Jump to content
crevice

Blackmagic Micro Cinema Super Guide and Why It Still Matters

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

personnaly i don't call it ultra compact when you have to add a monitor and accesories to shoot.

Don’t you have to do exactly that with the micro? At least the FP has a screen.

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
1 hour ago, thephoenix said:

sure. but i don't call it ultra compact either ;)

 

The FP is 112.6mm wide and 69.9mm tall.

Here is my Pocket Cinema Camera for you for some context to those dimensions.

474558519_FPvsPocket.thumb.jpg.f297e3cb0c0543a141d95f8f00f057e8.jpg

On that basis, I'm going to stick with "ultra compact" as being a fairly reasonable description for a full frame camera ;) 

 

 

Share this post


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

The FP is 112.6mm wide and 69.9mm tall.

Here is my Pocket Cinema Camera for you for some context to those dimensions.

474558519_FPvsPocket.thumb.jpg.f297e3cb0c0543a141d95f8f00f057e8.jpg

On that basis, I'm going to stick with "ultra compact" as being a fairly reasonable description for a full frame camera ;) 

 

 

The digital calipers for the win. 

Sigma already have some FP accessories listed and the basic grip doesn’t add much horizontal size to the dimensions.

82E5DB5D-F7B9-4AE3-939F-81DFBCF8BF02.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the write up! I have been thinking of getting the older Black Magic camera. My only problem is purchasing a used camera and something going wrong it later on but might not be a bad investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2019 at 1:02 PM, blkmagic4k said:

Thanks for the write up! I have been thinking of getting the older Black Magic camera. My only problem is purchasing a used camera and something going wrong it later on but might not be a bad investment.

They are very cheap now - so if something does happen, at least it’s not too much money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was inspired by those Cinama5D P6K tests and take attempt to exam BMMCC in near similar conditions. DNGs processed with workflow described here https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=65149&p=543725#p537852
My background is simple black fabric, so it is darker and so more extreme test than Cinema5D examples, you can compare things by Color Checker patches.

Let's be honest, even P6K can't provide usable underexposed 5 stops. It looks too noisy and became plastic mess if you add SNR. Sort of horisontal FPN lines also became visible in Sony sensors.

So we see here is 5 years old native HD camera with Fairchild Imaging dual gain sensor fights against gigantic 6K/4K modern Sony sensors in downscaled to HD mode.

3 stops under expose is pretty usable with BMMCC as well as P4k/P6K. If only we can fight FPN it could be extended even further...

P.S. I only can imagine what newer Fairchild Imaging dual gain sensor is capable of. Along to 4K it technically waaaay less noisier (Dark Current: 2 e-/sec compare to BMMCC sensor: 25 e-/sec, Ursa 4.6K sensor: 15 e-/sec) (Read Noise 1.0 e- RMS. BMMCC sensor: 1.2 e- RMS, Ursa 4.6K sensor: 1.5 e- RMS)
It is better to see images at full size in new tab:

ksYFncr.jpg
jmiVHi4.jpg
AZ9hVwW.jpg
ZnSPvUT.jpg
oLJMazB.jpg
fnL1net.jpg

And same examples, but with noise reduction (applied before expose push) and with fIlm emulation LUT applied:

j0RDp6k.jpg
12SnmcU.jpg
Zq53ukK.jpg
sB0X6Tc.jpg
TaIEWJR.jpg
21kNPow.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is also BMMCC overexpose test.
Technically digital sensors don't have such a thing as overexposure and there is nothing to test there because sensors itself don't have any highlights rolloff. They capture light in linear gamma and hard clipped in one single point. Next that linear data converted to LOG gamma specially designed for each sensor model. And next Color Science converts Log to normal gamma and shapes final image look. So mostly overexpose look is a part of software, but not a part of a sensor hardware itself
I use different lighting direction in this test to provide extreme bright light, so these images don't exact match to previous tests. As before i use REDLog3G10/REDWideGamutRGB as timeline gamma. Other gammas and other Log to Rec conversion methods may provide different look of highlight rolloff clipping.

2ivtx0B.jpg
x426JLt.jpg
aIeTdaD.jpg
1tzRMAt.jpg
pFrFiBj.jpg
yXXfrwS.jpg
WO5TkvA.jpg

And the same with Highlights Recovery turned OFF:

PNQCsNe.jpg
Ifdu9om.jpg
ZzCDt5G.jpg
xcMB1fX.jpg
KSRKgJs.jpg

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...