Jump to content
Yurolov

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Álex Montoya said:

I love the image coming off the C200, but it is a 7500$ camera.

 

The Pocket 4K is a 1000$ cinema camera, with Resolve, a beefy 19mm wide sensor, very nice codecs, TC, mini canon, full HDMI, and it's small and has nice color, latitude and sensitivity. For me, doing mainly fiction work, is a no brainer.

I agree with you it is not bad for the price. But isn't it $1300? I don't think there is a package that does not include the software. As for timecode, I think most cameras can input a timecode signal to an audio channel?

For me, I would be more excited if the new camera had an updated version of the original pocket's sensor. The old camera felt more unique. Am I alone in this thinking?

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
5 minutes ago, DBounce said:

The old camera felt more unique. Am I alone in this thinking?

The only DNG I've seen from the new one is from the biking footage. And it reminded me A LOT of the pocket's image. I can't say for sure yet as I've only seen ONE scene from another person's pre production model. But yeah, I don't know how you can be so sure yet when you're basing it on footage mostly seen compressed by youtube and graded by who knows what. We just have to wait and see until more people get their hands on the camera and actually start shooting in all kinds of environments and circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vast majority of hobbyists and vloggers will get better results with a GH5/S or XT-3 than the 4K Pocket. Just like the vast majority of them got better results with a GH3, 5D3 etc than the original Pocket and the endless ‘organic retro lut’ grades that abounded with that camera. Although Blackmagic are trying to aim this camera at a broader market that the Ursa 4.6k/Pro, I don’t think it is the right solution for people who don’t use Davinci in their workflow.

BM have tried to simplify things for users with the Gen4 colour science but they overestimate the average person’s interest in correctly white balancing (even in post), using more than one node, appropriate lift/gamma/gain and selective sharpening etc. The fact that this camera has a much higher quality ceiling than everything else under $3k doesn’t mean it will play out that way in most situations.

It is in that tricky space between being able to cut seamlessly with an ARRI or Ursa Mini Pro(which looks fantastic with Gen4 colour) and looking potentially worse than consumer cams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is way to early to say how the new PK4 really looks. I think the Concert video on the previous page looked pretty damn good. And I don't think it is fair to compare it to the original Pocket using 4K. But yeah I have been a bit underwhelmed also. But for the money I see it as a no brainer. With the BRaw thingy it will be a pretty powerful tool.

But it really is not that much cheaper now than you can get a new GH5 for or the Fuji X-T3. So it is not as good of a bargain as it started out being. It's not like you can't do ProRes with a GH5, GH5s if you Want that to happen. I think if you are really serious about this stuff you would probably have the new Atomos Ninja V anyway, even just for as a monitor. Probably in truth going to need one for the PK4 to be able to see a screen outdoors.. But it is nice to have all these choices at a reasonable price point these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, sfc said:

The vast majority of hobbyists and vloggers will get better results with a GH5/S or XT-3 than the 4K Pocket. Just like the vast majority of them got better results with a GH3, 5D3 etc than the original Pocket and the endless ‘organic retro lut’ grades that abounded with that camera. Although Blackmagic are trying to aim this camera at a broader market that the Ursa 4.6k/Pro, I don’t think it is the right solution for people who don’t use Davinci in their workflow.

BM have tried to simplify things for users with the Gen4 colour science but they overestimate the average person’s interest in correctly white balancing (even in post), using more than one node, appropriate lift/gamma/gain and selective sharpening etc. The fact that this camera has a much higher quality ceiling than everything else under $3k doesn’t mean it will play out that way in most situations.

It is in that tricky space between being able to cut seamlessly with an ARRI or Ursa Mini Pro(which looks fantastic with Gen4 colour) and looking potentially worse than consumer cams. 

Absolutely my thoughts.  This camera will sort the men from the boys.  I've seen footage that could go head to head with ARRI and Ursa as you say, but I've also seen footage that has more of a video look than a 8 year old apsc cannon dslr (way more infact).    The correct settings and grading will make all the difference.  And obviously the quality of the cinematography also.  One thing about a lower price point is that it makes it more accessible to more amateurs, so the lower average quality of craftmanship might make the camera seem worse than it would do otherwise compared to more expensive cameras.

Share this post


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

Exposure looks different in those shots also. So there is that. Honestly, with a little care they would look pretty dam well indistinguishable. 

This dude has no idea what he's doing. Nothing is done correctly for a real test. Not even his WB is even.

Share this post


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

I agree with you it is not bad for the price. But isn't it $1300? I don't think there is a package that does not include the software. As for timecode, I think most cameras can input a timecode signal to an audio channel?

For me, I would be more excited if the new camera had an updated version of the original pocket's sensor. The old camera felt more unique. Am I alone in this thinking?

what I see from tests is GH5S , the old pocket has something far better dynamic range and better handles the highs , I have GH5 and old BMPCC.

Share this post


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

The vast majority of hobbyists and vloggers will get better results with a GH5/S or XT-3 than the 4K Pocket. Just like the vast majority of them got better results with a GH3, 5D3 etc than the original Pocket and the endless ‘organic retro lut’ grades that abounded with that camera. Although Blackmagic are trying to aim this camera at a broader market that the Ursa 4.6k/Pro, I don’t think it is the right solution for people who don’t use Davinci in their workflow.

BM have tried to simplify things for users with the Gen4 colour science but they overestimate the average person’s interest in correctly white balancing (even in post), using more than one node, appropriate lift/gamma/gain and selective sharpening etc. The fact that this camera has a much higher quality ceiling than everything else under $3k doesn’t mean it will play out that way in most situations.

It is in that tricky space between being able to cut seamlessly with an ARRI or Ursa Mini Pro(which looks fantastic with Gen4 colour) and looking potentially worse than consumer cams. 

I don't know people tend to grade GH5 and Sony footage really poorly too and it often comes out worse then BM footage because neither camera has that great of color to begin with and the codecs are more limited. 

Share this post


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

Exposure looks different in those shots also. So there is that. Honestly, with a little care they would look pretty dam well indistinguishable. 

 

1 hour ago, Turboguard said:

This dude has no idea what he's doing. Nothing is done correctly for a real test. Not even his WB is even.

 

Indeed. Look at the exposure or those skin tones...

Gives an idea on the tool, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, GreekBeast said:

Why would you even compare a professional cinema camera to a pocket $1k camera?

Greeks do agree here!

Honestly, bringing the P4k into the same conversation with the C200 says more for Canon than BM, and it is no good.

C200 is still in no man's land, and it costs 9000euros here. BM is exhibiting how a enthousiast's/hobbyist camera is done, while Canon how a pro camera isn't..

Edit: GH5S is the best cheap Panasonic video camera in my opinion. I am not sure that the comparison is bad for the P4K.

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...