Jump to content

Thoughts on the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 6K Pro - why EF mount?


Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera-6k-scale

For a long time the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Cameras have been a barebones experience to shoot with. Great codec and image quality but a lack of important other features (and not great build quality). Well Blackmagic has stepped up and beaten the mirrorless cameras to build-in ND filters. Yes in 2021 it's finally happened! Well done camera industry. They have added a hinge to the screen as well. For an extra $500 you can get an EVF which slots on top. The battery also gets an upgrade from a smaller Canon LP-E6 to Sony NP-F570.

However one thing I find puzzling about the Pocket 6K Pro is the lens mount.

New blog post:

https://www.eoshd.com/news/thoughts-on-the-blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera-6k-pro-tilt-screen-evf-built-in-nd-filters-but-why-ef-mount/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sounds to me like a lot of us here aren't the target audience for Blackmagic. Not everyone wants to adapt lenses, look up compatibility charts, etc. Wanting MFT mount with S35 sensor or a mount specif

Like the original Pocket6K, there is a far bigger argument for it having an MFT mount. You can still have electronic control of EF lenses with non-speedboosted adapters, you can have a windowed m

The body shape is just... disgusting (and that’s coming from someone who owns and uses a P4K). They should just make the screen AND EVF each a $500 extra, and reshape the body into something more like

I guess EF mount because of price, I think they can use EF mount for free. And RF is prolly patented and they would need to pay a certain amount. 

And PL is not the hottest with dslr mirrorless style shooters. And E and L mount are more restricted/limited to sony and panasonic. (Not a lot of choice between cinema lenses, more photo oriented, and not as easy to mount to other cameras while EF lenses mount on any camera).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Members

Like the original Pocket6K, there is a far bigger argument for it having an MFT mount.

You can still have electronic control of EF lenses with non-speedboosted adapters, you can have a windowed mode for the native MFT electronic lenses, the manual MFT lenses like Voigtlander and Meike etc all cover the s35 sensor and of course, with the shallower mount, you are able to put PL mount lenses on it.

It makes it a lot more sense for P4K owners to upgrade to/replace/augment their setups as well.

Like JVC found though, trying to undo the pre-conceived notion of the relationship between the mount size and the sensor size being absolute is a bit of a tough sell.

To be fair, Blackmagic also have their higher end cameras with EF mount so from the point of view of the Pocket6K being a B cam for those it makes sense.

I'd be interested to know from which direction the majority of the Pocket6K sales are coming though, as A cams for Pocket4K/new owners or B cams for Ursa owners.

Going the sidefinder route like Sigma have with the Fp so that all three flavours of Pocket could have had benefited from the new EVF would have been nice.

 

 

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

Like the original Pocket6K, there is a far bigger argument for it having an MFT mount.

You can still have electronic control of EF lenses with non-speedboosted adapters, you can have a windowed mode for the native MFT electronic lenses, the manual MFT lenses like Voigtlander and Meike etc all cover the s35 sensor and of course, with the shallower mount, you are able to put PL mount lenses on it.

It makes it a lot more sense for P4K owners to upgrade to/replace/augment their setups as well.

Like JVC found though, trying to undo the pre-conceived notion of the relationship between the mount size and the sensor size being absolute is a bit of a tough sell.

To be fair, Blackmagic also have their higher end cameras with EF mount so from the point of view of the Pocket6K being a B cam for those it makes sense.

I'd be interested to know from which direction the majority of the Pocket6K sales are coming though, as A cams for Pocket4K/new owners or B cams for Ursa owners.

Going the sidefinder route like Sigma have with the Fp so that all three flavours of Pocket could have had benefited from the new EVF would have been nice.

 

 

Oh yeah thats true. Hope blackmagic will release a full frame camera, then EF would make a lot more sense indeed.

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

The body shape is just... disgusting (and that’s coming from someone who owns and uses a P4K). They should just make the screen AND EVF each a $500 extra, and reshape the body into something more like RED/Kinefinity/ZCam/BGH1.

 

Every time I see a BM Pocket camera I just shake my head and click Next. I know it shouldn't be that way, I love Davinci Resolve......but their camera form factor is pretty horrendous. They also seem to have no AF, not great in low light (this may have improved though), and no IBIS. For me a BM camera has never even been a consideration to date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just dumped the last of my EF lenses. I have been so close to buying various models of BM over the years but the aforementioned issues, reliability and inventory have kept me away. IF they had an E mount or ability adapt an E mount, I would purchase that in a hot second. I will give BM credit for creating a very usable Livestream Multicam ecosystem that my Sony's (FS7M2 & A7III) are always a challenge to integrate into and match with BMPCC6K's.

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

Like JVC found though, trying to undo the pre-conceived notion of the relationship between the mount size and the sensor size being absolute is a bit of a tough sell.

I sooooo wanted JVC to find success here. The camera itself wasn't quite right for me, but a Panasonic or Blackmagic camera doing the same thing would almost certainly found its way into my kit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds to me like a lot of us here aren't the target audience for Blackmagic. Not everyone wants to adapt lenses, look up compatibility charts, etc. Wanting MFT mount with S35 sensor or a mount specifically designed for adapting is a little bit like Gerald Undone saying the fp-L isn't worth its price because it has high rolling shutter and poor ergonomics.

The truth is, EF is still the most common lens out there. BM isn't competing for the users that want to look for custom handles, screens, and lens mounts. Want choice? Go for Z Cam--or maybe some of the internet folks are actually more interested in complaining about the design philosophy of companies they aren't buying from, than buying into the camera with the features they talk about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutly AGREE with BMD about EOS Mount. Huge choise of Canon and others manufacture lenses .Lenses are good and for any budget!  Those who wants to use Ef and ef-s lenses will be happy to use them without adapters. Still with EOS you can use NIKON, Russian lenses with adapters.  ND filters construction on this cam may not be suitable for others flange distances - my guess. 

I thanks BMD for EF-mount!

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

They should just make the screen AND EVF each a $500 extra, and reshape the body into something more like RED/Kinefinity/ZCam/BGH1.

Whatever they do, people will complain. If they did what you suggest, like with the Micro, a lot of people would complain about having to rig it up because 'it doesn't even have a monitor!?!'.

So, instead they put the screen on, a nice big one and people complain that it doesn't tilt, or it's not bright enough. So they make it brighter, and tiltable. But now, people want them to take it off completely?

Eventually, the only way to make people happy is to sell cameras in the way Apple sell their laptops. You choose from a selection of sensors, mounts, body shapes, screen sizes, media types, audio inputs, battery types etc. Then customer can mix and match to make the camera they want.

Although, even then, people will complain because the HDMI socket can only go on one side of the body, and I'm left handed, so it's a bit annoying.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually bought one rather than whine about its perceived "shortcomings" (not a dig at  Andrew's article). If there was an X-H2 that could record raw, I may have bought that instead but Fuji is apparently listening to clueless pensioners at fujirumours that cannot comprehend even the basics of what is needed for good video capture, while shouting "I do not need video". Now, I almost sold all of my fuji glass.

Apart from the trouble of licensing a new mount (would Canon licence its rf-mount? Or Sony? And what it would cost), I think the EF mount is still a good choice for the budget this camera is aimed at. I can have tens of thousands of used L-glass and of other glass that is compatible with the ef mount, while similar level glass on the RF mount is prohibitively expensive. 

There still is a somewhat unanswered question on whether the pl-mount mod kit for the 6k will fit to the 6k pro if one wanted that.

Writing raw to an ssd and then having resolve cutting through it like butter is a revelation. Resolve is also included for free.The synergy of hardware and software being attuned to its other's needs reminds me of Apple.

Internal ND's rock, no matter what you tubers say while peddling their own favourite nd supplier of the moment, and I finally have synced  timecode on both the camera and my mixpre.

The menu is a revelation, something no hybrid photo-video camera will attain soon. Battery life is decent, I ordered 4 patona protect np-f550, same Wh as the BM ones.

I am still not convinced that it has 13 stops of DR (actually I think that my X-T3 had more DR) but while waiting for the Sigma 18-35 to arrive and using a crappy helios lens, I am still blown by the plasticity of the  image. I got emotive's colour luts but still think that Fuji color science is better than what I have seen from BM, if better is the right word rather than "prefer". Nevertheless these are subjective observations that may change once I become proficient enough.  Although I am a newb in this, braw can be manipulated to a silly degree and even its prores is quite malleable. 

The ease of use counts quite a lot. I wouldn't go back to a hybrid camera now without having a dedicated cine camera even if this is the level of camera I can afford.

The only major disadvantage I find is the ridiculous pricing of the evf. I would have bought that if it was more fairly priced but I am not averse to shooting using the monitor.

 

I only had a minor hiccup with the camera when I switched it on and the monitor did not switch on, but removing the battery cured it.

Having a full hdmi, a dedicated pin for external power , ssd RAW writing, internal Nd's, dual iso, xlr inputs and a very easy menu are luxuries established DP's would dream of some years ago.

For all else there is Sony's lizard skin colours and horrible menus, but I am very happy that I made the switch with a small thought going on whether it will be reliable enough.

 

 

P.S Is there another forum for BM users apart from the official one and bmcuser that seems like a dead town? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, herein2020 said:

They also seem to have no AF, not great in low light (this may have improved though), and no IBIS. For me a BM camera has never even been a consideration to date.

That's because these are cinema cameras. Traditionally, cinema cameras do not have AF, are used under controlled lighting situations, and don't have IBIS. Cinematographers generally prefer full manual control and dislike IBIS (more organic approaches such as steadicam are preferred). This also sort of explains why they haven't released a full-frame camera, since full-frame is not a cinema format; I read recently that only one major motion picture in history has been shot in full frame. Full frame is making inroads in television, but slower to catch on in cinema. In general, the cinema world is slower to evolve; it's a different world from video. Of course, MFT is not a cinema format either but in the case of the BMPCC 4K I think Blackmagic saw value in increasing the sensor size from the Super 16 format of the previous Pocket while retaining the popular MFT mount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite like it and consisted it but for my needs it was the poor AF and lack of IBIS.

Nope, I don’t need a ‘cinema’ camera, I need a ‘run and gun’ video camera, with it without equally good stills.

I have that in the S1H but maybe the next evo of this series will finally...like Sigma and their FP line, meet my needs.

I really like the picture quality I see coming out of these more than probably anything else sub 5-10k.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bjohn said:

This also sort of explains why they haven't released a full-frame camera, since full-frame is not a cinema format; I read recently that only one major motion picture in history has been shot in full frame.

This isn't really accurate. Perhaps you are confusing the use of a full frame mirrorless camera in the film, The Possession of Hannah Grace, which was shot on a Sony a7sii.

Here's a brief rundown of the history of full frame in Hollywood films up to and including the DSLR revolution and the increasingly popular Alexa LF...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.creativeplanetnetwork.com/resource-center/full-frame-sensors-everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-but-were-afraid-to-ask%3famp

 

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

the increasingly popular Alexa LF...

That was what I was referring to; what I read (can't remember where) was that the LF has only been used in one major motion picture, although it's been making inroads in television. Maybe my source was incorrect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2021 at 1:11 AM, zerocool22 said:

I guess EF mount because of price, I think they can use EF mount for free. And RF is prolly patented and they would need to pay a certain amount. 

And PL is not the hottest with dslr mirrorless style shooters. And E and L mount are more restricted/limited to sony and panasonic. (Not a lot of choice between cinema lenses, more photo oriented, and not as easy to mount to other cameras while EF lenses mount on any camera).

I think it is because there are so many EF mount lenses.      Sony E mount lenses are being adapted with auto focus to Nikon Z cameras now (R might come but harder to do with such a short difference in the flange distance.

 

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...