Jump to content
Yurolov

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, John Brawley said:

I think we're just nostalgic.

When the Ursa Mini 4.6K first started shipping there were many many threads that were EXACTLY the same as some of the complaints on here....  Users complaining that the UM4.6K didn't have the same mojo / look / feel as the 4K sensor which at that point was in the Production camera, the Ursa and the Ursa mini 4K.

This is a new sensor.  

It has the same chef's in the kitchen, working with new ingredients.

Spend some time with the images, look at the RAWS when they're available and learn to get the most from it.  THEN come back and post about what you like or don't like.  But grading from a downloaded 264 and then writing it off as being inferior is a bit premature and simplistic.

JB

 

I love this man lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
2 hours ago, mercer said:

Idk, so far from what I've seen, I prefer the S16mm look from the older sensor. The new camera has a more modern, video look to it (it looks good and crisp and clean) but the OG Pocket/Micro had a different aesthetic that I prefer.

Ugh.

I think the color is just more accurate with the new Pocket 4K.  In the past the footage had more of a look to it, and now the color is better so you have to do that yourself.  Putting a heavy "look" on something makes it hard to judge the performance of the camera, so Blackmagic chose the route of grading it themselves and making sure it accurately represented the camera.

 

A lot of the Kinefinity Terra footage (especially Phillip Bloom's stuff) is hard to judge the color science of the camera due to haphazard and heavy grading.  I have no idea if Kinefinity cameras produce nice images because all of the graded material is very artistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

I think the color is just more accurate with the new Pocket 4K. 

This is true. One time I was filming something with my original Pocket using an RGB LED strip. I set the color to a purple color (swinging a little closer to magenta), yet when I looked back at the footage, the Pocket rendered it as a deep blue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, John Brawley said:

I think we're just nostalgic.

I admit I am nostalgic for the celluloid look which I see as the gold standard. It's impossible not to have a gut reaction to images and my reaction to the BMPCC4K was that they had lost something special and that they now have something of the sterility of a lot of other digital cameras around these days. I'm not hating it. They are still beautiful images (with superb colour) and I am buying the camera. It's like I was expecting an electric guitar but turns out I'm getting a synth. Of course you can still make incredible music on either...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Kieran said:

I admit I am nostalgic for the celluloid look which I see as the gold standard. It's impossible not to have a gut reaction to images and my reaction to the BMPCC4K was that they had lost something special and that they now have something of the sterility of a lot of other digital cameras around these days. I'm not hating it. They are still beautiful images (with superb colour) and I am buying the camera. It's like I was expecting an electric guitar but turns out I'm getting a synth. Of course you can still make incredible music on either...

That logic is wrong.  It's more like you expected a synth but you are getting a synth with more controls.  You can still make the familiar sounds of the old synth but it's a better starting place if you don't want a specifically defined "sound."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah I don't think it will ever be the same. It is a whole new sensor from a different manufacturer. It is sort of like the CCD  sensor versus Bayer thing.  I don't care what anyone says CCD had better colors, but sucked ass on low light. Sure it might get close but it has the "new" look to it, which I am not to fond of, but for what most people will use it for, it is probably the right direction for BM. And if you are going to try and make money using it that look is "in" now, and it is what younger people take for granted.  They want sharp, detailed stuff that pops.

Even the perspective from s16 to m4/3 is different, so that has a role in the overall look. I am sure there will be a LuT that makes it close, but we have a lot more footage to look at down the road so I am not giving up yet. But not everything that is new is always better, especially on the video side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Turboguard said:

I don't know what angle he used, but the cadence doesn't look as good as it does in the balloon sequence.

I can't imagine that John shot that at anything other 180 degrees.

And it looks pretty oobvious that he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

That logic is wrong.  It's more like you expected a synth but you are getting a synth with more controls.  You can still make the familiar sounds of the old synth but it's a better starting place if you don't want a specifically defined "sound."

Musical analogies aside, there seem to be a lot of people who feel the same way I do. It would be a good idea for BMD to release a 'nostalgic' look video to show that the classic Pocket look can still be achieved with the new one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

That logic is wrong.  It's more like you expected a synth but you are getting a synth with more controls.  You can still make the familiar sounds of the old synth but it's a better starting place if you don't want a specifically defined "sound."

Beautifully put!
 

4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Nah I don't think it will ever be the same. It is a whole new sensor from a different manufacturer. It is sort of like the CCD  sensor versus  CMOS thing.  I don't care what anyone says CCD had better colors, but sucked ass on low light. Sure it might get close but it has the "new" look to it, which I am not to fond of, but for what most people will use it for, it is probably the right direction for BM. And if you are going to try and make money using it that look is "in" now, and it is what younger people take for granted.  They want sharp, detailed stuff that pops.

Even the perspective from s16 to m4/3 is different, so that has a role in the overall look.

This kind of sounds like when audiophiles claim that magnetic tape sounds better than CDs and that they can hear the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Kieran said:

It's impossible not to have a gut reaction

Gut reactions are by definition spontaneous...not based on actual experience of the thing effecting your gut.

There are always quick and emotional responses online to pretty much everything, and definitely in this field.

My head tells me to trust the team that got us here and the pros who are speaking with confidence and praise regarding their hands on experiences.

14 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Sorry to ruin your day, but it does! It is WAY better.

As a music producer I was part of a blind test of engineers that tried to differentiate, also a similar test with dozens of engineers who swore by analog tube preamps versus digital.

I'll let you guess what the blind tests proved.

Hint, some of the analog manufacturers were present for the test and not only couldn't they guess what was recorded on analog vs digital - they couldn't idenitfy their own (very expensive) tube preamps.

A lot like Coppola choosing the GH2 over the Alexa in the Zacuto shoot out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh hell I am sure it will appeal to a larger audience than the old Color Science of the Pocket. And that is a good move on BM's part. Hell they want to sell cameras. Everyone, including Canon has changed their Color Science in the last 4 to 5 years. Even Arri had to moving to true 4K. They go with what is in at the time. And a more Pure look Is in like it or not. And I think most people like it.

44 minutes ago, Jim Giberti said:

Gut reactions are by definition spontaneous...not based on actual experience of the thing effecting your gut.

There are always quick and emotional responses online to pretty much everything, and definitely in this field.

My head tells me to trust the team that got us here and the pros who are speaking with confidence and praise regarding their hands on experiences.

As a music producer I was part of a blind test of engineers that tried to differentiate, also a similar test with dozens of engineers who swore by analog tube preamps versus digital.

I'll let you guess what the blind tests proved.

Hint, some of the analog manufacturers were present for the test and not only couldn't they guess what was recorded on analog vs digital - they couldn't idenitfy their own (very expensive) tube preamps.

A lot like Coppola choosing the GH2 over the Alexa in the Zacuto shoot out.

You believe what you want. I was there from the start. And for pure frequency response sure CCD wins. But something having too much does not mean too good. CCD's to me were eyeopening when they first came out, but ended up being brash, in your face. But my tapes and records, even with hiss and pops were, well, they were more relaxing, more enjoyable. Just more laid back. Kind of the reason I want to listen to music.

Now if you want to listen to Headbanger stuff, I do at times, sure probably CCD works better for that. But I am a Blues, Jazz man and I like that a bit more subtle to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Jim Giberti said:

Gut reactions are by definition spontaneous...not based on actual experience of the thing effecting your gut.

There are always quick and emotional responses online to pretty much everything, and definitely in this field.

My head tells me to trust the team that got us here and the pros who are speaking with confidence and praise regarding their hands on experiences.

The image making business is reliant on gut reaction. When I watch a film or listen to music or taste food, I have an immediate reaction to it. I'm certainly not thinking about the team of pros behind it or why they say I should like it. 

Seems like what you're really saying is 'you might not like it now but you'll get used to it'.   

Actually I don't dislike it (otherwise I would cancel my order) and I am used to it because that super sharp, super real style of imagery has been around for a while now. In fact BMDs take on it with this camera is a lot better than most. I just wish the image from the sensor was a little more organic looking out of the box. That's all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

Sorry to ruin your day, but it does! It is WAY better.

You mean magnetic tape compared to CD audio? Scientifically, you can't hear the difference.
 

1 hour ago, Kieran said:

The image making business is reliant on gut reaction.


No it's not. The film making business is about careful planning and polish as is the case with making food. Film and food consumption are about gut reactions... the second more literally than the first.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Myownfriend said:

You mean magnetic tape compared to CD audio? Scientifically, you can't hear the difference.
 

I am not talking about state of the art Analog stuff. I am talking old tapes I have had for years, records I have used for years, on systems that are heck 30 years old or more. They probably sound like shit compared to CDs. But that is what I grew up with, and the best sound to me by far. I don't want to hear a perfect sounding blues song form the 20's! They never sounded like that when it was recorded. It was recorded to sound guttural, not clean as hell.

It is the same crap with most film movies you see. They have been Digitally restored and  Digitally enhanced. Ergo they look a Lot better than they did when I saw them in a real movie theater 50 years ago. But I don't think they are better. I say they are worse. They are too perfect, sterile, no flaws. It wasn't like that and the mood of it changed. You loose that gut feeling of pain and stress. It just looks like some kind of perfect stuff. The emotion of the Film Stock has changed. It has Morphed into something different.

It's like this new PK4 versus the Pocket. I know we have not seen enough footage yet, but it is not going to look the same, ever. Every circuit in the path has been massaged to try and be perfect, more headroom, better low light ability, it is just going to be cleaner, not gritty like the other one. Not some funky Morie coloring at times. less overall noise, on and on.

It's like going from a Tube Guitar amp to a Transistor amp. It will be cleaner but not as smooth, not as mellow. It Will be different. And most amps now are transistor, or just have One 12AX7 in it to add a bit of tube sound in the preamp section at best. Are they bad, no, are they better, well that has a lot to do with how old you are, and what you remember what a amp Used to sound like. Back to my just because it is new does not always make it better, at least to an old turd like me.

When you get old you look back on the stuff that made you happy, made you smile. And somehow I don't think this PK4 is going to do that compared to the original. But time will tell. But yeah usability this new one will put the old one to shame. So yeah it is a plus for sure on that part.

I guess maybe Andrew will be able to sell a Pro LuT to make the new one look like the old one. Win, Win.

 

too old.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I formed my own opinion before reading the recent posts in this thread and my opinion based on the three videos Blackmagic has posted initially is that this thing does not deliver in the ways we all expect a Blackmagic camera to deliver. 

Its not bad at all and if Sony put out a camera that looked this good we would all be over the moon. 

But as a former BMCC 2.5k owner and BMPCC owner/ operator I can tell you flat out that this BMPCC 4K sensor is not looking as “Alexa like” as literally ALL of Blackmagics other cameras. 

It has seemed since day one that the goal of Blackmagic cameras was to emulate Alexa as much as possible. I’m not seeing that with the bmpcc4k and I think that’s why everyone is so confused. It’s not what we expect. 

It’s not bad, but it’s not what we expected. 

I can’t wait to get my hands on one and do some of my own proper tests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×