Jump to content
Yurolov

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Django said:

why are we comparing footage from a FHD camera released 5 years ago with a S16 size sensor to an upcoming camera that shoots 4K with brand new M4/3 size sensor, 4th generation color science and featuring dual native ISO?

the only thing the original pocket & the upcoming pocket 4K share in common is the "pocket" moniker and even that is misleading imo.

if anything the IQ will be closer to a GH5S without NR/Sharpening, and with BMDs Film/Log profile, color science & pro res / raw recording support.

FWIW, I wasn’t asking anyone to compare anything. For a long time, it’s been claimed that the Pocket produces cinematic footage, and what I posted is fairly representative of much of what I’ve seen - cyan cast, weak shadows, soft, grainy, clipped highlights, crushed shadows, poor skin tones, etc. The video @TwoScoops just posted proves that the operator is 99% responsible for the image quality, and it will be no different with the Batcam. 

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

 

30 minutes ago, mercer said:

I wanted to post this but since you originally found it, I didn’t want to step on your toes. 

As I said before, if someone had told me this was shot on an Alexa, I don’t know if I would have questioned it.

I wondered if it'd been mixed with something else, but only BM is listed here.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7018572/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

 

He's using the s16 mk2 Zeiss super speeds. I can't even find a place to rent those here. 

Share this post


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

You can also record ultra-crisp video with it if you prefer that look. It's just a matter of how you post-process the raw image.

 

What ever gave you the idea that all I look for in a video is sharpness? Did you even bother to read my post? Not only that, but in fact, the resolution of the video you shared, as near as I can tell with the slow vimeo I get here, is actually quite poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TwoScoops said:

 

I wondered if it'd been mixed with something else, but only BM is listed here.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7018572/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

 

He's using the s16 mk2 Zeiss super speeds. I can't even find a place to rent those here. 

Yeah I’m pretty sure he used just ProRes HQ... he seems to have a colorist and obviously those super speeds didn’t hurt. I think Arri had some S16mm super speeds back in the day that can be adapted and they aren’t horribly priced.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mercer said:

Yeah I’m pretty sure he used just ProRes HQ... he seems to have a colorist and obviously those super speeds didn’t hurt. I think Arri had some S16mm super speeds back in the day that can be adapted and they aren’t horribly priced.

 

Lenses. #1. Super glue. #2. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

37 minutes ago, jonpais said:

FWIW, I wasn’t asking anyone to compare anything. For a long time, it’s been claimed that the Pocket produces cinematic footage, and what I posted is fairly representative of most of what I’ve seen - cyan cast, weak shadows, soft, grainy, clipped highlights, crushed shadows, poor skin tones, etc. The video @TwoScoops just posted proves that the operator is 99% responsible for the image quality, and it will be no different with the Batcam. 

ok so on the one hand you claim the video you posted is "fairly representative" of the pockets IQ but you've now suddenly realized through the above video that  "the operator is 99% responsible for the image quality"... ? so basically you're whole point about the pocket was moot? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Django said:

 

ok so on the one hand you claim the video you posted is "fairly representative" of the pockets IQ but you've now suddenly realized through the above video that  "the operator is 99% responsible for the image quality"... ? so basically you're whole point about the pocket was moot? 

I didn't suddenly realize anything, @Django, I've seen good footage as well. Notice, I did not write 'all' the footage I've seen - I wrote 'much' of what I've seen.

My point was, what do members consider to be cinematic. The video posted by @TwoScoops is eminently cinematic, the one I shared, vehemently anti-cinematic. 

And I never talked about the Pocket's IQ. I was talking about the operator's skill.

Share this post


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

First of all, I don’t shoot adolescents. 

Secondly, not once, for as long as I’ve been shooting video, have I ever claimed that my work looked cinematic. That’s like telling me I can’t play basketball like Michael Jordan - I never said I could!

Thirdly, nothing you say changes the facts I reported about the video I posted. 

 

Jon it's fact that you often come across as a sanctimonious prig. Your headmasterly tone grates very quickly. You're just another opinion on here not a voice of authority. And do you really need to reply to virtually every single post on here in every thread? We know you love everything about the GH5 and no other camera measures up in your opinion - but give it a rest please. I'd like to see interesting discussions develop without your constant interjection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kieran said:

Jon it's fact that you often come across as a sanctimonious prig. Your headmasterly tone grates very quickly. You're just another opinion on here not a voice of authority. And do you really need to reply to virtually every single post on here in every thread? We know you love everything about the GH5 and no other camera measures up in your opinion - but give it a rest please. I'd like to see interesting discussions develop without your constant interjection. 

I never said anything here about the GH5, so why don't you give it a rest?

4 minutes ago, Snuff said:

BMPCC, RAW with a cheap Meopta lens from the 16mm cinema camera Meopta Admira. Does it look cinematic?

 

I normally have an aversion to shots of leaves and twigs, but that footage is splendid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stills from this video (exported from edited RAW in Premiere). There is some color noise but it comes from LUT, not from the camera. 

5.jpg

6.jpg

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0141_C0008.00_28_30_09.неподвижное изображение006.png

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0141_C0008.09_43_06_08.неподвижное изображение013.jpg

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0141_C0008.14_08_12_23.неподвижное изображение008.jpg

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0142_C0009_[000000-000712].00_01_11_05.неподвижное изображение006.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Snuff said:

Stills from this video (exported from edited RAW in Premiere).

5.jpg

6.jpg

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0141_C0008.00_28_30_09.неподвижное изображение006.png

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0141_C0008.09_43_06_08.неподвижное изображение013.jpg

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0141_C0008.14_08_12_23.неподвижное изображение008.jpg

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera_1_2017-06-05_0142_C0009_[000000-000712].00_01_11_05.неподвижное изображение006.jpg

I read in the info box over at YouTube that there was a problem trying to work with RAW in Premiere - is that still the case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jonpais said:

I read in the info box over at YouTube that there was a problem trying to work with RAW in Premiere - is that still the case?

Yes, Premiere adds its own LUT on a RAW video so colors and contrast are not accurate.

Share this post


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

I didn't suddenly realize anything, @Django, I've seen good footage as well. Notice, I did not write 'all' the footage I've seen - I wrote 'much' of what I've seen.

My point was, what do members consider to be cinematic. The video posted by @TwoScoops is eminently cinematic, the one I shared, vehemently anti-cinematic. 

ok well i think the issues you may have had with the video you posted and perhaps others had way more to do with the grading quality than inherent cinematic or anti-cinematic properties of the camera. it also makes a big difference if you're shooting RAW.   let's not forget about lenses, those zeiss super speeds s16 are a great pairing but it's worth noting the full prime kit will cost you 5-10 times the price of the camera! but cine glass will take you a long way towards achieving.. cinematic footage. In the end what makes BMD cams special and different from the hybrids is ProRes/RAW, no OLP filter, no NR/Sharpening, Film/Log profile, color science. Basically the ingredients you'll find in much more expensive cinema cams. 

Share this post


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

I agree with not comparing it to a new 4k camera, but this is the best I've seen from that sensor (BMMCC tho)

 

 

I'll agree it looks good. But I think this is more to do with the person behind the camera than the camera. I would have little doubt they could have achieved similar results with any number of cameras. 
Where for me the BMPCC lacked is in creating more punchy more modern looking images. It tends to always look vintage. You can make your footage feel 1960ish all day long. For me I prefer more flexibility. 

Share this post


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

ok well i think the issues you may have had with the video you posted and perhaps others had way more to do with the grading quality than inherent cinematic or anti-cinematic properties of the camera. it also makes a big difference if you're shooting RAW.   let's not forget about lenses, those zeiss super speeds s16 are a great pairing but it's worth noting the full prime kit will cost you 5-10 times the price of the camera! but cine glass will take you a long way towards achieving.. cinematic footage. In the end what makes BMD cams special and different from the hybrids is ProRes/RAW, no OLP filter, no NR/Sharpening, Film/Log profile, color science. Basically the ingredients you'll find in much more expensive cinema cams. 

Agree 100%. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While getting a cinematic image requires a variety of things, getting the camera settings correct is an important aspect of it. 

RAW (or a proper highbitrate codec) just takes fighting with the camera out of the way, and thus it is easier to get a cinematic image for example with the pocket. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DBounce said:

But I think this is more to do with the person behind the camera than the camera. I would have little doubt they could have achieved similar results with any number of cameras. 

I think this statement is right, a good job but nothing special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, DBounce said:

I'll agree it looks good. But I think this is more to do with the person behind the camera than the camera. I would have little doubt they could have achieved similar results with any number of cameras. 
 

That goes without saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jonpais said:

What ever gave you the idea that all I look for in a video is sharpness? Did you even bother to read my post? Not only that, but in fact, the resolution of the video you shared, as near as I can tell with the slow vimeo I get here, is actually quite poor.

Whatever gave you the idea that I was responding to you at all? You relate comments to yourself that were not directed at you. I didn't even reply to you or quote you.

Let me say it loud and clear: Your behavior on this forum is increasingly aggressive and narcissistic. You should consider taking a break as a moderator.

- And yes, Vimeo uses adaptive streaming. If you have a poor connection, the video image will have poor resolution.

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...