kye
-
Posts
7,885 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by kye
-
-
5 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:
And they would be right !
I don’t know where I got that notion from.
In my defence I am not far off qualifying for a bus pass, not really a fan of the destructive nature of IBIS and prefer OIS which a lot more of the X mount lenses have.
lol about the bus pass.. TBH there are so many models with so many combinations of features I'm surprised that anyone can even be familiar with the equipment they own personally, let alone be walking databases... (this camera has 4K and PDAF, but you can't use PDAF in the 4K mode unless you're wearing a blue hat and the moon is in Pisces...)
It's a bummer about not having IBIS as that stabilises roll, where OIS doesn't.
IBIS gets a bad rap because YouTubers put an ultra-wide on and then walk-and-talk without looking where they're going. No technology can withstand that kind of abuse!
In my situation I use the many-layers approach to stabilisation where:
- I don't use an ultra-wide
- I try and hold the camera as steady as I possibly can with three (or two good quality) contact points
- apart from the occasional follow-shot I am standing stationary with feet planted firmly on the ground and shoulder-width apart
- I breathe out and hold it out while taking the shot
- Shot will be static - no pans or tilts or anything
- OIS is enabled
- IBIS is enabled
In a sense, I've done most of the stabilisation before the light even makes it into the lens. In instances like this the IBIS is only making very small adjustments, but the real reason I want it is that it stabilises roll, which OIS doesn't, and the BMMCC is a long and very thin camera so roll is the movement it's most sensitive to. I'd stabilise in post, but when shooting 180 shutter the roll of the camera is baked into the frames in movement blur, so you can stabilise in post but then you get random bursts of rotational blur, which is less that ideal.
For the next trip I'm looking into options for a compact handle that will hopefully reduce this.
5 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:Well in my new role as Minister of Disinformation, I could only speculate but as it’s is the X-S20 internally then I’d go by that.
CineD said they "managed to get 13 stops of DR when the camera is set to 4K/25p" which is quite respectable. Assuming that's SNR=2 then it's more than both the BMMCC and the GH7, so very respectable indeed. Even if it was SNR=1 it's still pretty good.
The GH7 had excellent latitude test images, which is really what you actually use DR for, so maybe it'd be closer to being equal. Regardless, and excellent option.
-
My favourite cams right now are either the OG BMMCC or GX85. I would buy a GH7 to replace the BMMCC but it's $$$$$.
You could interpret that by saying:
- Blackmagic and Panasonic are my favourite manufacturers, but that's definitely not right
- Blackmagic in 2014 and Panasonic in 2016 are my favourite manufacturers
- Blackmagic and Panasonic suck because the best cameras they released are around a decade old
- Everyone sucks because the best cameras are around a decade old
- Camera users suck because they keep wanting things that make it so cameras are either rubbish or are absolutely huge
Your choice!
-
5 hours ago, ac6000cw said:
If you need the superzoom lens, the combo of A6700 + Sony 18-135mm is actually a bit lighter (and is a slimmer lens) than X-M5 + Fuji 13-135mm, plus it has an EVF. (Assuming https://camerasize.com/ sizes and weights are accurate).
I'd assume the sizes they list are likely accurate, but the images aren't 100% reliable as I stumbled upon a combination where two cameras had the same lens on the front (it was the front-on view) and they were slightly different sizes. Not so much as to stop using the tool, but maybe 10% out.
5 hours ago, ac6000cw said:If you need the superzoom lens, the combo of A6700 + Sony 18-135mm is actually a bit lighter (and is a slimmer lens) than X-M5 + Fuji 13-135mm, plus it has an EVF. (Assuming https://camerasize.com/ sizes and weights are accurate).
But the Pana 14-140mm is much lighter and smaller than either the Sony or Fuji lens, and has wider zoom range... it's really hard to beat as a 'do almost anything' travel lens.
I've been doing these kind of comparisons myself recently, with a view to possibly buying a *small* MILC with better video support than the GX85 I already own (and one that has a mic input).
Comparison - https://camerasize.com/compact/#910.702,935.426,673.931,ha,t
Your post actually brings up a point I hadn't explicitly made, but I actually want two cameras (one with an incredible image and one that's very small) and I want them to share the same lens system.
I did only mention the combinations of BMMCC with 12-35mm F2.8, GX85 with 14-140mm, and GX85 with 14/2.5, but actually I have more scenarios:
- Big camera for day and night stuff: BMMCC with 12-35mm F2.8
- Small tourist camera during day: GX85 with 14-140mm
- Small tourist camera at night: GX85 with 12-35mm F2.8
- Tiny stealth camera: GX85 with 14/2.5
- Extreme low light: GX85 with 7.5/2 + 17/1.4 + 50/1.2
- Wide-to-extreme tele scenes from the hotel window during the day: BMMCC with 14-140mm on tripod
- Wide-to-extreme tele scenes from the hotel window at night: GX85 with 14-140mm on tripod
- Wide-to-moderate tele scenes from the hotel window at night: GX85 or BMMCC with fast primes
As you see, apart from the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens, every lens is used on each camera. This is one of the reasons I tend to keep all my equipment, so many times I've hit a new situation and then reached into the "I'm definitely not ever using this again" box and pulled out just the right tool for the job.
I bought the 14mm F2.5 lens in about 2012, and am still using it and it's still one of the best options available.
5 hours ago, ac6000cw said:I've been doing these kind of comparisons myself recently, with a view to possibly buying a *small* MILC with better video support than the GX85 I already own (and one that has a mic input).
There is very little to replace the GX85 if that's your main camera. There's a reason I'm still using it, despite it being a long-superseded camera with quite aging tech. In my setup it's the "when size is more important than image quality" option. I've mentioned I can get the GX85 to look like the BMMCC, and that's true, but only with a decent amount of work and only when it's operating within its quite narrow sweet spot, and even then the images are only 'passable'. The BMMCC is truly a cinema camera - the fact it's so small is just a coincidence - apart from size it shares nothing with "small cameras", which is just a synonym for horrifically and unnecessarily compromised images.
-
12 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:
I'm wondering whether the new FujiFilm X-M5 might be an option if you looked for something outside the MFT format.
Its a proper little powerhouse for video with IBIS, PDAF, 10 bit 4:2:2 and 6.2K open gate etc
It is also just plain little as well, even against the GX80/85
Interesting little camera.. the lens options seem to be quite good too (unlike the FF systems right now).
The reviews say it doesn't have IBIS?
How is the DR and low-light on it? I couldn't find any DR tests except people parroting the claims from Fuji, and we all now that DR specs are amongst the least trustworthy pieces of information available across all of human history.
12 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:Works out around $200 more than the GH7 body only and of course, aside from the camera itself, are all readily available used to keep the price down further.
Its a sobering look at how far MFT prices have crept up.
Yes, MFT prices seem to have risen, I assume it's because they only release large flagship cameras now. Yet another one of the [everyone says X online] -> [manufacturers respond] -> [everyone complains about cameras on offer] pattern of behaviour.
I've been thinking about this more since posting and I think I'd actually prefer an MFT solution. I watched some video of the S9 and new 18-40mm f4.5-6.3 kit lens, and even at 18mm F4.5 it still has enough background blur to make me nervous about focusing.
[we want crazy-shallow DoF] -> [manufacturers go all-in on larger sensors] -> [now everything is out of focus.. waaaaah]On MFT focusing is still an issue of course, but the issue is typically acquiring focus, not selecting which thing in the frame to focus on. Of all the focusing failures I've seen over the last ~5 years, 90% of them are it successfully focusing on the wrong thing. With MFT I don't have this issue.
13 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:Oddly enough, my recent experiences of travelling have shown a shift in the negative perception of people with "real" cameras as my observation is that people are now getting far more irritated by the pouting photoshoots using smartphones happening everywhere.
I was walking through St James Park in London a few nights ago and the amount of people draped over the bridge doing the "take a picture of the back of me as I gaze thoughtfully at Buckingham Palace" was ridiculous.
Particularly considering it was virtually pitch black !
Encouraging news!
I did wonder if it would swing in this direction. When out shooting / touristing I've actually heartily embraced the dorky-dad aesthetic because it encourages locals to give you a bit of leeway if I'm accidentally rude or film them when they'd prefer not to be, and it also separates me from the vacuous volumes of professional narcissists.
Before I switched to WFH I shot a number of times in the CBD before work to test a camera, and when you're wearing office attire and shooting with a camera people seem to get very paranoid. I was shooting a composition of people walking through my shot (away from the camera) and one guy stopped right in the middle of the frame and then stood there for ages. At the time I was just annoyed because it ruined my shot. When I looked at the footage later it turned out that he clocked me with a sideways glance, then stopped, pulled out his phone and using the selfie camera to see behind him without turning around he super-zoomed in on me and took lots of photos of me. I'd assume he was a conspiracy nut.
-
16 hours ago, bjohn said:
That all makes sense. I bought my BMPCC and BMMCCs for a documentary project (and future doc projects) and they'll work for that; most of my doc work is music-related and I don't need a "run and gun" setup. But I do a lot of concert and dance photography and am occasionally being asked to do video as well, and that's where something faster and easier to use would be helpful. My big requirement there is low-light performance, and it seems that despite its smaller sensor the GH7 might be better in that department than the FX30 (the FX3 is out of my price range, although the Nikon Z6iii could be a contender), plus I'd get the advantages of more depth of field (and thus more forgiving manual focus) when shooting MFT. I'm in no rush to make a decision as I can get by with my current cameras for now, but I definitely want a simpler, hand-holdable and faster option available when I need it.
You'd have to find a direct comparison to compare the two.. I recently saw an FX30 latitude test and the way the person exposed it for the 'normal' exposure it had almost no stops under but heaps of stops over, so it might be that the different sensors and log profiles are skewing things rather differently.
I say this because I've noticed that in high-DR scenes you might want to expose things in a non-normal way, ETTR or ETTL. Everyone knows about ETTR, but I discovered that with the GX85 you want to ETTL because what's clipped is clipped but you can bring up the image 1-2 stops in post, so if there are higher-DR scenes then you'd ETTL in order to avoid clipping things too hard.
-
5 hours ago, bjohn said:
Definitely useful. The big lesson I keep relearning is that it's more important to get the shot than to have optimal image quality; of course if you can do both that's ideal, but in my case I find that I rarely shoot video because my cameras are so cumbersome to set up and operate.
Absolutely.
But, this is where things are highly contextual.
I've written about this before, but the summary was:
- Priority 1: Get the shot - You can't use the shots you didn't get.
- Priority 2: Get shots in the best way - Shots that are in focus, aren't shaky, have usable composition, don't have nervous-looking subjects or people in the background are staring at the camera, etc.
- Priority 4: Get the nicest image quality - Insert all the normal camera stuff here... DR, colour science, etc.
No, I didn't mis-number this, priority 4 is so far away from priority 1 & 2 that there is no Priority 3.
Now to context.
When I came up with that I was shooting my family and friends. The most frequent Priority 1 challenge was security guards wouldn't let you shoot in museums, art galleries, shopping centres, some zoos, and even in parks if you had a "professional looking" camera, and the most frequent Priority 2 challenges were that I couldn't frame up fast enough to catch the moment, shots weren't in focus, and were too shaky.
The only times that Priority 4 challenges came up was shooting shots where they weren't moving, or random shots without them in it, like landscapes and street scenes of markets etc.I also spent a lot of time analysing professional and award-winning edits of similar materials (travel / travel food shows such as Parts Unknown, Chefs Table, Street Food, as well as YT) and I discovered that in the professional stuff:
- the quality of their shots is solid but not breathtaking
- the quantity of shots was stunning - they're shooting vast quantities of material (one 45 minute episode had 2000 cuts!)
- the magic came from the structure, the interweaving of images combined with music and sound design, and the layering of interviews with voice-over narration
I used to shoot with the GH5 and manual primes as my main camera, but recently realised that the GX85 with AF zooms was the faster way to go, because it was smaller and less 'pro' looking so got into more places and when I was using it the AF and zooms made far more shots in focus, I got far more shots because I was quick enough, and lots less shots had random people in the background staring. The GX85 became my main camera for this reason.
Then the kids moved out and so the previous trip (which inspired this post) was just about the location, so I knew that Priority 1 and 2 would be far easier to satisfy. In South Korea many of the interesting places are public spaces (street malls and markets, not big shopping centres - although they have those too) so no security guards to worry about, and because I can mostly take all the time I need to frame up and expose and focus, mostly it came down to image quality.
However, you'll notice my setup wasn't only the BMMCC. It was the BMMCC and GX85 for a reason.
My thinking on the previous trips and for my next one is that there are four types of places where I might shoot:
-
Tourist places like lookouts etc, where everyone expects people to be filming
Use the big camera
-
Public places that are busy but not touristy, where people wouldn't be surprised to see someone filming
Take both setups and try the big camera but switch if you have to
-
Public places that people wouldn't expect to see someone shooting
Take the small camera, try with a zoom but swap to pancake lens if required, or use phone
-
Places where shooting wouldn't be expected and maybe not welcomed
Take the small camera and pancake lens in a pocket and keep it in the pocket when not taking a shot, but potentially grab quick shots with phone instead
In terms of the logistics, the BMMCC requires a backpack anyway because the rig is too large for a sling bag, so any time I take it anywhere I take the GX85, zoom, and pancake lens as well. The GX85 and zoom fit into a sling bag, and the other zoom and pancake lens also fit in there, so I take those too.
This means I can always "downsize" the rig I'm shooting with, depending on the situation.This is the setup I plan to take on the next one. There's no way I'd just take the "big camera", regardless of what it was (GH5, GH7, BMMCC, Komodo, etc).
-
Update..
I've booked another trip for next year, and have been doing the post-trip analysis and working out what I'll do for next time.
We all know the BMMCC sits in a very narrow niche of size, performance, and features, so I won't rehash that, but I figured my analysis on alternatives might be useful to anyone else still interested in this camera.
Options
Keep the same setup as I used previously
- Big camera: BMMCC with 12-35mm F2.8
- Small tourist camera: GX85 with 14-140mm
- Tiny stealth camera: GX85 with 14/2.5
- Extreme low light: GX85 with 7.5/2 + 17/1.4 + 50/1.2
- Buy: nothing
- Pros: no cost, known setup
-
Cons:
- no AF - manually focusing took time but wasn't a huge deal
- some moire - only a few shots had moire
- dim monitor - only a problem when in bright sunlight
- limited low-light when hand-holding - native ISO with 12-35/2.8 lens is 'enough' for ok lit places but not for dim places, and my fast primes don't have OIS so aren't usable with a tiny hand-held rig
- limited focal range when on tripod in low-light - I like to shoot little scenes at night from out the hotel window and the 50mm is the longest fast lens
- roll not stabilised - OIS can't stabilise roll so footage does have roll jitters from hand-holding in a smallish percentage of the shots
Same setup but minor upgrades
- Buy a brighter monitor to get visible screen in bright conditions
- Buy OLPF to ensure no moire
- Buy 85mm F1.4 to get fast tele for low-light
Use my OG BMPCC
As cool as the OG BMPCC is, is still suffers from most of the issues of the BMMCC as well as introducing new ones. The monitor doesn't articulate at all, is useless in almost all daylight situations, and is the wrong polarisation for my sunglasses so is black, so I'd still need an external monitor and therefore I'd need a rig for it to protect the notoriously fragile tiny-HDMI connector on the side. It also needs an external power solution. All to give me one of the slowest AF mechanisms ever invented.
Use the GX85 only
This really simplifies the setup with one camera, but severely limits the dynamic range. This is important for any time the sun is low, which is a lot when you're on holiday, but is also (surprisingly) more of a problem at night when you want to be able to see the people walking in the streets but don't want to blow out the people inside the shops and bars and restaurants eating etc.
I've done a bunch of side-by-side tests recently and have (finally) managed to get the GX85 files to have some of the mojo of the BMMCC, so I'm less obsessed with the filmic and organic look of the BMMCC that I was. It's really about DR, which just isn't enough to consider this a good alternative to the BMMCC, and is a recurring weakness for other options.
Use my GH5 as the main camera
- DR is still poor compared to BMMCC (almost two stops less?)
- Flippy screen is a PITA because to tilt it (I like to shoot from the hip and high angles) you have to flip it out to the side first
- AF is solved (I only use AF-S so no worries there)
- Moire is solved
- Dim monitor is solved
- Low-light when hand-holding is solved - I can use the 12-35/2.8 with a higher ISO or use the primes with IBIS
- Focal range when on tripod in low-light is partly solved - I can use the 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 with higher ISOs
- Roll stabilisation is also solved by IBIS
Buy GH5ii
Same as above, but DR is only around one stop less and instead of being free it's AUD1500. Not worth it compared to other options.
Buy BMMSC 4K G2
Same as current BMMCC setup, but..
- No AF without having that stupid handle that's larger than the entire rest of the rig
- Moire is fixed
- Dim monitor still an issue
- Low-light when hand-holding is fixed due to dual-ISO (400 and 3200) which means 12-35mm f2.8 lens on this becomes equivalent of a T1.4 lens on BMMCC
- Focal range when on tripod in low-light is also partially fixed as 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 becomes equivalent to T1.8-2.8 on BMMCC
- Roll still not stabilised
- Additional issues including: Large file sizes from 4K BRAW, must buy SSD, must buy mount and cable protectors for SSD, cost around AUD1500 plus SSD plus cage
Buy GH6
- DR is better to BMMCC
- AF is fixed
- Moire is fixed
- Dim monitor is fixed
- Low-light when hand-holding is fixed - native ISO for V-Log in DR Boost mode is ISO 2000(!)
- Focal range when on tripod in low-light is also fixed by high native ISO 2000 so the 14-140mm lens is good enough
- Low light becomes so good that I don't even need to take the fast primes on the trip (I'd still take the 14/2.5 pancake lens for use with the GX85)
- Roll is stabilised
- High-DR scenes had streaking issues that I'm pretty sure I'd encounter, considering I am shooting scenes where I am simultaneously clipping the white and black points of the BMMCC which has 11.2/12.5 stops of DR
- AUD2500+(!!)
Buy GH7
This fixes all the issues with the BMMCC.
- DR is much better than the BMMCC
- AF is PDAF
- Moire is fixed
- Dim monitor is fixed
- Low-light when hand-holding and focal range when on tripod in low-light are both fixed, and I don't need to bring the fast primes
- Roll is stabilised by IBIS
Also doesn't have the issues that other options have:
- Screen tilts as well as flips
- Can record internal Prores (not Prores RAW, although it does that too) at various resolutions (down to 1080p) and in various flavours
- No streaking or image issues
The only downside is the cost - AUD3400 or so currently.
Non-MFT cameras
This is pretty simple, there are no good options currently available that are equivalent prices.
Any non-MFT option currently suffers from at least one of the following issues:- Variable aperture 10x zoom lens options don't exist or are large or heavy or both
- Faster 3x zoom lenses are typically large / heavy
- I have to buy a new body as well as at least two new lenses, which simply can't compete with the price of just an MFT body
I also suck at selling things, so that's a whole hurdle I'd rather not have to deal with. I also seem to keep finding uses for old gear, so there's a reluctance there too.
Conclusion
My conclusions were pretty simple:
- The reduction in DR from the free options (using the GX85 or GH5 only) weren't worth the benefits, especially as things like the dim screen / moire / roll shake weren't bad enough in practice
- The cost of the GH5ii, BMMSC 4K G2 (plus SSD), and GH6 weren't worth it considering how many issues they didn't solve (or new issues they introduced)
- Therefore the GH7 was the only worthwhile option currently around
So, my decision is that unless I'm buying a GH7, I shouldn't invest in anything that doesn't align with that direction. Considering I don't want to casually spend AUD3500 right now, this means I'll be keeping the current setup, perhaps with a few minor things if they're not that expensive.
The advantage of this do-almost-nothing approach is that when I get around to looking to upgrade, I won't have locked myself further into the MFT ecosystem than I am now, so if I decide to change systems later on I still can. I also looked at the RED Komodo and found even a minimal rig was about 3x the weight of the BMMCC rig, so would be too heavy even if I could afford it. So that eliminates all cinema cameras too, making things like buying a fancy external monitor a waste when my next camera is likely a MILC.
Hope this is useful 🙂
-
8 minutes ago, bjohn said:
Yeah, I think the BMPCC 4K would be a more practical choice. Another problem is that even though the new Micro 4K collects gyro data, there's no way to enter lens information into the menu so the gyro doesn't actually work....at least for now, maybe that's something they could fix in firmware, but as a studio camera it's unlikely their target users would ever use gyro stabilization to begin with.
Yep, P4K over the M4K, the only problem is that it's 112% wider, 23% deeper, 46% taller, and 140% heavier... and if you do a volume comparison, it's literally 3.8x larger.
This doesn't count things like the battery jutting out the back of the M2K and the monitor you'll need for the M2K (but might also want for the P2K as the screen doesn't articulate), but still, you're going from one of the smallest cameras around to one of the largest!
The camera market for cinema cameras sure is strange at this lowest end of size and capabilities.
I did a big comparison trying to work out what alternatives there might be for the BMMCC and one thing that I worked out was that a RED Komodo setup was at least three times the weight of a BMMCC rig.
-
20 hours ago, bjohn said:
That's a good point of course, and I keep thinking about getting one of those cameras, especially since it looks like I could use all the same gear I use with my BMMCC. The only thing that put me off initially was the inability to play back what you've recorded, at least in-camera; that's important for me mainly when I'm shooting video in places with artificial lighting (especially stage lights) so I can check to be sure there's no flicker (that would require changing the shutter angle). I could record to a Video Assist and play back on that, which could be a simple solution although it means buying a new monitor (I have a Video Assist but it's an old one that's not compatible with this camera and the batteries run out after about 15-20 minutes).
The other major changes that I noted with the BMMSC4KG2 were:
- B-RAW only
- No internal recording - SSD or external recorder required (and appropriate rigging)
- There's some strange things about the monitor setup IIRC - something like the menu options only appear on the 1080p HDMI output and the 4K SDI output can only output 10-bit and not RAW so depending on how you use it you might need two monitors, or to swap between the inputs on the one monitor but only be able to see a clean feed
- If you want to control it via USB (like if you have the handle accessory) and also want to record to SSD then I think it works but you might need a USB hub, and if so not sure if it needs power
Compared to the BMMCC it's actually very different and has a bunch of strange quirks. It really is a studio camera designed to work while streaming and being remote-controlled. The fact it can record to a USB SSD and has the minimum number of buttons a camera could possibly have make it possible to use as a cinema camera, but it's sure a hell of a long way short of being nice to use as a cinema camera.
The way I think of it is that the BMMCC is fiddly and annoying in many ways, and in those ways this one is worse!
-
14 hours ago, bjohn said:
There is a cheaper OLPF for these cameras available from Alt Cine, although I believe they make them in small batches which means there's a waiting list, and I haven't seen any reviews.
https://altcinecam.com/product/altcine-optical-low-pass-filter/
Yeah, cheaper, but not that much cheaper!
I guess my challenge with these is that they're both around a third of the price of the BM Micro Studio camera, which apart from coming with an OLPF installed, also provides:
- 4K sensor that is larger (MFT vs S16)
- Will have greater DR than the 1080p one on a 1080p timeline (because new one will be downsampled to 1080p from 4K)
- Dual ISO
- More bitrate options - from 3:1 to 12:1
Plus, it's a brand-new camera not one that's potentially almost a decade old. The OG BMMCC seems pretty well made, but electronics don't have an infinite shelf life.
-
18 hours ago, bjohn said:
I read a couple of years ago that the newest version of the Rawlite OLPF for the OG BMPCC and BMMCC has much less impact on sharpness than the original one did. I bought mine (two, one for each BMMCC) in 2019 and 2020 so not sure if that's the latest version but the images are sharp enough for me, keeping in mind that for video I have a personal preference for less sharpness (though it's better to have sharpness and dial it back than to try to add sharpness that isn't in the image to begin with).
I have occasionally experienced moiré on my OG BMPCC (which doesn't have an OLPF) but the main reason I got the OLPF was to avoid having to use UV-cut filters on my lenses. One less thing to think about and carry with me.
Thanks, this is interesting info. I haven't looked into them yet, except to see the price and have my eyes go really wide!
I didn't know they're also an IR/UV cut filter, which is useful although not much of a deal for me as mine is just joined at the hip with my vND filter.
Also interesting to note with minimal loss of resolution, this is perhaps the greatest weakness of the BMMCC I think - imagine the image if it was a 2.5K sensor. @PannySVHS do you know what version you have?
I did get moire on my trip, but it was only on a handful of shots IIRC, so although a problem, a pretty minor one, and for the kind of stuff I'm shooting which is atmospheric shots and nothing in-particular, if I miss a shot it isn't critical.
-
15 hours ago, Tim Sewell said:
I mentioned here some time ago that I was planning to make a mini-doc at this year's Cambridge Folk Festival - the UK's leading such event that this year celebrated its 60th anniversary.
Well it didn't work out quite how I wanted. I took my 15yr old with me and had expected that he would go off independently in search of the things 15 year old boys hope they will find, but no. He wanted to stick to me like glue, as long as he could also stick to his camping chair and his phone all day every day, so I didn't get to do the vox pops and the storytelling I had planned (I still have 200 cards I had printed with the details of how to see the film once finished, to hand to interviewees). Ah well. I've booked to go again next year. Alone!
Here is what I did manage to get. Shot 4k on the A6600 - an underrated camera in my opinion and I don't think it scrubs up badly at all. This was exclusively with my now-doughty 18-105 f4 and subjected to pretty much the same grading process as the last clip I posted here (
)
Anyway. Hope you all like it. Edited to add: Select 4K and turn the volume right up!
Great stuff! Lots of little interesting stuff to notice in there, like you making sure people are clapping in time to your soundtrack, etc. Some fun characters too - there's nothing like a grumpy person staring down the barrel of the camera lens!
Those Sony 6000 series cameras can make some great images. I was considering the A6300 at one point, but an IBIS bug put me off at the time. I think the major issue for those cameras was that getting good colour out of them required more skill than people had at the time. Now there's more support for folks in terms of tools like colour management, the film emulation plugins, and more knowledge of colour grading techniques, so it's much easier to make the most of the files.
Amusing about your son - kids are funny sometimes. Just as I thought I'd figured mine out (even just partially) they'd change and go through a new stage and I'd go back to being completely confused again!
- Juank and Tim Sewell
-
2
-
I can verify I bought my BMMCC + rig from @mercer and would definitely recommend buying from him 🙂
20 hours ago, PannySVHS said:Oh no, why are you selling it? On the other hand it's so cool that you sold your other set to kye. @mercer Btw, I find the results from my Bmpcc even nicer than what I got out of my Micro with the rawlite oplf-ircut filter.
I'm contemplating getting an OLPF for my BMMCC but you have mentioned this before and it stuck in my mind as a reason to avoid it. Did you try compensating with a bit of post-sharpening?
19 hours ago, PannySVHS said:What kind is the monitor hinge in the set which you sold to kye? Maybe i need to get one myself for my Ikan and enjoy the ergonomy a bit more.
It's a Smallrig one. I can't see it on their website now, so I assume it's superseded, but it just tilts forwards/backwards and attaches with 1/4-20 bolts to the camera and monitor. Shouldn't be too hard to find a reasonable one that fits what you want.
If I take the BMMCC with me on my next trip in April next year then I'm contemplating a new monitor that's a lot brighter. I did a side-by-side with the BMMCC and GX85 on the beach a few weeks ago and literally couldn't see the Ikan at all, but the GX85 screen was totally usable.
-
1 hour ago, bjohn said:
Yeah, it was the building pans where I noticed the IBIS artifacts. In theory gyro should do a better job here because IBIS is always playing catchup; it's very fast but the lag can produce noticeable artifacts. There is no lag with gyro, but there's a crop and you have to use a lower shutter angle (typically 90 or even 45 degrees) and then add back motion blur in post. The lower shutter angle is to counteract situations in which the camera is moving faster than the exposure time per frame; if you use a 180 degree shutter angle the camera will often be moving faster than the exposure time per frame and you'll get blurry images.
Another thought, I really think it's down to the IBIS implementation.
The GH5 has two IBIS modes, one that smoothes motion, and the other eliminates it creating a stationary frame. The normal smoothing one is how you describe, but it's the other one that's of interest.
If you put it in that tripod mode, but then pan the camera, it keeps a stationary frame until you've moved it too far and it realises it has to 'follow' you, and if you keep panning you get the smoothest pans I've ever seen without sticks. The level of stabilisation is incredible. When you're doing it the feeling is a cross between pulling the frame through treacle and one of those time-warp things where reality is delayed (because it moves a second or two after you start, and then it keeps moving a bit after you stop again).I really miss that mode on the GX85, as it only has a normal smoothing mode, and if you hold it steady the frame sort of floats around randomly because it didn't completely eliminate all the motion.
Interestingly, the OIS from the 12-35mm F2.8 on the OG BMPCC and BMMCC (which don't have IBIS) tries to keep a much more stable frame - if you hold it steady then it will have a much more 'locked off' shot with far less drift than the 'normal' modes from the Panny cameras. I haven't compared it between cameras, so it might be the lens, or might be the camera doing this.
I think there could be a lot of benefit if they included several levels of smoothing on the IBIS mechanisms. Light, Medium, Heavy, and Tripod modes would be very useful I think.
- Tim Sewell and bjohn
-
2
-
49 minutes ago, bjohn said:
Yeah, it was the building pans where I noticed the IBIS artifacts. In theory gyro should do a better job here because IBIS is always playing catchup; it's very fast but the lag can produce noticeable artifacts. There is no lag with gyro, but there's a crop and you have to use a lower shutter angle (typically 90 or even 45 degrees) and then add back motion blur in post. The lower shutter angle is to counteract situations in which the camera is moving faster than the exposure time per frame; if you use a 180 degree shutter angle the camera will often be moving faster than the exposure time per frame and you'll get blurry images.
I was the opposite - it was the hand-held shots in the car etc where I saw the jumping the most.
That's why, to me at least, using a tripod for the buildings etc will fix those but still leave a gap for the in-transit hand-held moments. Thus my earlier reply about addressing that gap.
This style of video is something I've been thinking about a lot for myself, and the way I see it is that to create some movement and contrast in the edit, I'd mix up pacing and subject matter such that there are in-transit shots, abstract shots, wides, teles, people, architecture, looking up, low-angles, high angles, shots with diagonals and leading lines, shots with lines horizontal and vertical lines (e.g. from looking at a building straight on), etc. I've also been contemplating an enhanced way to do the sound design too, so that it fits better with the edit.
-
5 hours ago, Tim Sewell said:
Thanks. IBIS and AS in camera, then some stabilisation in post. Like I say, I'm taking a tripod next time!
Depending on your preferences, there might be benefit to testing some options for stabilising hand-held shooting as well as taking a tripod. For example you had lots of shots inside vehicles and while on the move, where a tripod isn't really practical.
What I mean is that for things like IBIS, if you can reduce the shake from being just-too-much for the IBIS to instead where it is operating within its travel, you can cut out all that jumping/lurching that the IBIS does when movement is beyond its limitations. This might only require a reduction of (say) 30% of camera shake but could reduce the vast majority of shake-related issues in the resulting footage.
Things to consider to stabilise hand-held shooting could include:
- Different ways you hold the camera (where your hands are gripping the camera)
- Different positions of your arms (e.g. shooting at belly height and pushing your elbows into your sides)
- Use of extras like wearing a camera strap and pulling the camera tight against it as a third point-of-contact
- Adding something small/foldable to the camera (table tripod sort-of thing) that can act as a stabiliser like an Edelkrone FlexTILT which can obviously act as a table tripod but can also act as a handle when hand-holding, or can even be extended backwards to form a shoulder-rig or pressed against the chest as a third point-of-contact
You could even get a very compact/light travel tripod and hand-hold the camera with it attached, essentially using it as mass to make the rig heavier and larger.
Alternatively, you could shoot much wider for such shots and then stabilise aggressively in post with a large crop. This risks having shake-related motion-blur in the shot that doesn't align to the post-stabilised motion of the final frames, but it can work in many situations.
My approach is to use as much stabilisation as possible (ideally technique+rig+OIS+IBIS with post-stabe if required), so that all the mechanisms are operating comfortably within their ranges and will therefore create less artefacts and also allow more usable shots.
For b-roll where no specific shots are critical, there's also merit in just shooting a lot and being pickier in the edit 🙂
-
On 10/18/2024 at 10:37 PM, Tim Sewell said:
As far as the FX30 goes - well it's an excellent little camera. Very easy to use, produces a nice image and with the latest update even has shutter angle! A few of the lower light shots needed some NR adding in Resolve, but nothing outrageous. For the video above I didn't use Cineprint. CST, NR, Balance, Contrast, A dab of Film Look Creator then out through the DVR Kodak 2383 D55 LUT, via a CST to Cineon.
Nice!
I think the FLC is a bit of a game changer for trying to get higher-end looks with non-cine-cameras. You could get most of the same results doing things manually, but it makes it so much easier and faster to do that it really unlocks it.
What lens(es) did you use?
-
On 10/6/2024 at 5:43 PM, BTM_Pix said:
I do now.
They REALLY want you to use the ATEM (which is what I have it for anyway) but if you buy the zoom demand add on then you can assign one of its buttons to trigger the AF.
However….
The P4K/6K have a beta firmware that uses the same Ethernet control now so I have developed two different controller options last week in preparation for getting the Micro Studio 4K G2.
Just tested them and they work well.
I’ll be doing a third type this week as I’m trying a different approach.
So I’ll personally be covered if I want to use it outside of the ATEM environment but I’m not convinced enough other people will be interested in doing the same for me to commercialise it.
It’s laughably small when put next to a regular P4K so it would be great for a lot of applications but the Bluetooth omission is definitely borderline kinky.
Yeah, it's definitely geared towards remote control. For a run-n-gun setup, by the time you add the zoom demand, it's now larger than the P4K, which is truly saying something.
I genuinely don't know what I'll do for my next trip, although the likely option is to keep the same setup as there's nothing out there that is better without also having massive downsides or a massive cost associated with it.
-
-
6 hours ago, PannySVHS said:
Hardly anyone has posted any involving videos in 120p here, which they have crafted themselves. Why that tristesse would change in 4K is beyond my comprehension. I couldn't feel less inspired to wonder about 120p in 4K than I feel by this thread. Decisive moment, seriously, where is it? Show me! Or maybe much rather not.
I really enjoyed @kye 's essay miniseries and screenshots from his journey with the micro cinema cam, travels with a cinematic eye and consciouness through and about the artistic journey. Stuff like that is my fuel to keep coming here.
But this thread is 4K of nothing and that in unbearable 120fps slomo hell. Grain of salt and two cents, so don't get too upset.:)
If you start with the desired aesthetic and then ask yourself what the equipment and settings are that creates that aesthetic, then you quickly realise that anything above 24/25/30p is a specialist tool.
For me, 60p conformed to 24/25/30p creates an aesthetic that is surreal. If the subject motion is significant then it can pass for reality but through a highly intense emotional lens. I've seen shots that were 60p but didn't look unnatural in situations of extreme grief, shock, and euphoria due to love, drugs, or adrenaline.
The aesthetic of 120p conformed to 24/25/30p is absolutely into the territory of a special effect. I filmed dozens of hours of footage from my kids sports games in 120p and am very familiar with the look, and it screams at the viewer that they're watching special effects footage. This is appropriate for heavily stylised content such as fight scenes or extreme action shots that take place outside reality, for example movies that are set in someone's mind or in virtual reality etc. 120p doesn't align with our senses observing our reality, except perhaps if there was an incredible amount of drugs involved.
The other potential uses for 120p or slower is to see things that aren't noticeable to the naked eye. Documentaries showing animals doing thing very quickly like frogs shooting their tongues at bugs, birds diving into water to catch fish etc. This is a special effect but a useful one to extend our perception in time. The Slowmo Guys on YT make great use of this.
The upgrade of a smartphone from 1080p120 to 4k120 is of almost zero practical use in film-making. Discussion of it at length outside of a very narrow niche can only be academic or fetishistic.
-
BM support replied, and yeah, no camera control from Video Assist units.
"Unfortunately you cannot control any settings from the Video Assist units. The only controls a Video Assist supports is trigger recording.
For the control functions you require, the options available are either through the ATEM control protocol, if you have one of our ATEM vision switchers, or you can use the REST API over USB Ethernet for external control via HTTP."
Seems like if it can trigger start/stop then a protocol is there, so it should be possible for them to do it, but with the PYXIS monitor being over USB and therefore a completely different implementation it seems unlikely they'll convert the VA units to control their Studio series.
I guess all hope for a tiny BM cine camera now lies in them releasing a new Micro model that uses the Pyxis monitor. This would be an incredible option actually, as the monitor has full camera control, it's nice and bright, is compact and light-weight, and draws power from the camera so no more duplicate battery situation.
However, if you live in the real world then don't wait on a fantasy to come true.
-
2 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:
Wrong presumption by me.
Dont get why you can’t control it over the SDI port let alone the HDMI port.
Its just weird choices they’ve made here.
This is the only viable solution for external control.
I’m getting this camera next month for use with ATEM but there is development scope there for me to make an interface for external control by that method.
I’ll let you know.
It very much seems like segmentation in their product lines and development departments.
The studio team created a range of cameras designed to be remote controlled and mixed etc, and they setup (what looks like) a comprehensive control system through the ATEM products.
The "cameras that leave the building" team created the cinema camera range with screens and buttons, and the Video Assist range, and probably don't care their monitor doesn't have a way to control the hermit cameras from the other department.
Definitely seems like a lost opportunity to have one camera be useful in both scenarios though.
-
1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:
Here is a user thread of experiences with the camera.
It should be renamed “Dude, where’s my Bluetooth?”
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=190223
Just read that thread, and yeah, it's a mixed bag.
It seems like a great studio camera, but in an attempt to cost-cut or simplify or <insert some reason or other here> they hamstrung its ability to replace the BMMCC and be used outside the studio.
Once again I'm reminded of the "industry blind spot" of camera size. If it's small then it's unnecessarily crippled, and if it's not crippled then it's physically large, and if it's neither then it's old and people are sitting around saying "they don't make them like they used to".
-
12 minutes ago, Sven said:
Altcine has a free solution for the buttons (if you have a 3-d printer).
https://altcinecam.com/product/bmmcc-buttons/I’ve put some bumper pads on the rec and power-button to locate without looking.
I also made a up/down-button on my own that I cut from rubber-material.
This looks like a great solution - you'd know by touch which button you're on. Awesome stuff!
Pity it wasn't made more ergonomic from the factory.
I took a cinema camera on holiday, and it changed everything
In: Cameras
Posted
Makes sense, and yes, it seems we have similar approaches. Great minds think alike... or fools never differ? If it was the latter then neither of us would ever know, so I'll assume the former 🙂
The crop doesn't really bother me that much, and it's only 10%, but lately I've been focusing on busy cities and the density means that if you go wider than 30mm you've probably got too busy a frame, but in those moments I just grab the shot with my phone and then move on. The 12-35mm on the BMMCC is equivalent to 34-101mm FOV, and while shooting in Seoul I only wanted to go wider on a handful of occasions over the two weeks we were there - it is a very densely packed city!
I became aware (and probably hypersensitive) to my clips looking amateurish and started trying to work out what might be the causes. One thing I realised I didn't like the look of was wide-angled lenses, especially if there's any uncontrolled camera movement. Obviously they are used by the pros, but the more I looked into it and did my own tests, the more I realised that wide angled lenses weren't that common. If you look at the old c-mount zoom lenses that were the work-horses on 8mm and 16mm film cameras, the wide end of the zooms for the 8mm cameras was often around 8mm, and the wide end of the zooms for the 16mm cameras was around 17mm, which would make them upwards of 40mm equivalent FOV. You don't see people shooting features on lenses much wider than 35mm, on crop-sensors!
This is one of the reasons I moved to zooms, it was so I could try and shoot with longer focal lengths, but not lose any shots that I needed to quickly zoom out for.
For me, I'd be an instant birthday present if Panasonic put the GH7 sensor in the GX85 body and gave it 4K V-Log, even if they killed almost all the other headline features of the G9ii/GH7. I know it's crazy, but I want to record 24p with a decent DR, and have files that are a reasonable bitrate and aren't over-processed. Maybe I'm old fashioned.