Jump to content

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Ehetyz said:

So I've been shooting a new mockumentary/short movie where I'm using both the URSA Mini 4.6K and the Pocket 4K side by side, for interviews etc. Did some preliminary tests on grading the footage today, and they match quite nicely. Nothing scientific (and not all 100% going for cinematic since it is a mockumentary) about this one so it's not as if you can take it as a direct comparison - but I think some of you might find it interesting. Both cameras were at 800ISO (which theoretically is sub-optimal ISO for the Pocket but eh) and shooting at 4K Prores HQ, only difference in grading is that tint is set to -8 on the URSA and 0 on the pocket.

test_1.2.1.thumb.jpg.ab61e20a8be6827a8ad7d4bad2cab10d.jpg

 

test_1_27.1.thumb.jpg.b67d9ab439d12c00e5e60d0fb2e75539.jpg

Top one is Pocket, bottom one URSA.

Looking at them full-res, the most obvious difference is that yes, the Pocket is sharper. I may have mistaken about in-camera sharpening in Prores - on the other hand, they have drastically different lenses too; Pocket is running on Sigma 18-35 at 1.8 and a speedbooster while URSA was shooting with a Takumar 50/1.2 which is quite milky by nature.

Anyways, it's proving to be a nice b-cam for the big bro Ursa.

Well now I want to see how the 18-35mm looks on the Ursa because it does indeed look nice with the P4K. Nice work matching them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My dear erstwhile member can you please stop attacking John Brawley now. I have long since given up on camera forum arguments so might not be completely up on who is right and who is wrong-evil /

I like the pictures. A lot.  This camera will probably replace the micro cinema camera for me as it’s not much bigger and is much easier to work with.  I didn’t feel as strongly about the 4K

What a shame. Who are these "deep state" BMD insiders that are here pushing an agenda ? Myself and Hook.  Who else ?  What do you guys think, there's a plot and conspiracy ?  You guys don't wat t

Posted Images

26 minutes ago, mercer said:

How is the Takumar on the P4K in ProRes?

It's surprisingly one of the better performing lenses on it despite the huge aperture. Haven't really noticed much of a difference or increase in aberrations between P4K and Ursa on it. Mayyybe a bit more flare, but on the lens itself flaring on it is pretty controlled so it hasn't been distracting so far. It's not as sharp as new lenses in any form unless stopped down but I love the vintage look.

Of the rest of my daily use lenses, the other Takumars perform pretty well. The Samyangs seem to fare the worst. They're prone to flaring and washed out look as-is and for some reason especially the 24 1.4 flares like crazy. Absolutely needs the lens hood at all times. Also a whole bunch of lenses I don't use as often are yet to be tested with the speedbooster/P4K combo.

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

So I've been shooting a new mockumentary/short movie where I'm using both the URSA Mini 4.6K and the Pocket 4K side by side, for interviews etc. Did some preliminary tests on grading the footage today, and they match quite nicely. Nothing scientific (and not all 100% going for cinematic since it is a mockumentary) about this one so it's not as if you can take it as a direct comparison - but I think some of you might find it interesting. Both cameras were at 800ISO (which theoretically is sub-optimal ISO for the Pocket but eh) and shooting at 4K Prores HQ, only difference in grading is that tint is set to -8 on the URSA and 0 on the pocket.

test_1.2.1.thumb.jpg.ab61e20a8be6827a8ad7d4bad2cab10d.jpg

 

test_1_27.1.thumb.jpg.b67d9ab439d12c00e5e60d0fb2e75539.jpg

Top one is Pocket, bottom one URSA.

Looking at them full-res, the most obvious difference is that yes, the Pocket is sharper. I may have mistaken about in-camera sharpening in Prores - on the other hand, they have drastically different lenses too; Pocket is running on Sigma 18-35 at 1.8 and a speedbooster while URSA was shooting with a Takumar 50/1.2 which is quite milky by nature.

Anyways, it's proving to be a nice b-cam for the big bro Ursa.

Shots look nice.
Yh. Using ProRes the P4K definitely sharpens despite it being turned off.
Also noise reduction is turned which eliminates some fine detail and texture sadly.

Would recommend shooting RAW all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ehetyz @mercer My Takumar 55 1.8 arrived yesterday and I compared it to my Helios and found some interesting results.  Wide open the Helios was tack sharp (ha ha) in the very centre but got crazy soft on the edges (even with the 2x crop of MFT) and the Tak was considerably softer but had the same level of sharpness / bloom / flare across the whole frame.  By F4 they were getting similar, but the character of the softness was quite different.

I'll do some more tests and post a little write-up in the lenses thread when I'm done.  I've still got some lenses on the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just tested my Olympus 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5 Zuiko four-thirds lens on the Pocket 4K.  It has a cheap electronic adapter that works on the Panasonic micro-four-thirds cameras I have tried it on.  However, I cannot focus this lens on the Pocket 4K.  I can turn the focus ring but nothing happens. The adapter does not appear to work on the 4K. Has anyone had success with four-thirds lenses and electronic adapters on the Pocket 4K?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, deezid said:

Shots look nice.
Yh. Using ProRes the P4K definitely sharpens despite it being turned off.
Also noise reduction is turned which eliminates some fine detail and texture sadly.

Would recommend shooting RAW all the time.

Shooting prores in this one because of the amount of footage we're getting. Lots of improvisation with cameras rolling several minutes at a time so RAW isn't practical.

When I do more planned, cinematic stuff I always use RAW.

@Stathman Noticed that myself as well. Needs a little more balancing but like I said, this is just a pretty rudimentary test. Some of the tone is from the angle the light is bouncing (Pocket is getting more of the Edison light in its frame) but yeah, I agree, in this case the P4K looks nicer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I am sure RAW is better but the prores looks dang good. Hard to believe the output you get for 1000 bucks. 

I did some brief tests of RAW vs ProRes when I first got my P4k and apart from the RAW having more noise I couldn't see a whole lot of difference and certainly resolution didn't look obviously better in RAW. 

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

I did some brief tests of RAW vs ProRes when I first got my P4k and apart from the RAW having more noise I couldn't see a whole lot of difference and certainly resolution didn't look obviously better in RAW. 

Were you zooming in 500%? You aren't a true artist unless you do. ?

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

ProRes HQ is great on the P4K.

BM is using an enhanced debayering vs previous cams.

The image is absolutely great and if you nail your WB, there's no real practical need to shoot with anything else.

It's also nice to shoot to simple San Disk Extreme SD cards for everything.

You can shoot 4K ProRes HQ to the SanDisk Extreme SD cards?!?

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

You can shoot 4K ProRes HQ to the SanDisk Extreme SD cards?!?

LOL...I had the *exact* same thoughts. I have the 1TB T5 drives on all three of my P4Ks. I am going to grab my V30 and V60 SD cards tomorrow and see if I can get Prores 422 to work with them. That would be a great backup. I thought that I remembered the charts saying I needed V90 cards to save 422 (which I don't have...).

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mercer said:

You can shoot 4K ProRes HQ to the SanDisk Extreme SD cards?!?

Can't say about Sandisk but I have a Lexar professional 1000x 64 gig SD card as a backup/overflow card in mine. It can't do high frame rates but it works as sort of a safety buffer if the CF card runs out mid-shot. I think it might cut out eventually on 25fps at some point though.

Also to join the choir with Jim Giberti, the prores HQ is extremely good. Gives you plenty of data to work with.

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...