Jump to content

helium

Members
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About helium

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Are you claiming that you can detect these defects under normal viewing conditions or just that they're visible zoomed in? Would you, for example, bet the house on being able to tell difference in a blind test, without being able to move your chair or hit the zoom key? If the answer is yes, please link to full rez examples, so the rest of us can test our own eyesight under the usual viewing conditions. If that sounds like I'm being over-generous with your time, you've repeated these same claims on several discussion sites, so surely you must have examples on hand?
  2. I tested a cheap third party battery, recording continuously for 50+ minutes with the screen at 35% (bright enough for indoors and cloudy days). Wasn't all that hot and no difficulty getting it out. Don't ask which one, I'd rather not offer a recommendation without more use. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the most common battery to jam is the counterfeit LP-E6, not the acknowledged clones. Somebody else claimed that the authentic Canons have latches more apt to jam on the BMPCC 4K, though it's possible this guy actually had a counterfeit, as reputable dealers don't appear to offer an absolute assurance you're getting the real thing. If the BMD battery suddenly jammed after repeated successful use, what other explanation than that it swelled? At some point, this may get sorted out....
  3. If anyone's LOL, it's BMD. They're selling thousands of "cinema" cameras, with no run and gun conveniences, to people who'll be shooting nothing but crowds, skylines, receding tail-lights and slomo gimbal reviews. And all ETTR. Sounds great, from the marketing point of view.
  4. I'm sorry you did too. What I didn't realize was that the 300+ pages here contemplate using this camera in uncontrolled conditions, and not shooting anything that *must* be exposed correctly and consistently -- you know, like faces. Perhaps there might be better camera choices for that sort of photography?
  5. Yeah, well, that's a basic presumption of cinema lighting -- you light the scene. But you expose for the subject. If there's no lighting, then we're back to the more haphazard approach of available light stills photography, where the best compromise is sought.
  6. Only if what you're shooting is unconnected street or nature scenes and you're using it like a stills camera. Otherwise, the best practice for this camera is to expose for the subject, as you would with any cinema camera.
  7. Watch the video. They rate the original BMPCC at 11.2 and the BMPCC 4K at 11.6. They appear to be using the lower more conservative set of values (SNR=.5) in the chart reproduced above. In any event, they state plainly that by their measurements, the P4K has more dynamic range. This is consistent with what most shooters, including this one, have discovered.
  8. Where did this come from? They tested the original Pocket tested at around 12.5, which was consistent with other third party results, and the P4K hasn't been tested at all. Or has it?
  9. Take it for what it's worth, but I find the performance of the two cameras nearly identical in the highlights, after grading -- meaning the same amount of data is preserved in both cases. At least, this is the case with limited testing. The shots above are not actually "blown out", so there's nothing to recover. It's just that the highlights are mapped into the super-white regions in the debayered .dng. But the data is intact, it just has to be brought down. You'll see the same thing on the original Pocket.
  10. It's interesting that you're able to perform DR comparisons by mentally comparing unrelated and differently graded shots seen on youtube, and are confident enough in the results to announce them. The usual complaint about youtube "reviews" of BMD cameras is that the tuber has no idea how to grade the material, so the tests are meaningless. But it's gone one better now: comparisons of unrelated shots (from youtube?) done by memory.
  11. No, that's not normal. Pressure on the grip has no effect on mine. I'd say exchange the camera, but of course you can't at this point.
  12. In that case, it's as pointless trying to grade the .png as it is the downloadable video. The few .dngs made available here by members here offer a much better example of BMPCC 4K performance, but I gather examining those frames isn't of interest to the critics here. It looks to me, subjectively, that the BMPCC 4K has more usable dynamic range than the BMPCC, at least in part because it's so much cleaner in the shadows. But for some reason there seems to be a strong interest in pushing another story here, and without reference to original footage.
  13. I don't know where the .png came from, but even if it was exported prior to grading, exports out of NLEs typically clip out of bounds (but recoverable) data, making analysis of actual DR impossible. The file may be flat, but it's levels are truncated. It's not original log. If you have grading skills, there is log/raw footage available for download, which would provide a more accurate view of the cam's DR. But that might not lead to your preferred conclusion.
  14. This thread is aggravating enough to revive the dead.... You do realize you're grading a grade, not camera original? There's no way to know how much original highlight detail was in the shots, because current levels are baked in. It's like trying to grade a bluray and concluding that 35mm stinks, because you can't push the highlights without clipping.
  15. So you're not really interested in the conversation, but simply must offer up your two cents anyway, which is that BMD had better drop everything until the BMPCC 4K murders the GH5 -- murder coming up, next firmware release! -- because you're not satisfied with the difference between the two cameras, based on what you've seen on youtube. Between a host with all the self-control of 5 -year old, and a readership which evaluates cameras based on hearsay and computer monitors, this place is really something. In other words, another one bites the dust. Goodbye, and good luck.
×
×
  • Create New...