Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
4K Black Magic Production Camera, raw, $2495 now
  • 330 Replies sorted by
  • FWIW, Bloom has tweeted that he's pre-ordered both of the new BMD cams.

  • FWIW, Bloom has tweeted that he's pre-ordered both of the new BMD cams.

    He must, it is his way to get bread and butter. To "review" new cameras.

  • Yes, and since they're not made by Canon, he'll nitpick their every "limitation". :-)

  • He must, it is his way to get bread and butter. To "review" new cameras.

    Let me save everyone some time. Here's the review from the future...

    "These are wonderful cameras, just like the C300. Sure you can shoot 4k, but the workflow just isn't quite as the smooth as glorious 8-bit C300. The Pocket Cinema Cam has a lovely image, but the crop is difficult compared to the C300. They're both a bit too clean at low-light imaging... I like the film-like grain you get with the C300. Did I mention the C300?"

    haha :)

  • Hey c'mon guys no Bloom bashing - he just might come back here again for 1 post saying '...please stop saying bad things about me, it's not cool, please please please or I will tell Steve Weiss, Eric Kessler, and my Mommy...and if you still don't stop - I will tell my cat!!!' :-p

  • Hey, leave Bloom's mum outta this. I'm a big fan of his mum! :-)

  • Hey c'mon guys no Bloom bashing

    haha, I like the guy... he just mentions the C300 too much. We get it. He comes from broadcast shooting and doesn't like color grading or large files. Just stop comparing everything to the DAMN C300! Especially when something like the original BMCC was NEVER meant to compete in the same area!

    No camera should really be compared to the Blackmagic family (in a legitimate review) if it's still in 8-bit color space and lacks RAW or Prores codecs. People get that these are not broadcast, ENG, or "video" cams, no need to beat a dead horse, or make straw-man arguments that the BMCC is "flawed" because it doesn't shoot to a crappy 50mb/s codec from 2003 and therefore the files are too cumbersome. People understand what they're getting into.

  • As Vitaly says above, it's about bread & butter. I get that.

    It would be nice if folks would put more of their energy into using (and learning how to use) tools (cameras, software, etc.) for what they're uniquely good for (their strengths), and spend less energy complaining about the tools' "limitations" (real or imagined).

    But, then again, what fun would that be? ;-)

  • @shian I´ve used it very recently, yes.. (not resolve 8) - not to any great extent (just for converting bmdcc footage) mostly because of the buggy and awkward handling of it. Maybe it works better for you, and maybe it´s me (because I don´t come from a background of control tables) but I felt really stifled by the software.. Essentially it just made me curse a whole lot.

    Looks like the pipeline for resolve 10 is to set things straight though, so I´m looking forward to that. I wouldn´t mind using AE instead for the whole pre-edit / post-edit workflow..

  • I think the guys of rewo will be more than happy that bmd didn't change the form factor of the body.

  • @shian

    I suggest to use http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/6630/new-black-magic-raw-cameras-pocket-and-s35-4k-general-talk#Item_84 for such posts.

    As far as price goes, I like to look at this from the other side. Combined income of all shooters won't be more than they have today, looking at situation, most probably it'll be less than year ago. Add here more expenses to storage, grading. So, this is not revolution from pure economical POV.

  • @last_SHIFT : "Hey c'mon guys no Bloom bashing - he just might come back here again for 1 post saying '...please stop saying bad things about me, it's not cool, please please please or I will tell Steve Weiss, Eric Kessler, and my Mommy...and if you still don't stop - I will tell my cat!!!' :-p"

    You forgot to mention resorting to internet argument #1 and insinuate that the person with the gall to speak ill of him is an unhappy loser that can't get work or has a shitty soccer team to root for. :rolleyes:

  • @WhiteRabbit regarding the canon mirrorless mount. I think it's ideal, indeed, get electronic communication for adapted lens', even speedboosted eventually. However, as you suggest the mount licensing, I would bet this camera would pillage their DSLR video sales, and also some of their new video centric models, so it's not in their best interest to license the technology. Third party lens' makers (and camera makers) don't "license" the current EF mount, instead it was reverse engineered. I would think that it will take time to reverse engineer, or at least validate support for the new mirrorless mount.

    @mintcheerios "The 4k sensor is CCD, yes this means global shutter, but it also means inferior dynamic range and less sensitivity." Well, some of those snippets you included were pretty strange, I haven't read the post yet, but the things he mentioned above are absolutely a reason why you wouldn't want CCD. BBMD even is straight up regarding the reduced dynamic range. Also CCD's are renounced to have less sensitivity than CMOS, just look at any CCD based still photo camera (like Leicas), the are several stops more noisy at high ISO's compared to CMOS based competition. The big sensor revolution in video seems to be exciting to many due to the ability to shoot available light in darker lighting situations, going CCD indeed will hamper some excitement in this area.

    However, having a global shutter in this price range, with this size of a sensor? uh.. what? That's kind of a game changer. If you don't think it's a big deal, just look at at what lengths RED is going to to get global shutter like skew correction.

  • @Mr_Moore "Effective Sensor Size: 21.12mm × 11.88mm (Super 35)" What's interesting, is that the GH2 sensor (being oversized) is 18.8mm x 10.6 isn't that much smaller, I wonder how much vinetting would occur, you could probably still get 3.5k within that image circle, maybe a full 4K on some lens'.

  • It seems Philip Bloom has edited his post to remove the part where he assumes the BMPC 4K uses a CCD sensor. He now says

    I am still waiting for official word on if its a ccd or CMOS sensor. If its CMOS Sensor with global shutter that is impressive!

    I guess he finally realized how baseless his assumption was. I need to be more skeptical of people with that many advertisements on their blog.

  • So he screwed up on the initial facts "maybe" big deal, let it go, nobody is perfect. I dont get why anyone thinks bashing him here is A -Relevant or B Helpful...its not. I happen to like and respect him its not easy doing those reviews and he works hard to keep people passionate about the craft I love... that alone deserves a little respect. Now onto the BLACK MAGIC 4k camera itself...so I am curious but is it just the Pro Res 4k that's available initially or will you be able to shoot 4k Raw from day 1? I am a tad confused on this. I also wonder what the other companies will do when the lion share of the market shifts....well IF BMD can deliver on their promises this time.

  • Just watch him advertising vbag. LoL

  • First of all... who owns 4k TV here?

  • I could care less about the 4K TV. I do like how 4K looks downsized to 2K. If I ever got one it would be for that purpose really.

  • I place a huge premium on the video quality of stuff I watch (I'm one of the few who still vastly prefers buying blu-rays to streaming online) but 4K for home viewing is a total non-starter for me, at least until I'm convinced otherwise. On my 40" LCD, 1080p is plenty resolution. Maybe when I win the lottery, buy a mansion, and build my own theater, I'll be more inclined.

    Now, 4K for acquisition, especially at 2K/1080p delivery... I find that very, very interesting :)

  • @joesiv, yes, an EF-M mount would be ideal to adapt from. BM are not in the business to rely on other manufacturer's products and EF will have a greater base than EF-M. The EF-M is ideal at 18mm flange distance for us out of the loop with lenses that will remain in their cases.

    The word I am hearing, while there is no MFT mount (19.25mm flange distance) version coming, which makes sense due to S35 coverage, the next 4K camera in this latest series may be PL mount. PL mount is great for making an industry standard 'cinema camera', however it is worse to adapt from than the EF mount (44mm flange distance), with PL mount being (52mm flange distance). If PL mount is in fact the next model BMD develop in this 4K camera series, for the rest of us with lenses that can not be made to mount on either the EF or PL mount via mount adapter, we can only hope that a 3rd model is developed in the future with a short flange distance mount so that we can use mount adapters to adapt out to our required flange distance mounts. I would like to see either an FZ-mount which is a solid mount for larger lenses and zooms, or an E-mount. Both have a wide enough diameter for an S35 sensor size, and both have an 18mm flange distance, being ideal to make mount adapters for just about any lens out there. The EF-M would be welcome also. Your view may vary. Any other mount suggestions?

  • Those are the three best, to be honest. FZ, E, and EF-M all have a flange focal distance of 18mm, which is as short as it gets for anything with a Super 35mm sensor size (unless they come out with a new mount). My personal preference is FZ mount, because it is the most robust, and it does have electronic interface. But the ideal choice for selling the most cameras is probably one of the other two. EF-M appeals to Canon lens owners, because it easily adapts to EF, and obviously E mount appeals to anyone who has been using Sony cameras. Don't forget the FS-cams have been reasonably popular in the industry, and hobbyists have been fond of the NEX cameras.

    Perhaps E mount makes the most sense. Canon lens owners wouldn't really benefit from an EF-M camera over the EF version that is already announced. They'd just get an EF-M to EF adapter and use EF lenses on it anyway. Sony E mount would appeal to the Sony users, a completely different crowd (as well as to anyone else who wants it to be short flange focal distance).

    It never should've even been EF mount. If they wanted it to interface electronically with Canon lenses straight out of the box, that's fine, I've got no beef with that. But it should've been EF-M in that case, and they wouldn't need to do different versions for anyone. But then again Canon might not have given them permission to use the EF-M mount.

  • @B3Guy, yes, the mounts probably have intellectual property concerns, likely patent. The EF going back to 1987 may have had the 20 year patent expire in or about 2007. The MFT though may have required permission, as I understand it is only a few years old and Olympus may own that, and they may be more open to using it by third parties, given Panasonic/Lumix MFT cameras, although I only speculate here.

    The FZ-mount would be great, Sony being open to sharing it may not be so easy. The E-mount does open a larger audience of potential purchasers of this 4K camera, though I am not sure if their lenses would have S35 coverage.

    Since I am using 30-40 year old cine lenses, I am not looking for an electronic mount. Save having all my lenses converted to PL mount, a cost that would likely exceed the cost of two of the BM 4K cameras, my next best option with this 4K camera may be to get a hack saw and start again from the base of the camera body.

  • @No_SuRReNDeR

    I don't think anyone hates Philip Bloom here, but I think it's relevant and worth it to investigate some of the things he says.