Jump to content

Blackmagic Micro Studio Camera 4k G2 - now shipping


kye
 Share

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Same impression going on here... Looks funny the first footage seen over here is not from a studio setup! LOL Looks like they should have trading names between both models instead : D

 

Curious to check it accuracy too... ; ) Seems this one is what the other one has missed to be, size and convenience ;- )

The first footage I saw was in a studio, but everything looks so good in a studio now that it's not a test that really stands for much.  

I've also seen a couple of videos of it on FPV drones, but those were coloured badly or weren't that useful.  I wasn't sure that people would even use it outside a studio at all actually, but thankfully I was wrong 🙂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

This one allows enough image quality for anyone of us. I wish for a M4K version with internal recording and an add on tilteable  2.5-3" monitor. Also give it optional S16 and 2x crop modes. For the Studio Micro G2 it would be cool to have a neat seamlessly connected ssd case like for the Sigma FP. Imagewise this is just as rocksolid as the P4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

More M4K footage....

Cat video was apparently shot on the Voigtlander NOKTON25mm 0.95, but details are sparse.  The second video has no details at all, and the first simply had "#cat" as the description, but someone asked about the lens in the comments!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the smallest braw or any kind of recorder-monitor is a 5inch biggie lumbing on that tiny cam. @kye With internal recording of braw and prores i would have been interested in it. With a top monteable 2.5 to 3 inch tilt screen designed for this camera, even moreso. Do that for a Bmmcc 4K and call it M4K, Blackmagic! Great naming btw. @mercer 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

But the smallest braw or any kind of recorder-monitor is a 5inch biggie lumbing on that tiny cam. @kye With internal recording of braw and prores i would have been interested in it. With a top monteable 2.5 to 3 inch tilt screen designed for this camera, even moreso. Do that for a Bmmcc 4K and call it M4K, Blackmagic! Great naming btw. @mercer 🙂

Yeah, it's hardly the ideal package size if you want a tiny setup.  If I went this direction I would fit it with an external SSD and small monitor like the Ikan VL35 3.5" 4K monitor I have with my M2K and a battery plate.

Still, the other options for a RAW setup also have pretty significant compromises:

  • OG BMPCC - small all-in-one package and internal RAW/Prores but only 1080p and screen is fixed and not bright and tiny batteries and no 60p and no dual-ISO
  • OG BMMCC - same size as this plus internal RAW/Prores but only 1080p and no dual-ISO
  • P4K / P6K etc - internal RAW/Prores but ABSOLUTELY ENORMOUS
  • Sigma FP - small with internal RAW (in limited resolutions/bit-depths) but fixed screen and RAW not compressed so file sizes are large and some modes require external SSD
  • Various mirrorless cameras - much larger to begin with but also require 5"+ external recorder to record RAW

The ideal package would be this sensor in an updated P2K chassis, but I doubt this will ever eventuate.

In terms of this only recording BRAW and not Prores, I do wonder what the computational differences would be between BRAW and Prores - they might be similar in practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your budget is decent, the Canon R5 is really not much larger to begin with when compared with the Sigma fp, does decent 12-bit raw internally, and has a decent flippy screen.  By the time the fp is rigged to do 12-bit raw (and you add a small grip so you can actually hold the thing!), it’s already about the same size as the R5 (and still has a fixed screen).  It’s one of the reasons I sold my fp and fp-l and kept my R5.  Sometimes I thought about shoving the fp into a small space without a screen to get something, but then I remembered there’s no built-in wifi and by the time you add even the smallest cineeye/hollyland transmitter to it, it’s… about the same size as the R5.  😛


If the new BMMCC 4K can do monitoring over wifi to a phone and can do 12-bit raw to a really small external SSD (like a Sabrent Nano or something), it could work well for that kind of thing.  If not, by the time you add an external screen (even the VL35) and small SSD, you have a kit about the size of an R5 (with worse ergonomics).

(With that said, your computer’s likely to be able to edit raw from the BMMCC a lot more smoothly than from the R5 - my M2 Max is just barely tolerable with R5 stuff in Resolve)

Also, I’d add in (though I haven’t used) a hacked EOS M as an option for a teeny tiny camera that can record raw internally.  From what I remember, it can do some sort of 2.5k, though that might only be in a 2.35 mode or similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

If your budget is decent, the Canon R5 is really not much larger to begin with when compared with the Sigma fp, does decent 12-bit raw internally, and has a decent flippy screen.  By the time the fp is rigged to do 12-bit raw (and you add a small grip so you can actually hold the thing!), it’s already about the same size as the R5 (and still has a fixed screen).  It’s one of the reasons I sold my fp and fp-l and kept my R5.  Sometimes I thought about shoving the fp into a small space without a screen to get something, but then I remembered there’s no built-in wifi and by the time you add even the smallest cineeye/hollyland transmitter to it, it’s… about the same size as the R5.  😛


If the new BMMCC 4K can do monitoring over wifi to a phone and can do 12-bit raw to a really small external SSD (like a Sabrent Nano or something), it could work well for that kind of thing.  If not, by the time you add an external screen (even the VL35) and small SSD, you have a kit about the size of an R5 (with worse ergonomics).

(With that said, your computer’s likely to be able to edit raw from the BMMCC a lot more smoothly than from the R5 - my M2 Max is just barely tolerable with R5 stuff in Resolve)

Also, I’d add in (though I haven’t used) a hacked EOS M as an option for a teeny tiny camera that can record raw internally.  From what I remember, it can do some sort of 2.5k, though that might only be in a 2.35 mode or similar.

It really depends on the situation you're in.  For me, the choice between the M4K and the FP and the R5 gets solved with lenses.  Specifically that I have them for MFT and don't for the others.

So the above comparison wasn't to say "here are many options to explore", it was really saying "the M4K isn't perfect, but everything else is far from it".

The M2K is a very unique camera in terms of its size/performance/features (especially the fact it can do 3:1 compressed 60p RAW internally) and the M4K is better in some ways, despite also being compromised in some other ways, but for some situations it might be a step forwards.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...