a 4K channel when it comes available. Sad but true. We're years from the general public fully moving to 1080!
 
That said I do agree with Zitter that 4K is great for acquisition although the majority of feature films and TV are currently using the Alexa which is NOT 4K...

stanley kubrick,orson welles movies in 2d

ridley scott james cam moron 3d
imagine blade runner in 3d red vision instead of kodak analogue.
no thank you.
marketing money bullshit and satanic corruption tis all.
my children let us all pray..
ohh sweet lord help us.
bury this 3d demon
this 3d bury it deep.
real deep &nbsp;and let us all stamp the earth down nice a and firm.
let us have nose more bearded twatters from new zealand and his little hobbit munchkin digical plastic pictures.
let the jackson spend his time raping sheep on that pretty isle, rather than offending are eyes with vomit inducing technology.
one more thing lord can you hurt the man that maketh the millions from transformers the one that is known as michael bay.
also what is the point of the man they call shia lebouf and lord donte gert me started on the jj abraham fella.

To be fair, a lot of the reps at these shows sometimes know less technically than I do about their own cameras, in my experience. So though they are speaking for the company, sometimes they are wrong. It doesn't seem to be the case here, but could explain your 720p on 5DIII anecdote. Sometimes they just don't know. They are reps, not engineers.