Super Members Mattias Burling Posted March 11, 2016 Super Members Share Posted March 11, 2016 You guys are killing me Im scouting for a D16 again. Its just to bad that most are in the US and really cheap. If it gets stuck in customs... Not so cheap. But I can wait (as a BMD shooter you get used to it ). BTW, regarding its ISO. In my experience, pushing it to iso800 or 3 stops in post is done with no hesitation, NR or thought about exposure. Further can be done depending on exposure etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 19 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said: You guys are killing me Im scouting for a D16 again. Its just to bad that most are in the US and really cheap. If it gets stuck in customs... Not so cheap. But I can wait (as a BMD shooter you get used to it ). BTW, regarding its ISO. In my experience, pushing it to iso800 or 3 stops in post is done with no hesitation, NR or thought about exposure. Further can be done depending on exposure etc. I've been looking everywhere for cheap used D16s. Where are you finding these? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted March 11, 2016 Super Members Share Posted March 11, 2016 12 minutes ago, TheRenaissanceMan said: I've been looking everywhere for cheap used D16s. Where are you finding these? There is one on DVX user right now. He is asking 2500 but thats with lots of stuff like the shark fin, MFT mount etc. Plus he is willing to take offers. If I was in the US I would be on that kit as we speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted March 11, 2016 Super Members Share Posted March 11, 2016 Shot on the D16 and a glimpse of the D16 at 1:34. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jpr Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 I have a friend who shoots with a d16 and I really love the image it produces. Some awesome examples here of it thanks for sharing them all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 There's an ikonoskop on eBay in Spain for 1500 euros. Liam 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted March 11, 2016 Super Members Share Posted March 11, 2016 54 minutes ago, mercer said: There's an ikonoskop on eBay in Spain for 1500 euros. 16mm film version. Still cool though mercer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said: 16mm film version. Still cool though Sorry, my espanol is a little rusty. Mattias Burling 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted March 11, 2016 Author Share Posted March 11, 2016 I had the camera for a day and did tests and I rated it at 200 ASA, 400 ASA gets pretty noisy. 800 ASA to me was way too noisy. I'm not a fan of noise reduction post tools, even though they are amazing - but I rather have a camera that's cleaner. With that said, yes the color is really beautiful and its motion is beautiful, but I really think you could get there with the BMPCC. I don't know for sure, but I would want to test side by side. I have some of that DB16 test footage, I should recolor it. I did a test with it but I graded it terribly. And just from all my experience with the Sony F35 which is a 400 ASA camera.... having a 200 ASA camera is not super easy to use - especially if you guys like to run and gun. Even if you are shooting narrative. Especially if you have night exteriors or low-light scenes. And I like the Ikonscope - with 12 stops of dynamic range, or 11 stops, it's difficult to use this. And having only CINEMA DNG just burns up disk sapce. For a lot of stuff, when you don't have a data wrangler, this is tough on production. Just sayin'. I really think doing a comparison with the BMPCC and the Bolex first, before dropping $5000 or so on it. One last thing - I think what people are noticing from DB16 footage is that there is a less of it. And those who use it are more artistic than just everyone who uses the BMPCC. So they do better coloring, frames, composition. They use film grain in post, noise reduction. So that's why all these clips look so beautiful. There's also a lot of clips on vimeo that don't look good. So just rent the camera from lensrentals.com and do some tests. That's what I did, and that thing went back immediately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted March 11, 2016 Super Members Share Posted March 11, 2016 My D16 (500gb version) with a lens cost less than a BMPCC + cards + battery + lens back when I bought it. And you need to ad the audio recorder to the bmpcc as well. I have side by side footage. Will dig it up. BMPCC looks good. It has much more moire thoug. And of course jello. Ed_David 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 On 3/2/2016 at 6:55 PM, independent said: I am so sorry to Independent.. I can't unquote you for the life of me. Just wanted to say to Ed, the first of the two wedding videos Dave posted from his db16 has a bmpcc b camera, and, no offense to Dave's grading skills or anything, you can tell the difference - at least in the reception. Ed_David 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted March 11, 2016 Author Share Posted March 11, 2016 Having to use the bmpc probably cause of low light capabilities Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Looked like it was for two angles of the same thing for the reception, so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Maze Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Ed is right. I had to switch to BMPCC with my speed booster because the low light. Also, I shoot weddings in ProRes LT so the image isn't as strong as the 2k 12 bit raw from the Bolex. Realistically, it's a terrible camera to use practically for a wedding or doc. I think the c100 is the best wedding camera. All day battery life. Great high quality compression. Perfect skin tones. Ed is also right about the fact that most the stuff shot on Bolex is purposely narrative. Which means more care has gone into the lighting and composition. A good DP can make any camera look good just like a good musician can make any instrument sound good. My buddy just got back from Nicaragua where he was going to shoot a doc on C300. They wouldn't let him bring his camera rig into the country so he shot an entire professional project on an iPhone and a Nikon point and shoot camera and the client was actually happy with it. Don't forget that these numbers bit rates and sensors are honestly not as important as you think. If you make a killer film using whatever and a producer sees it and hires you, you'll have budget to shoot on Alexa or whatever you want and it won't matter what sub $3,000 camera you purchased. Just get something that is the best workhorse for you and will make you happy. To me, I prefer the look of Bolex to any RED camera. So I rent the Bolex on my higher budget stuff and I usually have tons of room left over for crew and lighting because a Bolex is super cheap to rent. Having grip and gaffers who know what they are doing is the real secret. Ed_David, Axel, bamigoreng and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 4 hours ago, Ed David said: I had the camera for a day and did tests and I rated it at 200 ASA, 400 ASA gets pretty noisy. 800 ASA to me was way too noisy. I'm not a fan of noise reduction post tools, even though they are amazing - but I rather have a camera that's cleaner. With that said, yes the color is really beautiful and its motion is beautiful, but I really think you could get there with the BMPCC. I don't know for sure, but I would want to test side by side. I now feel I just never noticed how good the DB can actually be. But in comparison it looks a little more Super 8 than 16mm. I think you are right. Also, with the Micro, one should be able to build a more usable rig (smallHD 501 with sidefinder and rec709 Lut permanently fixed with HDMI connection hidden), because the body itself is so small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted March 11, 2016 Super Members Share Posted March 11, 2016 Here you go, BMPCC TIFFs and D16 DNGs.REMEMBER: This was the old D16 firmware, with the old Matrix, therefor it must be switched to BMCC or preferably BMPC4K Gamma. Otherwise its very magenta. You can do so i Resolve or After Effects if you have the BMDFilm converter. http://www.filedropper.com/frames Here is something I did with them. TheRenaissanceMan and Axel 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted March 11, 2016 Author Share Posted March 11, 2016 videos are so nice Mattias! Thanks for sharing. Free video, so thank you - but still One thing is to record BMCC with raw, not log. And also just literally a person's face and a color chart. motion test - that is what is nice from the DB again, though, the hard part, is the dynamic range and sensitivity of the camera. I no doubt believe the DB16 probably looks nicer than the BMPC in skintone and motion, but loses with dynamic range and sensitivity. And for some, that's fine. But as a A or B camera for me, where I am mostly working at 400 ASA or 800 ASA light levels where I need 12 stops of dynamic range a lot of times, this is challenging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat33 Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Haven't tested this myself but I have seen this floating around in regards to D16 dynamic range: Shooting 200 ISO lighting for 400: 12.3 EV DR +5/-7.3 Shooting 200 ISO lighting for 200: 11.7 EV DR +4.2/-7.5 This is some nice older firmware D16 footage with some low light at the end. Ed_David 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Maze Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 You must shoot at ISO 200 (now 160). I shot Frequency with the Kish lenses too which were F4 only. It was kinda fun though. Constructing our lighting around those locked settings. Not ideal for most scenarios, but when done correctly, the D16 really has a gorgeous image. Definitely some mojo for sure that is very unique. But I digress...back to the original topic of this post....the 1dc and Blackmagic micro. I have heard that the micro just has the exact same sensor as the BMPCC...but it looks better to me. Do we know categorically whether this is a new sensor or not? Also, is a 1dc relevant anymore? I used one in Haiti and really loved it but the files were pretty annoying to manage. Shot a Christian mini doc out there on the 1dc. Enjoyed it. But it was several years ago. Its a brick of a camera for sure Ed_David 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted March 11, 2016 Author Share Posted March 11, 2016 1 minute ago, DaveAltizer said: You must shoot at ISO 200 (now 160). I shot Frequency with the Kish lenses too which were F4 only. It was kinda fun though. Constructing our lighting around those locked settings. Not ideal for most scenarios, but when done correctly, the D16 really has a gorgeous image. Definitely some mojo for sure that is very unique. Right on. Also in terms of dynamic range - that's also interpretive - one person's level of acceptable noise is another person's not acceptable level. Like the whole Red Dragon fiasco. They showed a chart before it came out that had the camera I think at 16 or 17 stops of dynamic range. Alexa is around 14 stops. And then when people got it, I think they found it was more like 12 or 13. But yes, I think the DB16 to me, has more pleasing skintones than the Red Dragon stuff. I find the dragon stuff to have a BEIGE look like that video Phil Holland shot. I find that when I grade. With that said, like Mattius, I much more prefer the look of the red one mx's skintones. But like Mattius, I own a bunch of cameras, and once I own them, I get bored of their image and crave another camera. Then I get that camera and miss the older one and buy the older one. Then I do tests, and go, "opps." and then have to sell the older one. Or now I just, when I have that urge, I rent. Or just learn to love the flaws and all of my current camera. Man, I need therapy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.