Damphousse

I'm not a pro and I've never used a C series camera.  I do own a BMPCC though.

C series are totally different cameras.  They are the polar opposite of the BMPCC.  There is no comparison.  They are both good for what they are.

The BMPCC 4k looks like it will be substantially easier to work with than the BMPCC but it isn't going to be in the same league as the C Series.  If you like the colors, the codecs, and need 4k get the BMPCC 4k.  But if you are delivering 1080p and are a one man band in a fast turn around commercial setting I would stick with the C Series.

Honestly I am not into this hybrid camera thing.  In the end I will probably end up with a a couple of video cameras and a DSLR and maybe a mirrorless camera.  There are just too many compromises trying to get everything in one camera.  So owning a BMPCC 4k and a C series camera would be something I could see myself doing.

7 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I don't actually need it until 2019 and even then it might not actually be the right fit for what I'm going to be doing. 

Fotokina may also have given me pause for thought.

Plus, I can see it potentially being a time drain during the early months and I would rather observe that from the sidelines. 

 

I guess what is confusing people is none of that requires an alarmist post.  I thought you had some new information.

There hasn't been any game changing new information in months.

16 hours ago, TwoScoops said:

Escorts have been paid to have dinner with old, rich creeps for decades if not centuries. It's nothing new. 

In fact some would say it is the oldest profession.  And it is a lot more honest than much of the modern world...

40 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Now with the 4K BMPCC coming out it can nearly compete with rich people on an equal footing. The GH5s is amazing, the Sony A7 mk III is, the ML Canon 5D mk III, Canon C100, on and on. We live in an amazing time for video. It is now down to skill more than gear. The tables have leveled. No real excuse these days to not get the job done.

That pretty much sums it up.  Look at DSLRs.  The megapixel race ended awhile ago and body refresh cycles are getting longer and longer and less and less meaningful.

Eventually we will get to peak video and just about any camera will be capable of excellent results.

I sell pictures from my T3i for book covers and national advertisements.  I've beat out pros for projects.  No one and I mean no one is going to look at a book cover and say, "gee, I think this was taken with a T3i".  If I was a pro of course I would upgrade to a better camera for speed, accuracy, and ergonomics sake.  But I'm not expecting to suddenly be taking mind blowingly better pictures.

I am excited about the BMPCC 4k because of the value at the price point.  I also find the files easier to work with as an amateur.  I don't want to fight with sony skin tones or have to light a scene for a GH5.  My skills are limited so I use the tool that gets me nicer stuff with less effort... and at a great price.  Hopefully the BMPCC 4k will continue the Blackmagic tradition.

But really.  We need to stop the pro vs nonpro discussion.  Or at least move it to another thread.  Call the BMPCC 4k whatever you want... I'm probably buying it.

21 minutes ago, Mokara said:

Sony already have a FF bridge camera. It is called the RX1. 

The RX1 does NOT have a zoom lens.  Read the post I was responding to.

Also how much does the RX1 cost?  How many do they sell?

All sorts of niche weird and wonderful things are made.  That doesn't mean they are mass market hits or profitable.

21 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Haha hilarious! I opened a calendar and counted until 5th August. That's fantastic.

Edit: 5th of any month is irrelevant anyway - Doubling down on stupidity today!

Please don't do that anymore.  I have a project that I have to finish on a deadline and I thought I lost a month of time BSing on EOSHD!

3 hours ago, Gordon Zernich said:

So, what is the cost & profit margin for Samsung with this full frame sensor? Sure Samsung could supply other manufacturers ... however, a full frame bridge camera with a fast telescopic lens is undeserved in the marketplace. For the right price it would be a great travel camera and certainly better than a smartphone. I'd buy it quickly.

An RX10 with a 1" sensor and only 1080p recording costs $800 new.  So a full frame bridge camera is going to cost waaayyyy more.  Not many people want to pay that price and be stuck with one lens.

Consumer electronics is a low margin business.  A few companies like Apple make nice profits but have you seen how much they charge and what features they leave out?

These people aren't stupid.  If they were going to come out with a full frame in house camera they would have done it BEFORE they destroyed their reputation with photographers.

"Samsung open to new camera system" is a bit click baity.  I didn't read anything that indicated NX2 is on the horizon.  All the recent press release stated was stuff about cell phone cameras.

People really need to let this NX2 thing go.  There is no evidence it is going to happen.  Transforming a cell phone camera press release into NX2 fan fiction porn is a bit... desperate.

1 hour ago, frontfocus said:

Hasselblad calls it medium format, Fuji calls it medium format, Phase One calls it medium format, Pentax calls it medium format, Sony calls it medium format. Leica calls 30x45mm medium format.

If you think it's not it's fine, what do all those manufacturers know

I wouldn't call it "medium format".  I shoot medium format film and 645 is like the red headed step child of medium format.  I shoot 6x6.  And I keep salivating over 6x8 and 6x9 cameras.

You offer long time medium format shooters something smaller than 645 and you get the reaction you just witnessed.  Sorry.  That's just the way it is.  Marketing departments can label stuff whatever they want.  I mean they can call a Canon Rebel "full frame" if it makes them happy.  Doesn't change physics.  My only concern is how is this lens going to perform on this body?

Oh and the real men and women shoot 4x5 inch and larger!  I just haven't made the just to sheet film yet!

4 minutes ago, kye said:

It also might be an interesting way to not directly compete with YT, at least at the start.

Oh, it is definitely an interesting way not to compete with Youtube.

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yes, I know that, but still isn't applicable for a person who wants to record 4K *today*.

And like I said, it still has limitations that doesn't exist in some other sub $3K 1080 cameras. So while I'm very sure the BMPCC will be a great camera it isn't the perfect answer for everything 

Rent.

Rent whatever camera you need right now and buy a BMPCC 4k in September.  Simple.

$3K is peanuts.  If someone came to me with a HOT business idea but they said they couldn't afford to spend any more than $3K on their most critical tool I would pass on that amazing opportunity.

People need to get serious about their craft.

3 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

Regarding DR, I have a hunch that the pocket 4K will have slightly less than the  older pocket due to the older cam having larger photosites and dual gain architecture.

No need for your "hunches".  The manufacturer already told us it has the exact same DR as the BMPCC.  It is in the product description on the manufacture's site.

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

A lot of ad boards in shops etc are showing vertical video content either on a portrait oriented display or as twin content arrangement (with info on the right) in a landscape oriented display.

This is especially prominent in clothing and cosmetic stores, probably as a continuity of a traditional magazine format that those ads would be seen in if they were in print.

Instagram is very big with fashion influencers so its quite a natural fit from that point of view as well as from those pesky youngsters tending to shoot everything in general in vertical mode.

And airports display flight information on portrait oriented monitors.

That is a lot of mental gymnastics to justify such a quirky decision.  The youtube market is huge.  The "fashion influencers" who solely shoot vertically market?  ehh...

5 hours ago, Shirozina said:

or put another way - would you buy a C200 instead of the BMPCC 4k if it was 1/2 the price.........

$1295 with resolve is just too good of a price.  It is a no brainer price.  $3,500 is waaayyyyy too much.   It may be a killer price for a C200 but it is still in a different league than a BMPCC 4k.

On 6/20/2018 at 7:04 PM, IronFilm said:

It isn't hard to see how the E2 could be viewed as a premium camera relative to the BMPCC4K for some people's needs and worth the premium 

I can see how that argument would work... in a parallel universe where we hadn't already seen the prerelease footage.

The footage is bad.  We all agree on that.  And the company has a terrible track record.  No way I touch that camera whether the BMPCC 4K exists or not.

No raw.  No prores.  No USB C recording.  No xlr.  No 5 inch screen.  No Davinci Resolve.

One of two things will happen.  Either the footage will get dramatically better or the price will drop to sub $1,000.  Even if the footage was pretty decent I just don't see myself swapping all the other things Blackmagic is giving you just to get 120 fps in a compressed codec.  I get that some people are crazy about high frame rates but I am not going to dump a ton of every day work horse features for one niche thing I would use sparingly.

Just now, IronFilm said:

A camera that doesn't (yet) exist and still will mean a compromise in a few of the areas.

The camera was announced and put in the hands of journalists back in April at NAB.  You can preorder it now.  It exists.  They even recorded 4k to a SSD via USB C in an auditorium full of people.

Just now, IronFilm said:

Sure, if you just want "4K" and don't care about the compromises then they're dirt cheap. 

But what if you want one or more of raw, ProRes, timecode, DPAF, SDI, etc then you'll have to pay a pretty penny for the premium of 4K vs a very affordable 1080 version instead. 

BMPCC 4k.

Vertical video ONLY!

So completely useless for me.

10 hours ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

 Just shoot in 4K and make him happy :).

That's the answer.  Simple.

4k is dime a dozen these days.  If you have client demand just get a 4k camera and instantly increase your credibility.

My problems at work are a lot more complex than this.  If all I had to do was shoot 4k to make my problems go away I would consider myself blessed.  Heck I would have been shooting 4k years ago and TELLING clients they need it and they need to pay a premium for it.

8 hours ago, tellure said:

I think Boyle's message is still correct and can even inspire us shortcut-happy hobbyists (I am firmly in this category) to go deeper.  But it does miss the point for a huge chunk of the videography audience, since few of us have the time or commitment to achieve the level of artistry he's calling for.  Technology has enabled us to generate images that make us and our fans/friends happy, often with an investment that matches our commitment or resources.  All of us are trying to maximize our return on investment, whether that's in time, money, or stress/difficulty spent learning a technique or tool, and technology has definitely escalated the return on investment ratio.

I think you summed it up very well.  You see so many false arguments on the internet.  I could have every fancy scope on the planet and an experienced DP could light and shoot a scene before I could even have all my equipment turned on.  We use tech to give us a fighting chance.  No one is saying it is a substitute for talent or experience.  As hobbyists we know our limits.  I don't have a focus puller living in my basement.  So DPAF has appeal to me.  If a Hollywood DP said he can't shoot a movie without autofocus yeah I would be a bit incredulous.  But Joe hobbyist?

5 hours ago, DevonChris said:

I've been looking at many of the portfolios from the Magnum Photographers and what strikes me is the poor technical quality of many of their images. Many are slightly out of focus, have blown highlights, low resolution or been shot on low quality cameras.

I haven't found a single mention of a camera on the Magnum Photographers web site. To them, the camera is just a tool. What counts is getting the image, capturing the moment. Creating awesome content.

I've spent hours comparing tech specs, reading reviews and comments, watching YouTube videos, trying to find the best camera and the best deal. Sure, that is important, but my time would be better spent studying great photographers and their images, and learning from them. Then grabbing almost any camera and shoot as many photos as possible to improve my technique and learn to see better.

I don't know about that.  There have always been two kinds of photographers out there.  You just have to decide which type you want to be.  I dare anyone to show us ANY published Ansel Adams work that has "poor technical quality".

Ansel did it all.  If you are a more limited artist then make peace with it and put out technically poor work.  As you stated you can be quite successful without being very thorough or thoughtful about the technical process.

On 6/6/2018 at 11:27 AM, Don Kotlos said:

This camera would greatly benefit by ProRes RAW, and it could still fit between GH5s and BMPCC v2. 

Can we please stop requesting this?  We literally know nothing about it.  No one has explained what this offers over open source raw.

20 hours ago, kaylee said:

hmmm... whats this about? cards, subtitles/algorithm?

?

I was thinking the same thing but I was too afraid to ask!  Thanks for asking.  It generated some useful answers.

3 hours ago, cantsin said:

All those on Netflix' approved camera list (since Netflix only accepts 4K for its "Netflix Originals" productions):

• ARRI Alexa LF / Alexa 65
• Blackmagic URSA Mini 4.6K / URSA Mini Pro 4.6K
• Canon C300 MK II / C500 / C700
• Panasonic VariCam 35 / LT / Pure; EVA1
• Panavision DXL 
• RED Epic / Weapon / Dragon / Monstro / Helium
• Sony Venice / F55/ F65 / FS7 / HDC-4300 / Z450

https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000579527-Cameras-and-Image-Capture

I don't think that is correct.  All the cameras on that list that I recognize are bayer sensors.  You would have to over sample substantially to get a "true" 4k final output.

This is what netflix says...

Quote

Camera must have a true 4K sensor (equal to or greater than 3840 photosites wide).

For a bayer sensor that is techinically wrong.  I guess there is no law defining "true 4k".  But if a sensor only has 3840 photosites it can only be "true 4k" if it is a purely grayscale camera.  Otherwise all those photosites are split between red, green, and blue light capture.  You are not getting 3840 photosites capturing red light.

That is why the 1080p out of the C100 was so amazing.  It was downsampled from a 4k sensor.  The Red Monstro is a lot closer to "true 4k" than the C300 MK II.

I think Netflix just wants you to have 4k photosites.  It really is just an arbitrary line that they have drawn.  It is good for their marketing.  They aren't going to explain to the end viewer the difference between 4k photosites and "true 4k".

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

 Mind you, I never once before questioned the 4k image... that is, until I saw it side by side with the 2k DCI Scope image. Now I understand. 

Thanks for your honest and frank thread.  I haven't done a side by side experiment myself, so it is nice to see someone's genuine reaction.  All good information.

1 hour ago, andrgl said:

Ergo unless BM completely fucked with the mount specs, anything designed to mount on a m43 sensor will be compatible with the Pocket 4k.

Define "compatible".  Depending on how you define "compatible" it may not also mean "optimal".  I posted the M43/BM compatibility table already.  Read the second footnote.  Blackmagic spells it out in a very detailed manner.  I guess everyone is familiar with the type of mount and sensor crop.  What you guys keep glossing over is sensor stack thickness.  You can't just look at two out of three parameters and declare optimal compatibility.

11 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

There was a post on one of the other forums where Brian said that he didn't see any need to make a speedbooster as long as Blackmagic used standard filter stack size.  He basically said he didn't want to have to make one.

As long as this is standard (which it hopefully is) then everything should be just fine.

The first camera BMCC was their ORIGINAL camera.  It's possibly they didn't think about the filter thickness or made a hybrid thickness to accommodate both EF and M4/3 mount.  The Pocket was their second, and the micro is just a variation of the original pocket design, hence it would have the same thickness.  They may even have used the same filter of the original BMCC. I doubt thickness has anything to do with cost savings and they have likely rectified this with their latest model as sensor stack thickness can also affect optical performance when not using speedboosters.

I don't know much about filters, but maybe it was made thinner because Blackmagic's IR glass lacks any low pass filtering.

10 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

With micro 4/3 more popular than ever for video, Blackmagic now is building a 100% micro 4/3 only camera in both sensor size and mount, so they'll likely do things more normally this time.

Please stop telling people to buy a speedbooster before Metabones even has a chance to look at the camera.  I spent more on my speedbooster than my BMPCC.  It is an important purchasing decision.  No one should jump the gun and buy a speedbooster based on your questionable and somewhat strange conjecture.  I honestly can't figure out why you have such a strong conviction about your guesses regarding the sensor stack thickness.  This has to be the oddest debate in the history of this forum.  Sensor stack thickness on an unreleased camera?!  How did this become a controversy?

2 hours ago, Snuff said:

A couple of days ago I wrote to Metabones:

"Will Speed Booster XL 0.64x m4/3 work with the BMPCC 4K or are you developing a new booster especially for the new BMPCC 4K?"

Their answer:

"Sorry! We still waiting a test with BMPCC 4K …."

Okay.  Thank you.

Savannah's post didn't make any sense and confused me.  It would be odd for Metabones to definitively decide at this date not to even look at making a camera specific speedbooster.

I'm probably not going to get the BMPCC 4k till next year.  I have one M43 kit lens and I will just use that till we get some final answers from Metabones.  We are all anxious to get started but it is better to just be patient and wait instead of spreading misinformation.