Jump to content
Yurolov

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, sanveer said:

Actually, apart from Sony, I don't see anyone else using an eND. Maybe they don't have the tech. Atleast yet. And maybe it is too expensive to be borrowed from Sony. 

Kinefinity's non-focal reducer EF mount has electronic ND.

I think the Aputure MFT to EF follow focus (again the non-focal reducer version) has it too?

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
12 hours ago, sanveer said:

They will Obviously avoid being seen using Panny lenses. After using the Same sensor as Panny and probably doing a better job with it, albeit at Half the Price.  

Here's an interview with Bob Caniglia of Blackmagic holding the Pocket 4K and Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8.

 

Share this post


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

Kinefinity's non-focal reducer EF mount has electronic ND.

I think the Aputure MFT to EF follow focus (again the non-focal reducer version) has it too?

Ok, I wasn't aware. I guess they're using licensed versiona or have made their own versions. The tech has been around for over a decade I guess. Even the maybach uses a version where clear windows suddenly becone tinted. I guess it would depend on the amount of curreent being passed to rearrange the electrons (I hope I am recollecting things correctly).

I won't be surprised if chinese companies start making these for like 1/10th the price and everyone gets one within the next one year. 

Share this post


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

lol... it's offensive? To who? The camera? Come on... The GH5 has an image that looks like plastic. When you compare it to the detail you get with Red or even Alexa at 2k... then yes, it's garbage. And I'm a BIG fan of Panasonic actually. That's why I'm being so hard on the GH5. I know what they're capable of... the EVA1 image is fantastic. The Varicam image is also one of my favorites of the major cameras. The GH5 ACTUALLY resolves a great image... in the 6K abamorphic mode... where it looks like it disables the garbage Sharpness and NR settings. So all Panasonic has to do is write ONE STINKING LINE OF CODE to disable the horrible, horrible, image-processing. This again, has nothing to deal with one's personal work. It literally doesn't factor into the discussion about camera images.

I completely agree.
But guess what, I was reaching out to Panasonic ambassadors and developers in the past about this issue. They we're either uninformed and said there is no additional sharpening and NR, though the evidence thanks to strong halos in high contrast areas, harshness and sometimes even ghosting is there - or they were laughing at me "everyone loves how our images look"... :grimace:

 

Btw. the 6K mode suffers from artifacts thanks to the rather weak H265 implementation, but yh, basically no sharpening artifacts but banding. lol

Share this post


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

I completely agree.
But guess what, I was reaching out to Panasonic ambassadors and developers in the past about this issue. They we're either uninformed and said there is no additional sharpening and NR, though the evidence thanks to strong halos in high contrast areas, harshness and sometimes even ghosting is there - or they were laughing at me "everyone loves how our images look"... :grimace:

C'mon Dennis, you are getting your workaround to control the beast or not? ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like the ergonomics for such a camera, that I probably use with a speedbooster, or bigger lens, not so great with m43 lenses, even GH5 is a little more in both size and weight for my taste (even the 12-100 Olympus is too small and light for such a camera).

It is actually a bit shorter and has less depth than the Panasonic, and obviously wider because of the 5" screen.

I would really prefer a 4" screen, as the best compromise on-a-camera-monitor, and obviously some kind of hinge, preferably the kind of Samsung/Sony has that doesn't take any space from the side of the cameras, and help with lower/higher shots, but for the price, I really can't complain, can I?! 

If everything goes well, and nothing "better" (= more preferable for my case) exists until then, this is a certain buy. Just can't see how NOT having one for the price. I already have 4 mirrorless right now, I can sell a couple and get this as a more video orientated camera. It is that cheap.

On the other hand, this is not a hybrid, nor a photo camera, I can't see that it will replace my hybrid system, or my photo taking machines, so I believe all this negativity against Panasonic is unfair, and really unnecessary as there are at least 5 things that GH5 does A LOT better than the Pocket (and a few more that Pocket doesn't do at all), and the most important thing, is that you can take it right now, and make a video. I doubt anyone here can say the same for the Pocket 4K!

GH5 is 1 years old, and shaked the industry well. It sold amazingly well for such a camera, there isn't a company or a group of people that are in the business that do not have one, just in case. What it does is just amazing for the price. I mean, what were the other options last year? What are the other options right now, for less than 1800euros? There isn't any, really.

Also, if you need an Alexa, you take an Alexa, how the GH5 is in the same conversation with a camera that cost as much as dozens of GH5, (multiple dozens, and add a couple of GH5s dozens, for good measure!) it is seriously above me. Do really people think, that Arri is doomed because of the Pocket then?

We started from killing Canonikon, then we moved to Sony, today we killed Panasonic, and now we are moving to Arri, in just 24 hours! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, deezid said:

it's exhausting. ;)

LOL In good hands, pal, in good hands : ) The leftover, not even idea how to handle it ;-)

The way the highlights clip is the only other shortcoming which can hurt the outcome if the user let it go...

Share this post


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

Blackmagic is not doing crowdfunding. They are not going to get a dime from B&H or any company on pre orders. The will go to a bank and borrow money like any large company does to build buy the materials and pay for production for the camera. Plus company's like B&D don't even charge your credit card until it ships.

That is not really what happens. Using pre-orders as an indication of demand is used as a tool to raise financing necessary to produce a product. You have to convince the lender that you are a good risk using a viable business plan, and pre-orders is one way to do that.

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

No showreel, zero credibility. 

Here he is again, dismissing the X-H1 as  junk.

 

Lol, well, if he has clients and works on "serious projects", one assumes that he would not be using a consumer orientated camera in the first place. At least one hopes not :)

Share this post


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

Jesus we get you are not going to buy the God Damn thing. Give it a rest!

I never said I wasn’t going to buy it. I said it’s no replacement for the GH5/S. And by now you and others have seen the side by side comparisons and should understand better. But what those comparisons do not show is how it feels in hand, or screen response etc... 

You will come to understand. No one could record output as BM did not allow it. I did witness the motion cadence from the rear screen and thought it was not as filmic as the V1 camera. You will no doubt see this soon enough also.

Everyone is waxing on about how great this camera is... and they have not yet seen any footage. I’ve owned many BM cameras. But I’m no brand fanboy, so I’ll keep it real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mokara said:

Lol, well, if he has clients and works on "serious projects", one assumes that he would not be using a consumer orientated camera in the first place. At least one hopes not :)

I find it stimulating trying to get the very best image I can from second-rate cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Philip Lipetz said:

EDIT:  this information was covered by a prior post in this stream.   No need to read this,

 

The rumored is that Atomos has a period of exclusive use. Hence Apple cannot license ProRes RAW to BM. 

ProRes Raw is defintely not exclusive to Atomos.

 

Share this post


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

ProRes Raw is defintely not exclusive to Atomos.

 

Could be that BM were keeping this so secret, they hadn't applied for the license before the announcement? Just included the codes they already have licenses for. And they were just as surprised as us to see the words 'Prores RAW' written in a banner at the convention.

I really can't see them releasing this camera without it included.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m a little late to the game, but ProRes Raw, will I have the same raw abilities as with RAW? Like will the camera tab in DaVinci be accessible working with it? Or is it just a gloried Prores that’s easier on my hard drives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I find it stimulating trying to get the very best image I can from second-rate cameras.

Well, I am a scientist, and the idea of using tools intended for home use in a professional environment and expecting them to perform like professional tools is ludicrous IMO. That is not to say that you can't use them, sometimes for the odd thing it might be convenient and cost effective, but if I am going to do something routinely where I need reliable performance I get the proper equipment for the job. Why cut corners and take chances with stuff that might not hold up or be completely effective because it was designed for a completely different occasional use in a home setting? When you are working time is money and you want your equipment to always work and always work properly. 

I have one of these Kitchenaid mixers at home, which is fine for the odd baking I do on occasion, but there is NO WAY that I would depend on it if I was running a commercial operation using it 8 hours a day. For that I would buy a proper commercial mixer, because the home mixer would probably last a few weeks before burning out.

This is kind of how I see these arguments fretting about consumer cameras being "not good enough" for professional jobs. News flash, they were not designed for professional use, they were designed for home use. If you are shooting video professionally, then buy the professional tool for the job. IMO any "professional" who wants to use them as professional tools is probably not quite as professional as they might want to be. It does not mean that they are not doing good work, but clearly they have difficulty making a living doing their job if they have to scrimp like that to do work.

Share this post


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

Well, I am a scientist, and the idea of using tools intended for home use in a professional environment and expecting them to perform like professional tools is ludicrous IMO. That is not to say that you can't use them, sometimes for the odd thing it might be convenient and cost effective, but if I am going to do something routinely where I need reliable performance I get the proper equipment for the job. Why cut corners and take chances with stuff that might not hold up or be completely effective because it was designed for a completely different occasional use in a home setting? When you are working time is money and you want your equipment to always work and always work properly. 

I have one of these Kitchenaid mixers at home, which is fine for the odd baking I do on occasion, but there is NO WAY that I would depend on it if I was running a commercial operation using it 8 hours a day. For that I would buy a proper commercial mixer, because the home mixer would probably last a few weeks before burning out.

This is kind of how I see these arguments fretting about consumer cameras being "not good enough" for professional jobs. News flash, they were not designed for professional use, they were designed for home use. If you are shooting video professionally, then buy the professional tool for the job. IMO any "professional" who wants to use them as professional tools is probably not quite as professional as they might want to be. It does not mean that they are not doing good work, but clearly they have difficulty making a living doing their job if they have to scrimp like that to do work.

I have the same issue with my electronic baking machine. 3-4 hours for just one bread! at least it overheats less than my business partner's a6300!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why cut corners and take chances with stuff that might not hold up or be completely effective because it was designed for a completely different occasional use in a home setting?"

This cam is certainly not a home movie "film the baby" sort of cam. But I think, just as in "science", the proof will be in the final, shipping product.

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...