Jump to content

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K


Recommended Posts

  • 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

Nice to see a decent zoom lens on the Pocket 4k in the Phil Bloom video. To me the shooting with a good zoom lens allows me to use more of the language of film.

A couple of things that Phil could have mentioned, but it would have taken away from his pitch to sell multiples of each Fujinon zoom lens, is that you can get a m4/3 to E-mount adapter ring, though you would probably want to shoot no rails to make sure it is absolute stable.

Also, there are adapters that will allow Phil to go from a B4 broadcast lens to 35mm for mirrorless cameras. They do eat a number of stops of light, but it can be done and is particularly useful if you are looking for a long parfocal zoom lens.

For adapting B4 lens to the Pocket 4k the light loss is less and you could do it with an Abakus 132 and Olympus 1.4x m4/3 adapter for for slightly less that 2 stops of light loss, so  your 1.8f B4 would be a 3.32f over probably 60% of the zoom range. So 20x B4 Zoom lens would be a 12x parfocal zoom lens with 3.32f constant aperture... but there is the is issue of the sensor glass thickness, which means it is not a idea optical solution, but still many may find it useful slightly stopped down.

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

Nice shots, especially the first two.

Why 4:3?

Thanks Andrew!

Those are shots for a documentary featuring a lot on a single subject, so I guess that is the main reason.

Other than that, I'm a big fan of the work of the DP Robbie Ryan who has shot some fabulous stuff in the aspect ratio in my opinion! I believe he was a fan of the original pocket too...

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, CSolo said:

Noticed a large clump of sensor dust when I pointed camera at a computer monitor stopped all the way down.  

What approach are you folks using for sensor cleaning on the Pocket 4k?  

Didn't need it yet. AFAIK the usual one available for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2019 at 4:14 PM, webrunner5 said:

I have never said they are not a good, well maybe even great camera. It is that I am not into their more modern look, putting up with all the hassle with batteries, SSD's, etc I would rather have a GH5s that looks pretty much like the same output that works right out of the box. Now I have to admit that the new bRaw has a better, older style look to it, But I really don't want a camera like that that I have to have a Frankenstein rig for it. I might as well just buy a canon C100 and be done with it. I am like Mercer, I really don't Need 4K. Anything I shoot is just for the fun of it, not some magical pinnacle I have to reach. I am glad you are happy with it, but I am still not going to buy one.

I had a 6 camera event shoot yesterday. I used 3 of my GH5s cams and 3 of my P4K cams. Both cams are great, but they are quite different. The GH5s is a good bit better in low light (a stop or two). The GH5(s) cams are a good bit less "fiddly". You can pull them out and just shoot. I can even send the GH5 with a good lens with my wife (a great editor, but not a great camera person) and she can capture usable video footage. I can even set it to mostly auto mode for a novice user and I might get some usable video footage.

With the P4K's I have to worry about power and lots of other little things (like will the audio work right). The menus are very easy to use, but there are lots of things to think about while using it. I would really hesitate giving it to an inexperienced user. With all that said, the footage is lovely.

For my use, I find that I am using the P4K's more and more. I have even toyed with the idea of selling some of my GH5s cams. I am also seriously considering purchasing one of the new Blackmagic Ursa G2 cameras. I wouldn't have even considered that a few months back. The P4Ks are definitely more than you might expect.

Earlier today, I even found myself wishing that the GH5s footage had been BRAW! :) Weird, I know...

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

Not weird at all! Can the Pocket 4k match the GH5S with noise reduction applied? 

Yes, I think so. The noise reduction in Davinci Resolve is very good. I have used ISOs 10000 & 12800 a couple of times and have gotten usable footage after processing. I am surprised at how well the footage cleans up.

Every once in a while, you are forced to use crazy high ISOs. For example, yesterday, I had a presenter from a giant Silicon Valley tech company that refused to allow the theater stage lights on during her presentation. She claimed the lights would blind her and she wouldn't be able to see the audience. So, I had someone on a stage, with a projector screen behind her and no light on her, other than splash from a few lights on the audience. I had to run ISO 12,800 with f/1.2 lenses and was still about 1/2 stop underexposed. She was so dark that she was basically a shadow to your naked eye. Of course, she also didn't want to wear a lav. She insisted that she could be heard fine without one. At least I won that battle and got my lav on her during the presentation.

The footage from that event is certainly worse than I would have liked, but at least it is usable. If I had only had access to normal cameras, the footage would have been completely unusable. At some point, I will do some comparisons, but my use tells me that the GH5s is a stop or so better in low light than the P4K, before correcting in Resolve.

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

Yes, I think so. The noise reduction in Davinci Resolve is very good. I have used ISOs 10000 & 12800 a couple of times and have gotten usable footage after processing. I am surprised at how well the footage cleans up.

Every once in a while, you are forced to use crazy high ISOs. For example, yesterday, I had a presenter from a giant Silicon Valley tech company that refused to allow the theater stage lights on during her presentation. She claimed the lights would blind her and she wouldn't be able to see the audience. So, I had someone on a stage, with a projector screen behind her and no light on her, other than splash from a few lights on the audience. I had to run ISO 12,800 with f/1.2 lenses and was still about 1/2 stop underexposed. She was so dark that she was basically a shadow to your naked eye. Of course, she also didn't want to wear a lav. She insisted that she could be heard fine without one. At least I won that battle and got my lav on her during the presentation.

The footage from that event is certainly worse than I would have liked, but at least it is usable. If I had only had access to normal cameras, the footage would have been completely unusable. At some point, I will do some comparisons, but my use tells me that the GH5s is a stop or so better in low light than the P4K, before correcting in Resolve.

Yeah I would guess because the GH5 uses more NR straight out of camera. 

That is a sucky situation. Backdrop was probably super blown out haha. Some people are really lame to work with. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep up the good work Andrew. 

I hadn't realised that about those groups of youtubers that review cameras being selected by the companies but your right. They all tend to be glowing reviews now that I think about it whatever the camera was. I've seen more than a few by iPhondo for example and always very positive reviews with some token comment here and there to appear unbiased. 

As for Trolls and Brawley dont loose sleep over that lot. The launch sample footage was total crap (not the cameras fault). I have my Pocket 4K and absolutely love it. A very capable camera that fits the spot for those of us that want DSLR size but want a pro camera. 

Cheers,

Simon Bailey

Colourberry.com

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I can see a 0.95 lens in your future, maybe even on a Speedbooster lol.

two pages back the was a video shot by moonlight. i wonder if that's how it was accomplished with a 0.95 and speedbooster. I googled supermoon and they can be as much as 30% brighter and 14%  larger. So maybe a combination of all the above would make it doable perhaps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think if anyone is trying to make a actual living doing this stuff a lens combo like that would have to be a must in your kit. You Have to be able to make it happen whether you agree with the client or not. It is their money, so their call in the end. There is a reason the Sony a7s was so popular, maybe not the prettiest output, but a reliable low light output none the less. It can save your bacon. I would have to have one in the bag for do or die stuff like them or not. You get a reputation of not being able to make it happen and your goose is cooked. Pros make shit happen no matter the challenge with skill and gear, and that is why they succeed.

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

I would think if anyone is trying to make a actual living doing this stuff a lens combo like that would have to be a must in your kit. You Have to be able to make it happen whether you agree with the client or not. It is their money, so their call in the end. There is a reason the Sony a7s was so popular, maybe not the prettiest output, but a reliable low light output none the less. It can save your bacon. I would have to have one in the bag for do or die stuff like them or not. You get a reputation of not being able to make it happen and your goose is cooked. Pros make shit happen no matter the challenge with skill and gear, and that is why they succeed.

Did you have an A7S during your career years? 

Most of the pros I know prefer/own a GH5 more than a A7S. 

I dare to say A7s is a sail safe camera for youngsters more than experienced videomakers or pros. Just go unlimited ISO and pray.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell during my career I shot weddings with film! And later with film and tape video cameras. I would have been a Billionaire if I had a a7s back then lol. I disagree with a Pro not having one, you have in your magic kit ANYTHING that will help when the shit hits the fan.

I made most of my money in video doing TV ads. There is some damn good money in that. Everyone Has to advertise to be successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Did you have an A7S during your career years? 

Most of the pros I know prefer/own a GH5 more than a A7S. 

I dare to say A7s is a sail safe camera for youngsters more than experienced videomakers or pros. Just go unlimited ISO and pray.

The GH5 is an all round better camera than the A7s but for low light the A7s was ( and is ) in a different league and that’s why it can deliver the results in difficult circumstances. Oh and pair it with an ext recorder and you still have a competitive image with all the benefits off a full frame. Sometimes wish I’d kept mine....

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

P4K Battery life w/NP-F970 batteries:

By the way, I just completed a quick battery test on the P4K, for anyone that is interested.

I set up 3 P4K's with NP-F970 batteries on a battery sled connected to the 12V port on the camera. The batteries were fully charged before starting the test. They all tested about 8.1V at the start.

Each camera had the following equipment and settings:

  • XLR shotgun microphone with phantom power turned on
  • Audio levels set to 50%
  • Screen brightness at default levels
  • Samsung T5 1TB drives
  • Panasonic native M4/3 lenses
  • NO internal battery in camera

I recorded a static scene until the camera turned off. Then noted the duration of the recorded video. Here is what I found:

Battery 1: No name NP-F970 7.4V 48.84Wh => 2:08:51 total runtime
Battery 2: Powerextra NP-F970 7.4V 8800mAh 65.12Wh => 2:24:11 total runtime
Battery 3: Powerextra NP-F970 7.4V 8800mAh 65.12Wh => 2:25:10 total runtime

So, as a worse case scenario, my cams get around 2 hours and 20 minutes with a big NP-F970 battery.

Hopefully this information is helpful to people trying to decide how to power there little beasts :)

 

=============================================================================

 

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I would think if anyone is trying to make a actual living doing this stuff a lens combo like that would have to be a must in your kit. You Have to be able to make it happen whether you agree with the client or not. It is their money, so their call in the end. There is a reason the Sony a7s was so popular, maybe not the prettiest output, but a reliable low light output none the less. It can save your bacon. I would have to have one in the bag for do or die stuff like them or not. You get a reputation of not being able to make it happen and your goose is cooked. Pros make shit happen no matter the challenge with skill and gear, and that is why they succeed.

 

I see that you have "been there" before :) I agree with you completely. When you are getting paid for a job, you need to get it done, regardless of the obstacles. That is one of the reasons that I have backups for pretty much everything, including camera bodies. I get asked all the time why I bring so much gear to a job. Some of the gear that I bring isn't needed on every job, but at least I have the things to solve a problem when I need them. I am really big on redundancy. On a lot of our jobs, I only get one shot. I can't do a retake on many of our projects.

I actually had the Voigtlander Nokton 25mm f/0.95 Type II Lens in my bag the other day, but elected not to use it, as I didn't *quite* need it.  If I need a f/0.95 lens and ISO 10000+, that is a really peculiar situation. ISO 12800 with an f/1.2 lens is already much brighter on the screen than it looks to your naked eye. At least I didn't have to break out the night vision :D

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...