Jump to content
Yurolov

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JordanWright said:

Don't buy this card. The write speed is only 160mb/s. These are the data rates specified in the Tech Specs for this camera on the BMD  website. These are also based in 30fps recordings, so basically double it for 60p.

4096 x 2160
CinemaDNG RAW - 272 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 3:1 - 129 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 4:1 - 97 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 HQ - 117.88 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 - 78.63 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 LT - 54.63 MB/s
Apple ProRes Proxy - 24.25 MB/s

3840 x 2160
CinemaDNG RAW - 255 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 3:1 - 122 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 4:1 - 92 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 HQ - 110 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 - 73.6 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 LT - 51 MB/s
Apple ProRes Proxy - 22.4 MB/s

 

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

That's a pretty strong accusation to accuse a brand of buying factory rejects.  Do you have proof of this? Sure the cards did not perform as advertised and you maybe had to buy a few and return the slow ones, but those cards are half the price of everyone else.  Biwin was also really cheap, but they don't seem to be easy to buy anymore.

But if you really want to find the cheapest, at $208 for 256gb, this is the cheapest I can find on the internet.

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/ATOMOS-NINJA-256GB-CFAST-2-0-Memory-Cards-240GB-SSD-Hard-Memory-Disk-for-4K-HD/32523607737.html?spm=2114.search0104.3.67.76886aa7oHHkZw&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_1_10152_10151_10065_10344_10130_10068_10324_10547_10342_10325_10546_10343_10340_10548_10341_10545_10696_10084_10083_10618_10307_10059_100031_10103_10624_10623_10622_10621_10620,searchweb201603_1,ppcSwitch_5&algo_expid=449fee53-93a1-4a6d-a8b6-94b429018733-10&algo_pvid=449fee53-93a1-4a6d-a8b6-94b429018733&transAbTest=ae803_2&priceBeautifyAB=0

 

There are no reviews of the goldendisk brand so I don't know anything about the specs or reliability.

Share this post


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

This seems like the best card, speed for money wise. I also like that they print the read and write on the face - makes me trust them somehow. At least a lot more than those who hide their speeds. Reviews are also very good.

image.png.fc572addc38ed6c8665d7460073c42a1.png

https://www.mymemory.co.uk/integral-128gb-ultimapro-x2-cfast-2-0-card-550mb-s.html

I see they have 32GB | 64GB | 128GB. No 256GB one, but the price is right if they really work as advertised.

Share this post


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

Do you have proof of this?

Sorry.  It's been common knowledge for over half a decade.  You'll just have to google around if you want to see the myriad of posts concerning the matter.  I certainly was not the originator of the story.  Unlike you I am not 1000% certain about everything I post.  Years ago the online forum consensus was there was something funky with their supply chain.  What the specific issue was is really irrelevant.  Fill in whatever reason makes you happy.  The fact was a decent number of customers were not getting advertised speeds and they had to buy and exchange.  That's the main take home message.

And as I stated in my original post 100% of my experience and knowledge of the brand was from years ago and regarded CompactFlash.  I have not heard anything regarding Cfast 2.0 or any product in 2018.

I was just providing some free information so people can do their own research and make an informed decision.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but maybe they're just buying the memory from the same places that the other guys do and have lesser quality control? RED, for example, sources their SSD's from multiple companies.

The variance in speed of the compact flash could be due to the different companies where they get their memory from.

https://www.amazon.com/FreeTail-EVOKE-Memory-VPG-130-FTCF256A37/dp/B074PDD1B6/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1532299720&sr=1-3&keywords=cfast+2.0+256gb#customerReviews

Ok this one is even cheaper.  It's 199.99 on Amazon for 256gb.  A lot of these brands seem to be going on sale or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Don't buy this card. The write speed is only 160mb/s. These are the data rates specified in the Tech Specs for this camera on the BMD  website. These are also based in 30fps recordings, so basically double it for 60p.

I own two of the Transcend 128GB CFast 2.0 cards.  I don't know if they're a different model to the link posted, but mine both say CFX650.

Anyway, card #1:

591965462_ScreenShot2018-07-23at11_42_23am.thumb.png.c02b8f4a5c13ce04c75eb58f00f4f589.png

Card #2:

2121169672_ScreenShot2018-07-23at11_44_19am.thumb.png.287accf15d2b58811d7491de3e361310.png

Not quite enough for 4K60 at RAW uncompressed, but can do 4K30 RAW and can do 4K60 RAW 3:1 compression.

IIRC someone said that most commercial productions (TV I think) find shooting Prores sufficient quality and don't need RAW.  Especially if you're shooting 4K for a 1080 output.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Brawley said that and it's true. 90% of American TV shows seem to be shot on the Alexa in 1080p Prores 4:4:4.  Very few people do RAW or 4K, and if they do 4K it's usually Sony cameras shooting XAVC.  Only times you see raw are very high-end TV shows and RED shows for Netflix.  With now the Alexa LF, I'm sure a lot of shows will switch back to Arri.

It's not because of storage either because a lot of productions are fine with shooting even prores XQ, it's the extra costs of shooting RAW which people don't like.

I work in VFX where you occasionally will have shots where you push the Prores files harder than you ever would in grading and I generally see no issues.

Even when I do greenscreen stuff, the Alexa does 4:2:2 HQ during slow motion shots, and even then, those files are pretty robust too.

Share this post


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

I own two of the Transcend 128GB CFast 2.0 cards.  I don't know if they're a different model to the link posted, but mine both say CFX650.

Fair enough, I was just going by the product details. Seems strange to under estimate the speed so much haha. 

Screen Shot 2018-07-23 at 07.19.35.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

John Brawley said that and it's true. 90% of American TV shows seem to be shot on the Alexa in 1080p Prores 4:4:4.  Very few people do RAW or 4K, and if they do 4K it's usually Sony cameras shooting XAVC.  Only times you see raw are very high-end TV shows and RED shows for Netflix.  With now the Alexa LF, I'm sure a lot of shows will switch back to Arri.

It's not because of storage either because a lot of productions are fine with shooting even prores XQ, it's the extra costs of shooting RAW which people don't like.

I work in VFX where you occasionally will have shots where you push the Prores files harder than you ever would in grading and I generally see no issues.

Even when I do greenscreen stuff, the Alexa does 4:2:2 HQ during slow motion shots, and even then, those files are pretty robust too.

Even high end TVC's don't shoot RAW a lot of the time. Mainly ProRes4444 and the VFX bunch are more than happy with it. This is why I just dont get why people are wanting to record uncompressed RAW on Blackmagic Cameras. Don't get me wrong, RAW is great but 3 or 4:1 compressed RAW is plenty for everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from a few RED shoots (which are doing a heavy ratio of compression with theirs anyway, so not exactly a fair example. Probably like 12:1 or higher ) I can't even think of a shoot I've been on recently that did raw.

Raw just doesn't happen out there as often as many forum goers think. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Fair enough, I was just going by the product details. Seems strange to under estimate the speed so much haha. 

Yeah, I saw that and wondered if it was a different model, which is why I mentioned the model number on mine.

On looking a bit further the CFX650 seems to be a better model with the performance I got in my tests: https://www.transcend-info.com/Products/No-672

Something to look out for when purchasing I guess!

2 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

There's maximum speed then there's minimum speed.  Not all cards can sustain the max speed for extended recording.  SD cards are particularly bad at this, that's why V60 and V90 standards exist.

If there are any tests you'd like me to perform just ask.

47 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Raw just doesn't happen out there as often as many forum goers think. 

Just people recording their kids and pets then...  I guess if you already own some m43 lenses then $1300 is worth it to have 4K 60P in RAW of Mr Mittens!!!

Share this post


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

Raw just doesn't happen out there as often as many forum goers think. 

34 minutes ago, kye said:

4K 60P in RAW of Mr Mittens!!!

2 hours ago, Tone1k said:

It's not because of storage either because a lot of productions are fine with shooting even prores XQ, it's the extra costs of shooting RAW which people don't like.

I wonder how that's going to change once ProRes RAW is more available and has been tested a bit more. From my understanding, the file sizes aren't much different to normal ProRes options, and the workflow should be much easier that working with CinemaDNGs once more editing software is updated to work with it. I guess it'll be like working with "hyper-LOG". 😅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anaconda_ said:

I wonder how that's going to change once ProRes RAW is more available and has been tested a bit more. From my understanding, the file sizes aren't much different to normal ProRes options, and the workflow should be much easier that working with CinemaDNGs once more editing software is updated to work with it. I guess it'll be like working with "hyper-LOG". 😅

I'm curious to understand a bit more about how RAW differs to Prores in post.

To preface this, I'm a Resolve user and I don't know much about PP or FCPX, so maybe there are larger differences there?

In terms of Resolve, when you shoot DNG sequences:

  • the sequence appears in the media browser and other windows as one item, the same as a clip, and behaves like one throughout
  • the RAW panel is available (which isn't for other file formats obviously) but I think the defaults are just to defer to the camera metadata, so you don't have to change anything here if you don't need / want to (this is the part I'm less familiar with so maybe there are things you need to do here?)
  • everything else behaves the same way a clip would

Assuming the above is correct and I'm not missing something, where is the extra difficulty?

Is it in extra processing power required to debayer the files perhaps?  Or does PP / FCPX not handle image sequences as clips?

People online talk about image sequences from time lapses as an extra bother because you have 'lots of files' or 'you have an extra step to combine them' but in Resolve that's completely automated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kye said:

I'm curious to understand a bit more about how RAW differs to Prores in post.

To preface this, I'm a Resolve user and I don't know much about PP or FCPX, so maybe there are larger differences there?

In terms of Resolve, when you shoot DNG sequences:

  • the sequence appears in the media browser and other windows as one item, the same as a clip, and behaves like one throughout
  • the RAW panel is available (which isn't for other file formats obviously) but I think the defaults are just to defer to the camera metadata, so you don't have to change anything here if you don't need / want to (this is the part I'm less familiar with so maybe there are things you need to do here?)
  • everything else behaves the same way a clip would

Assuming the above is correct and I'm not missing something, where is the extra difficulty?

Is it in extra processing power required to debayer the files perhaps?  Or does PP / FCPX not handle image sequences as clips?

People online talk about image sequences from time lapses as an extra bother because you have 'lots of files' or 'you have an extra step to combine them' but in Resolve that's completely automated.

The issue is logistics. 

The show I’m on now shoots in Atlanta but editorial is in LA.

Dailies needs to be available next morning synced and ready to edit.

We shoot three cameras on almost every scene.

We shoot about two hours per camera per day of footage.

Ar least once per episode we shoot 2 units so you can double that again. 

That’s a lot of footage that has to be graded, transcoded to DNX (Avid) and stored safely in three locations (archives).

Every day.  For weeks and weeks.

RAW data rates would swamp a production.  

The network I currently shoot for AIRS in 720 and masters at 1080.  They don’t need RAW.  There’s ZERO advantage, especially if you’re shooting a nice 12bit file like ProRes 444.

JB

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

The issue is logistics. 

The show I’m on now shoots in Atlanta but editorial is in LA.

Dailies needs to be available next morning synced and ready to edit.

We shoot three cameras on almost every scene.

We shoot about two hours per camera per day of footage.

Ar least once per episode we shoot 2 units so you can double that again. 

That’s a lot of footage that has to be graded, transcoded to DNX (Avid) and stored safely in three locations (archives).

Every day.  For weeks and weeks.

RAW data rates would swamp a production.  

The network I currently shoot for AIRS in 720 and masters at 1080.  They don’t need RAW.  There’s ZERO advantage, especially if you’re shooting a nice 12bit file like ProRes 444.

JB

 

 

 

 

Allow me to make an honest question then because something doesn't make sense to me and I'm afraid I might be missing something.

Don't storage rates also depend on the camera and the RAW format?

For instance if the shows you work on used exclusively the Ursa Mini Pro, how would Prores 444 UHD at 165 MB/s be a better choice than CinemaDNG RAW 4:1 at 135 MB/s?

Not only would you be saving space, you would also get higher resolution for re-framing and stabilizing among other things if needed.

To conclude my line of thought, couldn't you even say that what you claim about RAW is only true of the few cameras that only offer uncompressed RAW and no compressed RAW alternatives? Like the Arri Alexa cameras.

Thank you in advance for your input Mr. Brawley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @John Brawley that makes sense, and the data logistics would be significant.  However, I thought someone had mentioned that Prores was preferred even in situations where the data rates were similar?  I probably should have included it in my original question :)

Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, or perhaps that statement might have been in a different context?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, the Alexa only does uncompressed raw.  Nothing else.

Secondly, there's no internal pixel binning, so you have to record full sensor resolution to get the full sensor size.  Not the same as 1080p prores.

Thirdly, and a big problem is RAW is not as simple as prores.  So at least at the VFX studio I work, we recieve the prores reels directly from editorial.  Then we get the EDL, and we generate the plates necessary for the shots, directly from the EDL and original camera prores with the necessary handles. This would likely be DPX format.  This is a 100% automated process.  We then composite with the necessary changes.  Any intermediate "precomps" would then be rendered as 32-bit linear EXR, and finals are exported back out as Arri-log DPX which are then converted back to Prores and delivered to the editorial/color.

With RAW it's not as nice because we can no longer deliver back in the same format that we recieve.  AND there are so many settings, especially with something like REDCODE that it's likely someone else now has to generate the dpx plates for us as we can no longer do that.  The ISSUE is they're not a VFX house and they likely do not have automated tools that do this, so that means extra time and money.  And then you might run into other problems slowdowns on the post side of things.  RAW is nice but it's not so simple just to use it as it causes extra hassle.  Prores 4:4:4 on the Arri Alexa makes everything work like a well-oiled machine.

Lastly, a lot of people believe that you have to have 4:4:4 in order to get accurate green screen keys, but what if I let you in on a secret.  I don't always KEY greenscreens.  You'll never hear this from anyone else, but if you take a greenscreen shot and despill it to where it's just a person over a now grey background, you can then difference the despill and the greenscreen to get a sort of fake alpha channel.  Multiply your background image over your despilled greenscreen plate and mask it by the result of that "fake" alpha channel and you get 100% perfect edges with no compositing.  And then you just adjust the white and black point of your bg image until it has the right level of contrast and color.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this likely to apply to the Pocket 4K? In the video, he says although URSA Mini Pro 4.6k has a native ISO of 800, you'll get a cleaner, more malleable image at 400.

With the P4K's dual ISO of 800 and 1600, would it be reasonable at this time to assume that you're better off shooting at 400 and 1200?

Does this also apply to the GH5s, since it also has dual ISO?

(Disclaimer: I realise any responses are entirely hypothetical)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...