Leaderboard

  Quite, it can't be "fine to shoot the grandkids" and copy a useless feature from high end. These are just excuses. It isn't finished, it's not a complete product.  You can't delete clips or format because the firmware isn't finished. It lacks some basic functions, and from what I've seen, the image is 'alright', not spectacular. Yes it's good for the money, but a camera is not just its image when you're under pressure.   Another couple of years yet I reckon til they're solid kit.   It's a tool, if it doesn't work right, then it doesn't work right. No one here owes it any abstract, philosophical leeway. Pure abstract 'image quality' is not everything, and it doesn't even kick arse at that. There's moire, it ain't so sharp, the highlights clip super hard, and some sensors are calibrated wrongly.   May sound harsh, but combined with all the glitches and shipping issues, there are a lot of negatives.   "it can be fixed in a firmware update"... yes so could many dream features. C100 could become a C500 and so on... but we've yet to even see decent functionality updates for the first bmd camera, let alone the 'pocket'. People wait for years with a tool they dislike, praying for updates only to be disappointed. It's just no way to live, guys  :blink:   Buying a tool because it might work properly later seems mad to me.   If you're dropping a lot of cash, you shouldn't have to 'work around' your gear. It should work for you.    This is, in it's current state, far less convenient to shoot on than an RX100, a pure consumer camera!   Also, all this extra 'quality' and 'grading room' is only any use for those who are able to take advantage of it, quite frankly. 90% of films I've seen made with these cameras haven't benefited in any meaningful way from high bitrate. They could have been shot on camcorders. The extra creative leeway simply hasn't been used by the shooters. It's the great power/great responsibility thing.   When it comes to judgement, if this were 4K or very compressed RAW or S35 prores, actually had a real standout feature (though of course the usefulness of each in context is debatable) that was fully functional... it'd deserve the easy ride it's getting in some parts...   but it's a box of compromises, and a bunch of the early bodies even need to be sent back for adjustment.   Imagine the amount of media you'd get through in raw? It won't even be slightly useful til cards are much bigger and faster cheaper, by which time it'll be obsolete. Moore's law is a bitch, she hits both ways...   I give them their due: it is an attempt at innovation. That in itself is good and we need more of it. But most of what is happening in the hands of a few pros and a lot of eager hobbyists, should have happened in a lab. I don't want to pay that much to be a beta tester.   In most of the shoots I've done recently, all of the pocket's 'niggles' would have resulted in me getting far fewer shots which would have impacted the creativity of the piece negatively. That's my number one concern TBH.  And that's the thing the client (in the pro world) or audience care about most, not a few more lines of resolution or a bit more grading room.   Though extended dynamic range or resolution is nice to have, it means nothing if you can't even capture the content in a given environment due to a high number of workarounds.   The OP's example of the director's dis-satisfaction is illustrative. As a director I wouldn't mind the whole thing being shot well on GH3 (granted, this is greenscreen, but for most shoots), but to have to pick up a few shots on a remarkably different camera at short notice because A-cam didn't work, would be annoying and a bit of a negative mark... you expect people to know their gear. how many people want to expose themselves to the possibility of looking foolish when their livelihood depends on it?   It's too glitchy for pros and it's needless 'quality' and excessive extra equipment for amateurs... I just don't think it's ready for either market.

That's nothing, Star Wars was shot on VHS-C   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN8QCL8B8sU

I've just finished up a shoot using the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera on a professional shoot, so I thought I would share my experience with the camera in this environment. (I will post the video when its finished up)   The Shoot   My business was hired to shoot a music video for a concept on Green Screen. It was a parody of infomercials, so the task was to film various models and comedic hosts demonstrating several very silly products. I was the DoP/camera operator, and we also had a director, 2 assistants, 2 photographers and  a make up artist.   The Gear The Blackmagic was mounted on rails in a Wooden Camera Cage, with just a Follow Focus. I had 4 x Sandisk Extreme Pro SD cards, 3 batteries, mic, charger and AC adapter. The camera was connected through HDMI to an external monitor. The green screen was lit with 2 Kino Flo 4-Banks, and the models with Kino Flo Diva 401s and Dedolights.    I would not recommend the Wooden Cage. Its just ok. The screw holes all over it make no sense. The battery charger was the worst piece of kit I've ever used in the history of video production. Cant remember the brand (begins with a H), but lots of companies are selling it with the camera as a bundle. You can put AA batteries in it and its so fiddly. It sucks.    Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera Feedback Whilst I was impressed with the BMPCC, I did have various issues with the camera - mostly with the lack of in-camera formatting and batteries. I will display these through Pros and Cons.    Pros + The build is solid and of high quality   + The back screen is nice and clear, a very decent size!   + Very simple to use meaning you can focus on creating   + Image quality is fantastic. Compared it with the GH3 in flat profile and the difference was staggering   + Skin tones are beautiful, very organic   + Not much dynamic range to see, but the roll-off was very smooth on the models   + The size makes it easy to handle and not a pain to shift around. Nice and quick.   + Zebras are very useful. Wish I had these on my GH3!   Cons - This camera eats memory cards for breakfast, lunch, and dinner! Used all of the 4 x 32gb cards. So the cost of running this camera at a professional level could be quite costly.   - Battery life is dreadful. The shoot was 8 hours long and we went through 9 full charges.    - No ability to format cards in camera. Completely unacceptable. We ran out of space, backed up the cards and tried to format one to exFat on a Mac. Camera wasn't having it. 10 mins left til close. So had to use GH3 for last 2 shots. Director wasn't happy.    - No indication of recording time left. No idea if 1 second left on 60 mins! Again, this is unacceptable.    - Auto focus is absolutely terrible. I don't use it much, but its useful when you are against time in a studio. Just doesn't work. Why bother Blackmagic? Your features HAVE to work.    - Focus Peaking is temperamental. It works, then sort of does, then doesn't at all. Maybe something wrong with this unit?    - Manual focusing with the Panny zooms seemed to be a lot more fiddly on this camera than on the GH3. It seems to be much more intricate and I have no idea why that is. The director agreed.    - No articulated screen. Its 2013. I don't want to sit on the floor or bend over in front of models to see the screen.    - Moire. Can't handle fine lines.    Conclusion Having only use the camera once for a studio shoot, its hard for me to give a full opinion on this camera - but from my experience there are some definite quirks that I feel are a major issue for its use in a professional (and general usage) environment for its target 'DSLR video user' market.    Ok, it shoots in 10 bit ProRes and has a beautiful image. It will shoot RAW soon. Its cheap. But...   For professional use, the fact you cant see how much recording time you have left or even format a card is a completely ludicrous omission and causes issues. Issues that take more time, more work, more stress, more stuff you shouldn't have to deal with in a camera. Blackmagic need to sort this out, it cant be difficult.    The fact the the camera is labelled 'Pocket' is mind boggling. Batteries constantly need charging, and its always a worry. If you were to really carry this round in your 'Pocket', expect to need a bagful of batteries. Or you are screwed.    The focusing area of the camera also seems unfinished. Auto focus doesn't work, and peaking just can't be arsed half the time. Didn't they test the camera, or is it a good-egg, bad egg thing with the production line?    My opinion so far is that this camera isn't completely ready for use in a professional environment, and is better suited as a hobbyist item for (very) short films. If you can afford lots of storage, 60 billion batteries and a ton of memory cards, and dont mind a few workarounds then you should enjoy it - its a cool gadget with a beautiful image that a video DSLR really needs.    Its very quirky and needs more work, which is expected of a 1st generation model. Lets hope for more improvements and a Blackmagic employee facepalm about essential little features that are unacceptably missing.    I like it. Its just a pain in the arse. Like my fiance. You might just have to put up with its issues just because its so beautiful ;)

  HI, I watched your reel.  Very nice!  You're a professional and, as a tinkerer,  I'm not going to tell you your business :)     However, if you don't mind, I think you're letting certain COMPLETELY justified frustrations get in the way of your adopting this technology.   In my experience (and again, i qualify that as a hobbyist), grading is not the primary benefit of RAW.  After all, as you point out, nothing happens if you can't get the rightly lit, prepared shot in the first place.   Also, bit-rate is a price you pay for RAW, it is not a reason to do it.  Again, you're right about everything, but... (baby with bathwater?)   RAW gives you is the look of natural lighting and skin tones.   Have you worked with a RED, Alexa, BM, Magic Lantern RAW, etc?  If you have, and if all the negatives you talked about were not there (for the sake of argument) which image would you prefer?  I believe, looking at your reel, that you, especially, would prefer RAW shooting.  You shoot natural light, often single source, with much shadow detail.  You're not gimmicky.   Please don't take offense, but I believe you would have lowered the contrast in many of your videos, if you could have.  The video cameras you use make images artificially bright because that's what the CODECs are tuned for to write at certain bit-rates.   I'm not here to question you.  I'm here to say, give them a try.  Don't let a bunch of knuckleheads cloud your judgement.  Everything you say is true, but if may not matter once you fairly balance the pros and cons.  I leave you with a poem that I read when younger, about others who had creative blind spots:   A Pact I make a pact with you, Walt Whitman -  I have detested you long enough. I come to you as a grown child Who has had a pig-headed father; I am old enough now to make friends. It was you that broke the new wood, Now is a time for carving. We have one sap and one root -  Let there be commerce between us.  Ezra Pound

Last pro shoot on 600D I used three batteries and a single 32GB card, that's with increased bitrate.   That's a lot more convenient! Far less fooling around and more shooting time.   I'm sure the image has some advantages, but it sounds like a beta camera to me. I'm glad i removed all my preorders.

If you haven't bought it yet get the MFT mount instead and a Metabones Speed Booster and you're back in business with the 11-16mm (assuming appropriate adapter can be worked out).     The LA7200 can be used with wider lenses than just about any other anamorphic adapter.  It's worth a shot though 11mm is wider than I've ever read being compatible.  You should check out the anamorphic forum and study up on the diopters you're going to need to make it feasible though.  You're better off buying a Speed Booster and getting more FOV that way, if you can change your order from EF to MFT.     An LA7200 is going to cost well over a thousand dollars, until something like the SLR Magic anamorphic lens is for sale and when that happens there will be little reason to spend $1500 on a used LA7200 when you could spend that on a new adapter that doesn't absolutely require diopters to be useful for nominal shooting.  You could easily spend as much as the price of a brand new BMCC on an LA7200 and the necessary diopters.  A Speed Booster is under $500.