John Brawley

MFT has some great advantages and I"m a fan of the format. I'm not a fan of it being used as an interchange mount for other lenses to allow for larger image circles on larger sensors. Ideally we'd have an OPEN mount standard, as BM have been using open standards as their raison d'être since the beginning... E mount isn't open, nor is it available. I'm not really sure what lenses it covers that MFT wouldn't also cover either but there's no point really having it on the list.... JB

This is so tedious. It's incredibly ignorant to keep on saying "off the shelf sensor". To keep on re-iterating this means zero understanding of what it actually takes to make an image, especially so if you want to brag about being an academic in screen culture. Olympus cameras are highly praised for their look, yet they use "off the shelf" Panasonic or Sony sensors. Somehow they're renowned for their look, because of the whole image processing pipeline, even though they use the same sensors used in many of the G series panny cameras. Olympus don't have a patent on their "look" though. So same sensors, totally different imaging outcomes, none of which are patented. They do highly customise their sensors, and there are lot's of ways you can do so...the CFA for example... Leica are the same, they have also used "off the shelf" sensors in the past and somehow they too are praised for their look, and also, surprise surprise, have no patent for their look, and yet, it's the very reason many buy them. I thought you'd have wised up by now, but you keep digging in on the ASICS and sensor design. Here's a clue. ASIC's have nothing to do with the sensor design. You assumed so because of Land's comment, but then you couldn't explain why some cameras don't seem to have ASIC's. I've challenged you and you haven't answered. According to Land and you for quoting him, the prerequisite for a cinematic camera maker is designing your own sensor AND ASICs and yet you can't account for Canon, Arriflex or Blackmagic... what do you think they're using if there isn't an ASIC ? How is the ASIC linked to sensor design ? In what way is using an ASIC making the sensor design more credible ? What do other camera manufactures use if they aren't using ASICs ? ASIC's run the camera, not the sensor.... ASIC's aren't related to sensor deisgn any more or less than FPGAs are. You still haven't brought up the alternative yet because you don't know. Go google FPGA. You posting history is entirely relevant when your credibility is at issue. Your backflipping contradictory posts are just as insightful as when you first posted them. And yeah, it's pretty normal for companies not to protect their IP using patents which require them to publish in detail the IP itself. I'm pretty sure RED will have a patent on RedCode, but not your precious ASICs. JB

Nobody but Sony can do E mount. JB

Netflix will accept any camera originated material for content they decide to acquire but that they don't commision. If you come up with a great film or doco, then they won't care what you shot it on. If they are the commissioning producer, then the 4K mantra applies. If you pitch a series that they pay for the production of, then yeah, they want it 4K acquired. Pretty simple. JB

Ha, no I've been urging they make the mount much more "open" than that. I think MFT would be a bad idea on a sensor that is larger than what MFT lenses are projecting. Then you're just using MFT as an interchange mount and I think it's very poorly suited to that job. It should be more robust if that's the intention. Mounts are really tricky because the tolerances are so critical and everyone THINKS it's easy. JB

Hi. You may think I'm a brand ambassador, but lets examine what that would actually mean. It would mean that I get paid to promote and generally aid the cause of Blackmagic and their brand awareness and experience with their users, is that right ? I am not a Brand ambassador for Blackmagic, mostly because I don't get paid to be one, and I'd rather speak my mind openly in public forums like this. I've believe I've been honest in my views of the pros and cons of their products. I have a personal relationship with many of the people that work there and I've had a lot to do casually with helping with test shoots, iterations of changes to fundamentals, which again, I'm not paid for. In return I get to be involved with the development of cameras, furthering my own understanding of how a camera is built from the ground up, I get to see some of my input make it into the development cycle and I get some cameras. Blackmagic once flew me to IBC to help with the launch of the MFT version of the 2.5K, a version I strongly lobbied for internally with BM. None of my involvement with Blackmagic has EVER lead to me getting work as a DP, or increasing my profile. If you think that's what producers go for then you'd be wrong. If you don't think I'm polite enough then it's really your problem. I would much rather remain independent and be able to speak my mind frankly. It's exactly because I'm not a Blackmagic Brand ambassador that I can do this and the more I do this job, the less patient I get with armchair experts like Kino. I feel like I've earned the right to be able to speak on that which I know something about and I don't really have the patience to argue points of fact with someone anonymous like Kino who has no ability to back up his claims nor legitimacy in his identity. Anyone who's been on camera forums knows me and my history and has that posting history to inform them. I have been on CML since nearly the begining, on C.com for many years and DP review, REDUSER, DVXUSER all long before Blackmagic came along. I have a blog where I try to write meaningful and helpful work and share my very own camera tests from actual shows with anyone who wants to see them without monetising it or having any kinds of adverts or kickbacks. Because I like to be able to speak my mind when I wish to. I'm not building a profile with this audience because I am not tied to you guys for money. JB

So Kino once again dodges his assertions with claims about his academic prowess. Notice readers, once again, Kino avoids rebuttals on his claims and moves to...ahhh..defense of his academic prowess. Anyway, last I heard patents weren't the only way to protect IP. In fact, the most enduring way is to keep it secret...like Coke and Colonel Sanders do. Having or not having a patent is indicative of nothing at all. Once again, a very old fashioned out of date view about how IP is protected. But again we're just diverting the conversation again aren't we. Something Kino always does. How about this. Do you think RED don't work with their sensor fab partner in EXACTLY the same way Blackmagic or ARRI or Digital Bolex do ? You don't cause that's what you're saying, but you actually don't really know do you because all you can do is dig up a quote about ASICs and Sensors, without knowing what you post about. Of course you are trying to perhaps have me confirm a technology partner of BM, when you know full well I'd never be able to disclose that without breaking an NDA, but I can assure you, the sensor used in the UM4.6K is not an "off the shelf sensor", nor is it one that you can just go order from whomever you think the vendor is. I know this because of actual personal involvement with its development. Please explain how I can have that so wrong and your version be more correct ? It's very usual for camera manufacturers to partner with companies making sensors to also spin off the development costs to amortise them for other uses. I bet you can't name me another sensor company that has done this after developing a sensor that never came to market....cmon now, you failed on the ASIC questions...You should be able to get this one... The fact is you're wrong. You make wrong claims, and for an academic, you fail to make bullet proof arguments about your claims, backed up by anything other than second hand information. I also don't believe you own any of the cameras being discussed, nor do I believe you've used them. Here are some of my favorite collected Kino quotes and please tell me this isn't the same Kino from another forum.....Please note the regular contradictions and backflippery. "With every 4.6k video that is posted, the lack of a pleasing highlight roll-off is more and more apparent. It could possibly be a highlight recovery issue in post, but it is a characteristic of this camera in several videos that we have seen. It's like the sensor hits a wall and cannot reproduce the gradations of luminance one would expect from the shot." "4 stops over-and-under is a very respectable performance. It's not going to equal an Alexa or Weapon, especially in the highlights, but the 4.6k's blacks are very clean. Its noise performance is pretty impressive and, while it is losing saturation in underexposure, the footage is still usable. " "This is exactly why I said 10-12 stops for the 4.6k," "I cannot imagine at this stage that BMD is having quality control issues." "Obviously, that is a serious problem. That purple/blue clipping is from the camera, not any lens." - Which was said in relation to an obviously mis-graded clip that had the "old" Resolve BM 709 LUT applied. Some of my favourite Kino posts relate to a conspiracy theory he ran for several pages about the 4.6K not having the DR everyone now accepts it has because some early clips that were released didn't to HIS EYE appear to have any DR and then he really got excited because a post of a photo of a XYLA chart on facebook by a senior ASC technical committee DP shot on a computer screen in shot while a 4.6K appeared to be tested didn't appear to show the correct DR and yet didn't seem to want to accept it could never be an accurate image because the lights were on in the test environment for the purposes of taking...the photo... He doesn't even understand how the test conditions would change that result, even when told, he still posted this kind of garbage... "Yes, final results are necessary from an independent source (Cinema5D, for example), but that image was pulled because it was revealing, not because it was misleading." He didn't know the image WAS an independent source, namely the individual ASC technical committee members facebook page, but whatever... "So even when there is evidence there is no evidence. Of course, I anticipated this day. Put a Xyla chart or waveform in front of them and they still cannot acknowledge that the camera's performance does not meet its advertised specs." "The spikes I'm referring to are clearly visible in the waveform monitors sitting on the table in the released image of the 4.6k test. The "waveforms" you have posted are of your own fabrication and not from any test of a RED camera. There is a fundamental difference. Besides, the question remains: why was the entire post, its conclusions, and its uncontaminated Xyla (if any) taken down?" He also continues to ridicule and attack individuals that have no ability to answer because of the very fact that they ARE under NDA. This is also why i like to hold him to account for his reckless and misinformed claims. "Now, of course, I understand you are under NDAs and your responsibility is to report such problems back to BMD and not this forum, but you can't turn around and argue that you were the ones who brought the magenta issue to our attention. That's a joke, right?" But my favourite of course also in the same thread many of the above posts were in was.. "This camera is finally ready for prime time and for my wallet." Sorry if this seems harsh. I just don't like debating what I know to be factually untrue with an anonymous grandstander. I prefer to hold someone that posts that kind of ill informed guesswork to account. All I ever used to do was challenge Kino's claims. He just ignores that and never retracts or admits getting it wrong. I'm happy to be proven wrong if all this is untrue. Well, I have major issues with the testing methodologies espoused by many that produce the magenta corner result. I was sent an image from a RED DRAGON that had the same test results applied according to the author, a 400% boost in saturation to bring out the result, and it looked worse than what's usually cited on the UM4.6K. JB

I haven't seen it in my cameras nor has it been a problem in any of the many QC processes my work goes though. I haven't gone looking for it either. jb

The problem with Kino is that he posts after trying to reverse engineer his knowledge with a google search. Look at his claim about Sony and RED being the only company that make their own sensors and ASICs. He is of course just parroting some marketing speak to support another of HIS claims that he's been called on here, without realising it only undermines his opinion presented as fact. Does he even know what an ASIC is I wonder ? Does he know that not all cameras use ASICs ? Does he think that using an ASIC is the only way to make a camera, as Sony and RED apparently do, which of course means that Arriflex have no idea how to make a camera or design a their own sensor ? Or Panasonic or Canon for that matter. So which is it ? Which are saying is proof of credibility ? Are you saying that Arri, Canon, Panasonic and Blackmagic aren't ? Do you have to use ASICs to design your own camera sensor or do you not ? Does Kino know if designing a sensor and designing ASICS are mutually exclusive ? or not ? Let's wait and see what he says, because one way he shows he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about and the other means he has to accept that he was wrong about Blackmagic not designing their own circuits (boards) and sensors He has zero understanding of how a sensor is designed. He still uses phrases like "off the shelf" without really understanding what that means. Challenging him only leads to sideways arguments. He'll come back now after a period of time while he furiously searches for the answers I challenge him on and he'll regurgitate some more half relevant information. This topic is really just a place for people to vent their disappointments with Blackmagic products, which, they've probably earned their fair share of. My personal experience isn't what many others claim, and I see a company that may not communicate what they do very well, yet addresses these issues when they come up. I've seen them deal with many of their issues in manufacture, like the orbs that came up through the pockets, the rolling noise in some of the early BMCCs. I probably have cameras that some here would define as magenta issues, but I never seem to shoot in circumstances that ever seem to reveal them to the QC processes I go through, namely a tech check for each days rushes, an assistant editor assembling the shots, another editor then cutting the shots (and intercutting with other cameras mind) then going to online, then grade, then through the QC process for delivery, which is very stringent. I've seen some cameras that absolutely have a problem and as far as I know anyone that can demonstrate that kind of severe problem has been able to RMA their camera JB

I've had a UM4.6K for nearly a year. It's done many weeks of work on my sets. Most of the images in my twitter feed are of the same body, the very first one I got. I've had another two PL bodies for about 7 months that have also seen a lot of use. The camera can handle on set abuse. My main body has lots of scuff marks, scratches and dings. It's been rigged on a steadicam, Movi, to cars, in my hands, in production mode, in studio and remote locations. It's had extra transmitters, timecode clocks, plugged in, audio connections used, additional on board monitors, UMC's for remote focus.... There are many many sequences now in the last two TV drama series I shot that have Ursa Mini 4.6K shots and no one ever picks them. I managed to rip one helicoil out early on when an overzealous grip overtightened a rig. I lost a lock off screw that controls the tension on the EVF rotation. I've never replaced it, because the tension hasn't needed to be changed ! My cameras boot up, they don't overheat, they don't loose frames, my shots have passed a zillion INTERNATIONAL broadcast tech checks that specifically go looking for things like noise and FPN and image problems. Directors love the shots I can only get with an Ursa Mini 4.6K, so I'm going to keep using it. JB

Can you buy the same sensor that is in the Ursa Mini 4.6K off the shelf and get the same result ? No. You can't. Is it an off the shelf sensor ? No it isn't. Do you keep saying it is ? Yes you do. Do you say stuff like "I think it has something to do with the fact that they source parts and do not manufacture their own circuits and sensors as with RED and the electronics conglomerates" That's your quote...you forgot that you said RED as well didn't you ? :-) Never mind.... So, you're wrong because RED don't do what you claim. Blackmagic DO make their own circuits and like RED, go to a sensor fab company and customise a sensor to their own specs that you can't buy. So do Arri for that matter. So how would you KNOW ? Seriously ? How do you know that it's off the shelf ? If it's only slightly modified, what does that ACTUALLY mean ? Is it the package size ? What EXACTLY is the benchmark for a slight modification ? What is it that was tweaked ? Was it one thing or many ? Did they just put the BM logo on it ? What other products use the same sensor ? Why doesn't someone else buy the same sensor and make a better camera ? I call you out because I've called you out before sir and I'm just cutting to the chase. You're wrong. Have an opinion. Don't post it as fact when you don't know if it's true. That's all I'm asking. JB

One just sold on EBay with media for 3.5k. Go get one ! (Ok it's a bit more than 500) but ita not far from F35s for that kind of money second hand.... jb

Ok so if you could get one today for 3K it would be a "good" camera ? jb

I think they failed because they didn't make a good camera. Everyone THOUGHT it would be a good camera on spec and to look at but actually it really wasn't. The images were mediocre. It didn't even do half the features claimed unless you used an un-announced and un-launched external recorder that AJA were presumably going to build later. It also says a lot about those who say it's just an off the shelf sensor. There are at least three cameras that are rumoured to use the same sensor, all with different results. Go figure... I think Art Adams got a lot right in this scathing review of the camera. And it's very telling that pictures just didn't deliver. At the end of the day, that's what people want...good looking images. Cion didn't really give you that. Not only that, I personally actually found it to be a pig on the shoulder, being way too front heavy, and despite everyone championing it's ergonomics, they kind of sucked for me in my brief time with it. I really don't think it's simply cost. For most medium to high end pros, those costs were still at the lower end of the scale. Only one of those companies is making a camera, and that camera is a very very niche camera. Kino, just dont make shit up when you have no idea what you're talking about. JB

My mistake. You know it all. They just rock up to the sensor drive though and get a Big Mac sensor meal to go. JB.

Neither RED nor ARRI make their own sensors. They have them outsourced and made to their specifications. Just like BM do with their 4.6k sensor. BM make their own circuit boards. They don't outsource them. Then make them from scratch. They make the physical bodies themselves. They rely on commodity items for the chips and screens but they manufacture more than most other companies in house. They have an active policy of not outsourcing. You're just guessing or making things up when pass mis-informed opinion as fact. Maybe think about qualifying your guesses next time so those reading will understand that you're guessing or making something up. How does anyone know what the margins are for Blackmagic ? A company that don't tend to outsource but do tend to keep as much as they can in-house. Just like the first post that posited that few would sell when thousands have already been sold. It's just guessing at best, and most are way off. They're doing fine. Compare them to AJA and the Cion. Similar sized company to BM, they made a camera based on the same sensor package, but one that was considered to be the much better camera. Look how well that went for them. Why is it that Cion failed ? Everyone who was a "pro" breathed a sigh of relief that a "real" camera would be made and yet... Axiom ? That was going to show everyone how an open source market/ ML style approach would make a camera right ? Show those Blackmagic clowns how to do a camera OS. Look how grindingly slow that's been going because Canon didn't do all the heavy lifting on the sensor front end. or DB ? Why did they fail ? Again, they have an apparently loyal following and unique features. Again it failed. Panavison have failed at least twice to launch a new camera to replace the Genesis. Dalsa, who everyone forgets made the first 4K cinema camera have gone out of making cameras. Aaton went bust trying to make a digital cinema camera. Ikonoscope went bust using the same DB sensor. You armchair quarterbacks are all posting guesses but you actually have no idea what it actually takes to make a camera from scratch. I sure don't but I know that after seeing Blackmagic do it up close for the last few years it's way more complex and intricate than I ever imagined. I know that when I ask about a feature or aspect that I like or don't like of the engineering team they've spent a long time already thinking about it or trying to get past the hurdle. Making and developing cameras is a very expensive game and there's no way it would be some kind of loss leader. It's just way too expensive. At least they're still in the game and offering choices. They continue to innovate, and I think if you look at their first efforts, compared to now, they obviously listen to what their customers want even if it doesn't appear to be so. They have certainly hit some pretty big bumps in the road too but they are still here and trying to compete with the big boys, something a lot of others have failed to do. I find the "qc" issue hasn't hit me. I guess I'm lucky or maybe I don't expect to have my camera working or repairable after dropping it but in years of using all the BM cameras I have on commercial and paying jobs, I've not run into most of the problems that are cited as being their weakness. I mean honestly the camera doesn't overheat and yet it's constantly written as a problem on review sites or in the mythology. In the early days of RED they had to educate their users about how to get the most from their cameras and how to shoot RAW. I think BM need to do the same thing because you still get people who have no idea about a RAW workflow stumbling into using RAW for the first time after having only shot 8bit 4:2:0 previously. This community more than "pros" is where BM cameras do the most for filmmakers. Which other big box company gives you ProRes or even 10bit ? JB

Resolve has a post solution for the Black Hole issue, which is great because there are other cameras that have the same problem. I wa shooting MAC moving lights on a film four days ago with Alexa's and guess what.....they too suffer from black hole sun. IS lenses work great on the pocket ? JB

Yeah, you'd be 100% wrong there. But carry on... They seem to have sold thousands of them. Mostly they're still backordered. Such as...? Resolve...? Oh wait, you get that included with the camera... Monitors ? Converters ? I think you're stretching a pretty long bow.... JB

The video assist I used for this shoot is very low cost and small. I thought it did the job very well. JB

Hi, thanks for the feedback. I had some Zeiss MK3 Superspeeds that are T1.3. Perhaps you're thinking of those ? If you have specific shots you want to know about I can probably remember what I was doing. Thanks again. JB I agree, I think the Olympus cameras are highly customizable, once you spend the time to set them up and understand them. JB One thing that's not well know is that there IS a difference in the construction of the IS between the various bodies (some are magentic and fully float) The EM5II is the most advanced of all the current bodies :-) JB

Hello. Here's some more DNG's for downloading. There's a mix of evening and dusk shots here with tricky and mixed lighting. Compressed RAW as well. https://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/…/ursa-mini-4-6k-carnival/

Yeah it's the house that he's driving towards in the drone shot that's downloadable. Look closely... :-) jb

Just because the couldn't get gs working as well as they would like for the current cameras doesn't mean you won't see it in the future, like for example the over due Ursa 4.6K turrets ? I think BM had to draw a line and ship the UM4.6K because for the vast majority of users the RS is perfectly acceptable for most users, while they keep optimising it. jb

But that's your choice to make isn't it ? The real takeaway is.... Don't plan for anything that you can't buy today and have in your own hands to test for your own needs. Don't plant to shoot with anything you haven't tested and can't get your hands on. Then you'll never be disappointed by a product being delayed. Yeah they shipped a camera that said RAW on the box and enabled it a month later (the 4K). Pretty sure they hardly had actually shipped any actual bodies but it was poor form. JB I agree and around this time of year with NAB everyone's always like...whooo wait and see what XXXX will show up and do and it STILL hasn't happened because no one's even touched their very first camera. Who else TODAY does an internally recording uncompressed RAW / ProRes / DNx camera with such high DR ? No one has actually matched it ! STILL !! That camera was launched in 2012. They even added features they didn't really plan to ever add. When they made the first camera, they were just like, let's see if anyone buys this.....They dind't know it would be as successful as it became. They started a whole new division. The Ursa is a great evolution. Look at how far they've come with the form factor. They have done their own EVF....They've continued to add functionality, and they've still not really crippled any of their cameras for the sake of other tiers. That's impressive for a small company in such a short amount of time. Look at the Cion. They even are rumoured to use the same 4K sensor. And they supposedly had the better form factor. All the reviews were, Oh this is what BM should have done yet it's failed almost as miserably as Dalsa did. Why ? I mean yeah BM are infuriating with the way they operate but I don't see anyone else coming close to doing what they are doing. JB

I guess you could argue that if they never actually shipped anything....And if there was something else that compared with the very first camera they made.... JB