Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

[Kisaha 1,746]

There is definitely an issue here with the native m43 lenses. We pay top money for the best zooms, and the performance is not adequate not even for prosumer use.

on another note, I tested the 70-200mm 4f just now with the Viltrox M1 (I have the 2 also) and the camera doesn't communicate with the lens (so no AF or aperture change), but the image seems good enough!

I have a couple EF-S also I could test, that are wider, but I will update the Viltroxes first.

EDIT: 

EF-M1/EF-M2II Version 3.3
Updated Date: 2019-03-21

Update as follows:
1. Fixed the BUG which cannot control the aperture in BMPCC 4K. 

EDIT 2:

Tried a lot of things, 3 adapters (the 2 Viltroxes and the Lens Regain) no EF(-S) AF on any of them. Iris works fine.

Camera has 6.2.1 installed.

[nathlas 37]

Viltrox is not the best speedbooster you can rely on.....

[BTM_Pix 5,741]

3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

 

Tried a lot of things, 3 adapters (the 2 Viltroxes and the Lens Regain) no EF(-S) AF on any of them. Iris works fine.

 

Unless there have been firmware updates for the other manufacturer's adapters that specifically enable it, it is only the Metabones adapters that have any type of focus control from the Pocket4K.

 

[Yannick Willox 41]

I posted before, the pl 12-60 is passable at 12mm if there are no important vertical lines in the frame. My old 14-50 4/3 lens is better at 14mm than the new 12-60 at 14 mm. Even my  4/3 14-150 mm is better at 14 mm. Glad I kept my old glass. i am planning to get aMeike12mm for those wide shots.

however, the 12-60 is parfocal, and the old lenses certainly not ...

[anonim 629]

On 10/12/2019 at 7:23 PM, Kisaha said:

There is definitely an issue here with the native m43 lenses. We pay top money for the best zooms, and the performance is not adequate not even for prosumer use.

For the case you maybe missed it (I sold 12-35 and 35-100 and preorder 10-24)... Actually, IMO it seems that with such newcomers m43 cine-usage case becomes even more attractive

http://en.dzofilm.com/index.html

[Kisaha 1,746]

42 minutes ago, anonim said:

For the case you maybe missed it (I sold 12-35 and 35-100 and preorder 10-24)... Actually, IMO it seems that with such newcomers m43 cine-usage case becomes even more attractive

http://en.dzofilm.com/index.html

Interesting. Very good prices. Are they any good?

It is just not a run n gun solution.

[Anaconda_ 881]

To be fair, it doesn’t look any bigger than the Sigma 18-35 on a booster. And since you don’t need f1.8 for low light on this camera, it’s potentially more versatile. 

[anonim 629]

3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Interesting. Very good prices. Are they any good?

It is just not a run n gun solution.

IDK... To me the most or even only important is precise/smooth manual handling and focusing, and I'm expecting that aberrations will be enough well controlled. But, to be honest, although I understand problem of, say, distorted image at wide focal length, I didn't find that it is so important or distractedly noticeable in moving pictures and movie making for average spectators. What extremely bother me with Panasonic zooms is totally unusable (even for my pretty tolerable criteria) manual focusing. (Granted, I found that 12-35 II has pretty impressive stabilization.) Is it something improved with 10-25 and clutch mechanism, I don't know.

Dzofilm's constructors are promising true parfocal design, and, all in all, true cine lens experience for relatively modest price. I guess that even for such  newcomers  price for FF or APSC counterpart lens will be more similar to Fujinon MK zoom 18-55 (which, of course, doesn't have such UW range). That's why I think that, contrary to death-prediction or afraid by many, it is gold time for m43 movie make aspiring shooters. Simply because of the most important thing - lenses. As much as I've found that Voigts 0.95 lenses are unique regarding value/specs/usability/affordability between all lenses on Earth, it might be that these Dzofilm zooms will match that mark. 

And as Anaconda already mentioned, they are actually pretty small, about 15cm and 1kg what is ideal for run/gun, considering way that I'm using it - combining handheld and quickly shoulder mounting rig. (I simply couldn't stand gimbals, although I tried them, bought and sold several times.)

[IncriminatingPictures 17]

This might be an ignorant question, but the above conversation about lens distortion had me wondering, is correcting for the wider lenses something that BM can correct in a firmware upgrade?

[Anaconda_ 881]

In theory they could, but in practice I don't see them doing it, especially for Braw recordings.

It is something you can very easily fix in post, and is one of the default panels in Resolve, so it's not a huge issue. 

[IncriminatingPictures 17]

Fair point!

[anonim 629]

6 hours ago, IncriminatingPictures said:

This might be an ignorant question, but the above conversation about lens distortion had me wondering, is correcting for the wider lenses something that BM can correct in a firmware upgrade?

To be more precise - look at "Lens Correction" tab at the bottom of Inspector panel in Edit page of Resolve.

And to be even more precise - and I apologize if you already did it - take a look just at most cinematography-wise acclaimed movie from last year production,  The Favorite by Yorgos Lanthimos

[IncriminatingPictures 17]

3 hours ago, anonim said:

To be more precise - look at "Lens Correction" tab at the bottom of Inspector panel in Edit page of Resolve.

And to be even more precise - and I apologize if you already did it - take a look just at most cinematography-wise acclaimed movie from last year production,  The Favorite by Yorgos Lanthimos

Ha. I guess my question did come across ignorant. As I’m aware lens correction in post is possible.  I guess I was more asking if it being in done in camera was something possible and “better” than the process in post

[Kisaha 1,746]

What is the point having a run n gun lens and have to correct every shot in post?

[Anaconda_ 881]

36 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

What is the point having a run n gun lens and have to correct every shot in post?

Well, if you're shooting stuff that can't be reshot and you need flexibility on location, but you have more time in post. 

Or what about then you need very wide and tele shots within 10 seconds of each other? What other option is there for MFT users?

Sure it's not ideal, but I'm fairly sure 12-100 is the only option, and the downside is 45 seconds of extra time in post.

[Kisaha 1,746]

3 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Well, if you're shooting stuff that can't be reshot and you need flexibility on location, but you have more time in post. 

Or what about then you need very wide and tele shots within 10 seconds of each other? What other option is there for MFT users?

Sure it's not ideal, but I'm fairly sure 12-100 is the only option, and the downside is 45 seconds of extra time in post.

45 seconds for how many shots? And what about 12-13-14-15-16-...100mm?

[Anaconda_ 881]

2 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

45 seconds for how many shots?

Copy - paste the effect to all you clips at any given focal length. I agree, it's less than ideal, but doesn't stop it being a run-and-gun lens. You can shoot fast with it, and then fix it up later... isn't post work what this camera's all about anyway? 

If you need a corrected lens and have no time for editing/grading, perhaps there's a different camera out there that's more suitable to your needs.

[Kisaha 1,746]

13 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

Copy - paste the effect to all you clips at any given focal length. I agree, it's less than ideal, but doesn't stop it being a run-and-gun lens. You can shoot fast with it, and then fix it up later... isn't post work what this camera's all about anyway? 

If you need a corrected lens and have no time for editing/grading, perhaps there's a different camera out there that's more suitable to your needs.

Maybe a firmware update with lens profiles for the most popular lenses will add that angle to the camera and make more people happy than less people.

I am 100% sure that I am not alone on that.

 

[Anaconda_ 881]

Right and uncropped 1080p Braw too - but then there's the argument that it's no longer raw video... same as uncropped 4k Braw on the 6k camera... fixing the lens distortion in camera will no longer be a raw image.

I can't say it enough, I do agree with you, however I don't see BMD implementing lens profiles into this camera.

[BTM_Pix 5,741]

7 hours ago, Kisaha said:

What is the point having a run n gun lens and have to correct every shot in post?

If you are looking for a single lens allrounder that can be alternative to your Olympus then adapting a Tamron 16-300mm f3.5-f6.3 might be worth thinking about.

On a speed booster it becomes slightly wider on the short end (and has a lot more range on the long end obviously  ) and a few stops faster. The speed booster also brings the f6.3 long end back to f4 as well so you won't be losing out there either and can just run it as a constant f4 if you want.

I've just done this quick comparison on the P4K for you between it and the Panasonic 12-60mm f2.8/f4 (which is typical of the uncorrected wide end of the native lenses) so you can see the difference in the distortion at the wide end with walls and edges.

EDIT>>>SEE POST FURTHER DOWN FOR RE-SHOT TEST

Whilst the Tamron isn't exactly distortion free either, it shows far less than the Panasonic.

Also, if you go in by a fraction (17-18mm unboosted versus 16mm unboosted) then it improves quite a lot more.

Size and weight wise, its a bit less than the Olympus.

https://***URL removed***/products/compare/side-by-side?products=tamron_16-300-3p5-6p3&products=olympus_12-100_4p0_is_pro

It also has pretty decent stabilisation and the big kicker of course is the price as they can readily be found used for under £250.

Its not without its faults (it isn't particularly sharp at the very long end but the speed booster does alleviate that somewhat) but as a run and gun all rounder it is a decent alternative.