Jump to content
BTM_Pix

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 6K

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Well, that price is doable if the whisper was correct. I’m pretty deep into two projects right now, so any purchase today wouldn’t really be used for another 6 months to a year. I bought a P4K back in May but quickly cancelled my order before it shipped and after the 6K release and the FP announcement, I can’t tell you how glad I am that I didn’t buy it. When I am ready, probably around this time next year, the FP may be even cheaper, or something better, for me, will be available.

That whisper may well prove to have been drunken slurring but I think its on the money.

I think I've said to you before but the FP has the potential to be the full frame version of the BMMCC.

For a few reasons, I await it with probably a little more interest than most ;) 

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
54 minutes ago, mercer said:

Well, the mount and lens can only do so much when the sensor isn’t set up for proper video AF.

The AF won’t be any better with the P4K.

If you want reliable AF in a cinema camera, Canon is your only option. 

I know. Dont use AF anyway and I have shot a few projects with the P4K so I know what is capable of. Just trying to find another plus for the 6K to make me want to spend the extra 1300€, but do not see it happening.

For 2000-2500€ I could be waiting for the FP, seems like a very well thought project, unlike the design and ergonomics of the Pocket cameras. Seriously, what they were thinking?!

Share this post


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

Technically, speedboosters actually add sharpness and detail while minimizing lens imperfections, the exact opposite (for the same optical reasons) that teleconverters degrade IQ by softening, enlarging the image, more pronounced CA, etc. 

Cheaper focal reducers can show soft corners, but Metabones are usually razor sharp edge-to-edge. 

Thank you. I've found that the two main detractors of speedboosters either have never used one or have used an inferior one. My Metabones improves every lens I put it on.

Share this post


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

Thank you. I've found that the two main detractors of speedboosters either have never used one or have used an inferior one. My Metabones improves every lens I put it on.

That's not entirely true. The new pocket 4K speedbooster that just released is noticeably sharper when the lens is wide open due to the different thickness of the IR glass on BM cameras. Technically, with the old speedbooster and the pocket 4K, the wide open performance is soft.

But with something like the Lucadapter on the Pocket 6K you should see some good performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

That's not entirely true. The new pocket 4K speedbooster that just released is noticeably sharper when the lens is wide open due to the different thickness of the IR glass on BM cameras. Technically, with the old speedbooster and the pocket 4K, the wide open performance is soft.

But with something like the Lucadapter on the Pocket 6K you should see some good performance.

The new BMPCC4k speedbooster is indeed sharper, but the regular one is still very high performing. I've seen no credible complaints about the performance of the Ultra .71 on the BMPCC4k until the new one came out for people to compare it against. Again, my own experience is that every one of my lenses has become sharper with the MB on my cameras. YMMV.

Share this post


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

The new BMPCC4k speedbooster is indeed sharper, but the regular one is still very high performing. I've seen no credible complaints about the performance of the Ultra .71 on the BMPCC4k until the new one came out for people to compare it against. Again, my own experience is that every one of my lenses has become sharper with the MB on my cameras. YMMV.

That's true, but maybe then you have to compare the best M4/3 glass to the best EF speedboosted glass since it's a little unfair to compare the center cut of a lens. But anyways, yes the quality of EF does generally improve, but I'm surprised how much of a drastic improvement the Blackmagic version was. I thought it was just a money grab, but the difference is quite noticeable.

I am debating whether to buy a Lucadapter for the Pocket 6K or invest in lower cost ef-s lenses like 17-55 2.8, etc.

Share this post


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

That's true, but maybe then you have to compare the best M4/3 glass to the best EF speedboosted glass since it's a little unfair to compare the center cut of a lens. But anyways, yes the quality of EF does generally improve, but I'm surprised how much of a drastic improvement the Blackmagic version was. I thought it was just a money grab, but the difference is quite noticeable.

Is it? Where did you see it?

I am consider getting the X0.64 version for using my Samyangs.

Share this post


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

Is it? Where did you see it?

I am consider getting the X0.64 version for using my Samyangs.

There are some pictures floating around of the difference between the Pocket speedbooster and the original M4/3 one and there's a general haze over the image on the original one. The pocket speedbooster is a lot sharper, but it doesn't work optimally with any other m4/3 cameras, so less flexible.

I think the usual m4/3 filter thickness is very thick(8mm?), and Blackmagic uses a rather thin IR cut filter.

Share this post


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

 

For 2000-2500€ I could be waiting for the FP, seems like a very well thought project, unlike the design and ergonomics of the Pocket cameras. Seriously, what they were thinking?!

I find the fp far from being an ergonomic masterpiece. No touch screen for the menu for exemple.

  

Share this post


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

There are some pictures floating around of the difference between the Pocket speedbooster and the original M4/3 one and there's a general haze over the image on the original one. The pocket speedbooster is a lot sharper, but it doesn't work optimally with any other m4/3 cameras, so less flexible.

I think the usual m4/3 filter thickness is very thick(8mm?), and Blackmagic uses a rather thin IR cut filter.

The BM speedboosters do not work at all at other m43 cameras (Olympus, Panasonic, JVC, e.t.c).

4.1-4.4 for the others, 2.4-2.5 for Blackmagic.

16 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

I find the fp far from being an ergonomic masterpiece. No touch screen for the menu for exemple.

  

No, it isn't, but it is so small that you can really work around it. No flip/swivel screen either. Doesn't it have a touch screen? I didn't know that. We are very far away from a real one. It is just an announcement, while I have done a few P4K projects already so I know what to expect from ergonomics/menus/workflow.

That is my point, if you are waiting for the next big announcement, it can take you easily to 2022.

These Pockets are good enough for most things and they are available now. The 4K one is so cheap that it doesn't matter if you do a "mistake". 

Imagine buying a Canon C200 mainly for the Raw and EF mount a week ago, and now you can get it for 1/3 of the money and with cheaper media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Yeah honestly the camera matters so little with a production. A crew is what makes everything happen. That said RAW is definitely nice for whoever is editing it lol 

Really ? 

I'm so disappointed that when you buy the P6K that you can never putt together a good crew.  I miss the days that a sucky camera and good crew created magic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

I find the fp far from being an ergonomic masterpiece. No touch screen for the menu for exemple.

  

Why ? 

Were all deep in touch ergonomics and suddenly a camera without that is now complete ? 

 

Image quality will rise or sink the camera not issues like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, thephoenix said:

i only have the lensregain that i wanted to use on the bmpcc4k that i was planning to buy late september, guess i won't be needing it anymore, so i actually never tested one.

but on the few tests i've watched they all looked very soft( not to say unusable) when getting that "extra" stop they claim to provide

Most lenses get soft when wide open, may be what you are seeing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Imagine buying a Canon C200 mainly for the Raw and EF mount a week ago, and now you can get it for 1/3 of the money and with cheaper media.

If you bought a C200 and the pocket was even on your radar, then you probably bought the wrong camera regardless. 

The benefits of the c200 are the ergonomics, auto focus, battery life, Internal NDs and reliability. The pocket can probably get close strictly image wise, but it’s a lot harder to get there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, BenEricson said:

If you bought a C200 and the pocket was even on your radar, then you probably bought the wrong camera regardless. 

The benefits of the c200 are the ergonomics, auto focus, battery life, Internal NDs and reliability. The pocket can probably get close strictly image wise, but it’s a lot harder to get there. 

I would say the P6K will have better image quality then the C200 already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

That whisper may well prove to have been drunken slurring but I think its on the money.

I think I've said to you before but the FP has the potential to be the full frame version of the BMMCC.

For a few reasons, I await it with probably a little more interest than most ;) 

Hopefully he wasn’t drunk enough and it will be even cheaper. 

With the screen, it could be the FF version of the BMMCC but even better.

I can only imagine the plans you have for it... other than your affinity for Sigma products in general.

I think I mentioned that I’ve been wanting to get into still photography, so if I do end up with an FP, I may use the unique still/cine mode as a parlay into using it as a hybrid camera. 

Btw, I was reading more about it on their web page and was surprised to learn that it looks like it will have a solid all-i h.264 codec and a “cine” picture profile, so that could be interesting as well.

I was also over at Red User and the conspiracy theorist in me thinks the P6K could be a big middle finger to Red over that lawsuit. Obviously, that is unlikely but the Komodo doesn’t seem as appealing to even some of the diehard Red fans over there. 

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...