Man Stuff like this happens with smaller companies not used to having such a major release. I think they make bad decisions based on trying to grab buyers before other companies come out with their product. It's easier for established camera companies like Sony, Canon etc. They have experience and tons of current customers who are already fans of their products so they don't have as much to worry about. If customers who pre ordered are unhappy they can cancel, but i'm not really gonna bash the smaller companies too hard knowing that they are pushing the envelope on design and forcing the big companies to make better and cheaper product just to retain their status. I'm pulling for BMD to catch a break and get their product rolling.

RED, BMD, SLRMagic, Digital Bolex etc. All of these companies are doing some really amazing things and I hope that customers are patient with them and their issues. In the end we've all benefited from their efforts even if not entirely successful.

I can't find any confirmation of the march shipping date, not on black magic site. Nowhere else either. I was at the black magic event in stockholm 4 days ago and they were still saying december.

I think that laws must restrict preorders, so you sign kind of agreement and seller will pay you fees each day if target date is not met (with 60 days equal 100% of sale price :-) ) .

Had an excellent time at the #blackmagiccinemacamera seminar here in Hong Kong. Not shipping til March though!

Via: https://twitter.com/nickdearman/statuses/263260271877955584

All looks really bad.

@DaVeat

I've only heard the Ultra 16's do work, though it's unconfirmed rumours and I haven't tested it personally. If that's the case the 9.5mm, 12mm and the 14mm (all T1.3) would be of interest.

They are very very expensive and pretty rare lenses though.

jb

Re: s16 lenses.. the rule of thumb for c-mounts (s16´s mainly) and the gh1 sensor was that you could get full coverage on most s-16 25mm focal length primes. Obviously there would be a little more of the field curvature / light falloff than the lens designers intended but it´s a possibility, no doubt.

Wide angles are no-go, unless the ultra´s (@johnbrawley) happen to have a larger imaging area..

I have a canon 50mm c-mount (tv-16) lens from the 70´s which I´m sure will look great on the bmd cam and the new gh3.. there´s also a 25mm from the same lineup of tv-16 lenses, which could be worth a shot.

Thanks a lot J.B. There's a lot of fine S16 lenses out there not being used so I'm trying to find out whether some focal distances or image cropping would work, since BMC shooting resolution is 2432 x 1366..

another great video from OneRiverMedia! Thanks!! Great video, again!

So the BMC is 3k, the C300 16k, and you are putting cost of media in between them !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yea, +1. I don't even know why people bring up the C300 for anything. It's so overpriced and out-speced in every area, that it's mind boggling when people bring it up as a potential investment. You could literally get TWO Blackmagic Cinema cams AND A FS700 for the price of ONE of those 50mb/s 8-bit dinosaurs. Mpeg-2 codec really? For $15,000? Who in their right minds are even purchasing these inane cameras? Pound-for-pound in 2013... the C300 is worth about $750. Not even joking here.

I just got a quote the other day for LTO storage (which is what allot production houses use anyways) for around $3500. Tape is $30 for a TB and FALLING FAST. It's just not an issue.

Like I've been saying for the last two years... it's all about competition and markets. Allot of people just don't like the availability of RAW cinema-grade cameras for so cheap. It's upsetting technology. They'll use any excuse possible to discredit it...

IMHO the c300 is a much more robust camera for most types of work.

You have to consider the cost of it. FS700 is even more robust, versatile and quite a lot cheaper than what canon has to offer.. it´s comparable to the c500 which is a lot more expensive.

@itimjim

I think you got some valid points. Im not concerned about storage costs btw. What I'm saying is that storage will be a hassle in your pipeline with raw footage from this camera. That's a bitter truth many will face. I don't nesesarly believe cineform will be a saving on this on, but it might.

It would most likely be more expensive to add some sort of onbord raw compresion, thats a given. But to what cost? Thousands or a couple of hundreds extra per camera? One thing is the cineform transcoding time you need to put into the workflow, but what about storage space needed in the meantime, before doing anything with your raw footage? I for one belive that can turn out pretty ugly, fast. But, I see your point on this one, you will probably do something similar with the R3D files in the end of the day. Difference is, they don't need to concern about filling up theyr drives with 1200mbits footage before transcoding, more like 200-300mbits. Red rocket or not, you dont need it. And honestly i dont belive most scarlet users (which is the closest RED users we can compare to) own red rocket. 200-300mbit is much like prores or dnxhd, but than your out of the raw business right. Time will tell how good prores or dnxhd will compare to raw. Maybe its good enough, or maybe you figure out that you just can't live without raw when you actually have that option in your grasp. In my mind you will eventually go for the best of what you have. I sure dident shot whit LP mode back in the tape days.. Even though it meant I could save my self from a hectic and stressful tape switching.