Jump to content
Yurolov

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Snuff said:

Blackmagic pocket cinema camera 4k test (lowlight) with Panasonic 12-35 f.2.8 first gen (4K DCI Raw Lossless iso 1250 f2.8) shot with only one photography guide light + soft box

 

BMP4K Test.mov_snapshot_00.11_[2018.10.22_17.28.18].png

BMP4K Test.mov_snapshot_00.23_[2018.10.22_17.25.51].png

Out of likes. Wow that is some thick looking footage. Can't complain about that.

 

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
22 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

And with a lot of $$$$$$ spent on lights.

And a lot of time spent on set

And time = $$$ , especially when you're using skilled professional craftsmen. 

 

21 hours ago, Turboguard said:

I will try more and see what my median for 60fps is.

 

edit: you’re right, the second I took it outside and shot in sunlight, it stops under 10sec. So with T5 you can at least do 30fps 4K DCI without having to worry.


Trying panning the camera back and forth on a long lens, in front of leafy trees on a windy day. That could impact at what point the drive cuts out.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mercer Has anyone given you the 1080p tests you were looking for a while ago? If all goes to plan, my camera arrives tomorrow, so I'll happily share some OG files. RAW, ProRes, Film, Video, Extended, 24/25/30/50/60/120 you name it.

I'm also going to take it for a walk on Wednesday (hopefully) so will share a bunch of footage and audio samples then too.

If anyone else would like something specific - apart from water testing - let me know and I'll do my best.

 

Share this post


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

Blackmagic pocket cinema camera 4k test (lowlight) with Panasonic 12-35 f.2.8 first gen (4K DCI Raw Lossless iso 1250 f2.8) shot with only one photography guide light + soft box

 

BMP4K Test.mov_snapshot_00.11_[2018.10.22_17.28.18].png

BMP4K Test.mov_snapshot_00.23_[2018.10.22_17.25.51].png

Looks really nice, but when you bring the levels back up, you start to see those highlights that I keep seeing in the P4K footage. If you add a bit of a shoulder, you lose detail but it smooths out the highlights. You probably lose a stop of DR as well. 

I'm not a colorist, but the c300ii I use often looks closer to the version with the curve, right out of the camera. I find the OG pocket to similar in that regard. The highlights have a lot of roll off.

Exposure.jpg

Highlight_Curve.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I am confused as heck. XT2 higher dynamic range then XT3??

If you compare their dynamic range testing over the last few years of the Same camera, you'll probably lose your sanity. Apart from contradicting everyone else, they contradict themselves too, many times over. And I don't think it's their fault TBO. It may have to do with the voltage and some kind of bulb or tube issued with their equipment. 😁😁😁

Share this post


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

Would be interesting to see the pocket 4K in here since someone on this thread claims the OG pocket has better dynamic range. I forget who it was.

It's me. And yes, would love to see that, A73 in HLG is missing as well. The chart seems quite accurate to me, the FS7 is definitely quite impressive in terms of dynamic range, I just don't like what the processing does to its image. RAW is amazing though.

8 hours ago, Snuff said:

Blackmagic pocket cinema camera 4k test (lowlight) with Panasonic 12-35 f.2.8 first gen (4K DCI Raw Lossless iso 1250 f2.8) shot with only one photography guide light + soft box

 

BMP4K Test.mov_snapshot_00.11_[2018.10.22_17.28.18].png

BMP4K Test.mov_snapshot_00.23_[2018.10.22_17.25.51].png

Wow, looks great. Seems like Pocket 4K footage shows way more low contrast texture than the X-T3 does which looks flat in many cases.

Share this post


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

Looks really nice, but when you bring the levels back up, you start to see those highlights that I keep seeing in the P4K footage. If you add a bit of a shoulder, you lose detail but it smooths out the highlights. You probably lose a stop of DR as well. 

I'm not a colorist, but the c300ii I use often looks closer to the version with the curve, right out of the camera. I find the OG pocket to similar in that regard. The highlights have a lot of roll off.

 

 

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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, helium said:

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.

 

It's a 10mb 4k png still... Yes, I think a lot can be revealed about the image when raising the gamma slightly. The file is basically flat anyway...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been impressed at how much I've been able to lift the blacks and mids with no noise on a number of challenging scenes.

One shoot was brilliant bright fall light streaming through an autumn canopy for an all day mountain bike segment.

The light and contrast changed constantly with no time to adjust even with a couple of grips with bounces.

Bottom line, I don't even think about ETTR with this. It's a totally different image/negative.

Very clean very gradeable - and all we've shot so far is in ProRes HQ UHD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, IronFilm said:


Cinema5D has been so far off the mark in the past, why should we start to believe them now?
 

Looks kind of realistic to me for what they have tested. But I would need to see more cameras to be convinced. The Arri sounds about right in a real life situation. Most cameras are overrated, so no surprise.

Sure Cinema5D may seem crazy. So does DXO at times. But the one thing they have going for them is they use the same test on Every camera they test. So are they real values? Maybe not. But they do show who is better and worse on their tests. Right or wrong they are all subjected to the same standards. So it will prove the best camera and the worse camera no matter the truthful outcome on DR stats. They are both controlled tests. So I can believe who is on top and who is not.

And I don't think anyone on here can be surprised by the outcomes. Better Codecs,  better Data rates, better Bit depths  are going to be on top, old or new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Looks kind of realistic to me for what they have tested. But I would need to see more cameras to be convinced. The Arri sounds about right in a real life situation. Most cameras are overrated, so no surprise.

Sure Cinema5D may seem crazy. So does DXO at times. 

It's beyond blasphemous comparing DXO Labs with Cinama5D. Cinema5D for the SAME CAMERA will show 3 different rantings in dynamic range, given enough time. I had even posted proof of this in one of the discussion threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sanveer said:

It's beyond blasphemous comparing DXO Labs with Cinama5D. Cinema5D for the SAME CAMERA will show 3 different rantings in dynamic range, given enough time. I had even posted proof of this in one of the discussion threads.

I will admit Cinama5D is all over the place, but their DR rating to me are more realistic than most. DXO is all about Photos. Cinema5D is all about Video. Photo DR is always easily 1 1/2 stops to 2 stops higher than video DR because of Bit Depth.

And yeah they have changed the way they test now from years ago. So it is not going to seem the same. They bought some really good, expensive as hell equipment to test it with now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I will admit Cinama5D is all over the place, but their DR rating to me are more realistic than most. DXO is all about Photos. Cinema5D is all about Video. Photo DR is always easily 1 1/2 stops to 2 stops higher than video DR because of Bit Depth.

And yeah they have changed the way they test now from years ago. So it is not going to seem the same. They bought some really good, expensive as hell equipment to test it with now.

I hope there is some consistency with their testing even if they are wrong. 

To give credit where it's due, I actually check their rating and comments regarding dynamic range whenever I am down. It makes me laugh till my eyes water. Hopefully they don't stop that. They're probably doing all sorts of public service. 

Share this post


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

I hope there is some consistency with their testing even if they are wrong. 

To give credit where it's due, I actually check their rating and comments regarding dynamic range whenever I am down. It makes me laugh till my eyes water. Hopefully they don't stop that. They're probably doing all sorts of public service. 

So what results do you think are way off? What website has realistic DR ratings in Video Mode? Surely you don't believe the Manufacturers Hype?

Share this post


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

Cinema5D for the SAME CAMERA will show 3 different rantings in dynamic range, given enough time. I had even posted proof of this in one of the discussion threads.

I remember that in the Z Cam thread. And since I want to get to the bottom of this, and had some time, I gathered every Cinema5D dynamic range test I could find. I found that they are actually very consistent*, within a half stop of every other measurement for a given camera. For example, the Ursa Mini 4K is pegged at 8.5 in one chart, and 9 in another. But overall, quite consistent*.

In one post, they mention a drastic difference after an Imatest update--this was in 2014, on their a5100 test. I didn't find any other tests from 2014 or earlier.

 

* EXCEPT: there's something really screwy going on with their A7sII tests. Every camera is consistent, except the A7sII. What could be going on? The numbers I found are:

Slog2: 11.9, 11.6, 10.6, and 10.6

Slog3: 12.4, 12.1, 12, 12, 12, 10.6

Perhaps sometime at some point typed 10.6 instead of 11.6, and that number was carried into the most recent lab result? Perhaps the last Slog3 number is also mistakenly the Slog2 number? But so far that camera is the only anomaly I know of.

I've included the excel doc I recorded the data in. If I've missed any articles, or made any mistakes, let me know!

C5D DR Tests.xlsx

 

EDIT: Sometimes, I pulled numbers from within the article and they'd say "just over 12" or "just under 12." In these cases, I would add or subtract a tenth of a stop, e.g. 12.1 or 11.9 in my chart.

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...