The next Blackmagic Pocket or Micro Camera?

[IronFilm]

16 hours ago, Liam said:

I think blackmagic wants to hold off "uprgading" their cameras as much as possible. You can sort of see how each of their cameras still has their own purpose.

THIS! x1000 this.

I feel rather than a BMPCC v2.0 (unlikely!) we will instead see a new camera which overlaps with the BMPCC (like the BMMCC does) but more importantly fills in another different little niche that BMD hasn't done yet. (such as a dedicated gimbal camera? Like has been possibly rumoured)

[mercer]

They'd be insane not to do a pocket ii. Hands down, the Pocket was their most successful camera, but it is starting to get a little long in the tooth. At the very least the form factor deserves 60p, a better LCD and better battery. If they can work out how to include the 2.5k and the global shutter, they'll have another hugely successful camera... Especially if they can keep the cost at or below $1299.

[Mattias Burling]

9 minutes ago, mercer said:

They'd be insane not to do a pocket ii. Hands down, the Pocket was their most successful camera, but it is starting to get a little long in the tooth. At the very least the form factor deserves 60p, a better LCD and better battery. If they can work out how to include the 2.5k and the global shutter, they'll have another hugely successful camera... Especially if they can keep the cost at or below $1299.

But is it really? The only camera imo that has caught up to it in the price range is the 5Dmkiii. Which is an even older camera.
Other than that the BMPCC still is the cheapest Raw cinema camera out there (with proper quality HD and unlimited recordning).

If one wants a better screen, audio and battery there is the BMCC for just a little more. Sacrificing the size.
If one wants slowmo there is the Micro. Again sacrificing the size and price.
But then one might as well get the 5Dmkiii. The BMCC definitely has its place but the Micro is, imo, not a good option unless you need it for specific things like drones etc.

A pocket version 2 would be cool. Probably needs a fan for slowmo. Not sure if the 2.5K sensor has global shutter ability, if not it cant happen.

Its tricky imo to say what they could do. A BMCC with better screen, slowmo etc is the URSA mini. A pocket without the screen and  added slowmo is the Micro. A BMPCC with better screen, audio, etc is the BMCC.
They seem to have it covered. Cinema, studio, big Ursa, Ursa mini, Pocket, Micro Studio, Recorders, Editor, etc.

One thing that's missing is for example highspeed. Like an affordable Phantom type deal.
That would be cool.

Long way till NAB
 

 

[tweak]

BMPCC with better screen and battery does not equal BMCC in my opinion. Huge scope for a BMPCC V2 and it would sell like hotcakes guaranteed. Even with such annoying problems BMPCC sold super well, that says it all.

[Mattias Burling]

45 minutes ago, tweak said:

BMPCC with better screen and battery does not equal BMCC in my opinion. Huge scope for a BMPCC V2 and it would sell like hotcakes guaranteed. Even with such annoying problems BMPCC sold super well, that says it all.

5Dmkiii has it all already. 

[AaronChicago]

They really should make a BMPCC/BMCC combo and even call it a BMCC mark II. DSLR sized form factor. Articulating screen. Canon battery. SD or CFast 2.0 card slot. EF and MFT mounts.

[tweak]

2 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

5Dmkiii has it all already. 

True, but mk3 cost a lot more and is in a bit bigger package, plus not speed boostable/ as adaptable. mk3 will likely be my next purchase though.

[Bioskop.Inc]

A Pocket/BMCC hybrid with Global Shutter (or just improved RS like the Micro), would be the way to go.

It'll be bigger than the Pocket, but smaller than the BMCC & have better battery life, screen & a cooling system to get 60p - it won't be 4k, but 2.5k in RAW & 1080p ProRes. This would be perfect.....

[tweak]

22 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

A Pocket/BMCC hybrid with Global Shutter (or just improved RS like the Micro), would be the way to go.

It'll be bigger than the Pocket, but smaller than the BMCC & have better battery life, screen & a cooling system to get 60p - it won't be 4k, but 2.5k in RAW & 1080p ProRes. This would be perfect.....

I'd also love something like that.

[Michael Coffee]

I suppose a pocket 2 with the micro cinema sensor would be quite nice

[Justin Bacle]

Actually, I would love to see exactely the same BMPCC but with a better battery and an even lower cost (say $500 ?), so that everyone can have one (think film schools, they could give one to every student). RAW S16 for everyone ! YAY !

[Mattias Burling]

32 minutes ago, tweak said:

True, but mk3 cost a lot more and is in a bit bigger package, plus not speed boostable/ as adaptable. mk3 will likely be my next purchase though.

Smaller than a bmcc an I guess as big as the pocket would be with equal screen, battery and audio.

No need for speedbooster, its already full frame. It can adapt alot of lenses from cheap m42 to C/Y.

Price is depending. A used 5Dmkiii costs less than a BM Micro body only. A used with warranty costs less than a Micro + monitor.

The only drawbacks to the 5D imo is convertion times. Its not bad, but an extra step.

I will probably buy one as well. Have a bmpcc that does everything I need but when the price reaches sub $1k I will pull the trigger. Only $150 to go...

[tweak]

I'm on the same path and I have EF lenses already and shoot a lot of pictures so it's kind of a no-brainer for me as soon as the price is right. Just need those fan-boys to start selling off their mk3s for mk4 upgrades  .

[Justin Bacle]

14 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

The only drawbacks to the 5D imo is convertion times. Its not bad, but an extra step.

Actually, I started using MLVFS (Magic Lantern Forum link : MLVFS) to import the footage in Ae (to use Camera Raw). I then use the Ae comps directly in Pr with ingest for creating proxies. It is painless compared to the transcoding mayem (raw2cdng -> Ae -> DNxHD 444 -> Pr)  that I used before.

[tweak]

9 minutes ago, Justin Bacle said:

Actually, I started using MLVFS (Magic Lantern Forum link : MLVFS) to import the footage in Ae (to use Camera Raw). I then use the Ae comps directly in Pr with ingest for creating proxies. It is painless compared to the transcoding mayem (raw2cdng -> Ae -> DNxHD 444 -> Pr)  that I used before.

I was trying to use it but it doesn't work so smooth on my laptop.

[mercer]

5 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

But is it really? The only camera imo that has caught up to it in the price range is the 5Dmkiii. Which is an even older camera.
Other than that the BMPCC still is the cheapest Raw cinema camera out there (with proper quality HD and unlimited recordning).

If one wants a better screen, audio and battery there is the BMCC for just a little more. Sacrificing the size.
If one wants slowmo there is the Micro. Again sacrificing the size and price.
But then one might as well get the 5Dmkiii. The BMCC definitely has its place but the Micro is, imo, not a good option unless you need it for specific things like drones etc.

A pocket version 2 would be cool. Probably needs a fan for slowmo. Not sure if the 2.5K sensor has global shutter ability, if not it cant happen.

Its tricky imo to say what they could do. A BMCC with better screen, slowmo etc is the URSA mini. A pocket without the screen and  added slowmo is the Micro. A BMPCC with better screen, audio, etc is the BMCC.
They seem to have it covered. Cinema, studio, big Ursa, Ursa mini, Pocket, Micro Studio, Recorders, Editor, etc.

One thing that's missing is for example highspeed. Like an affordable Phantom type deal.
That would be cool.

Long way till NAB
 

 

I'm just not sure that you can argue, if you want those features then move up to the BMCC. They are two totally incomparable beasts. 

I think a pocket 2 would have to be slightly bigger for 60p, but I don't think it would have to be too substantial of an increase. The micro has the same height as the pocket, is shorter in length, but deeper. So I assume the depth helps a little but so does the vents. I would think an inch thicker and a better heat sink would be more than enough... At least for 60p... For 2.5k... Not sure?

[Phil A]

I think mostly everyone imagines an evolutionary step above the current (old) offering. Size-wise between BMPCC and BMCC with the 2.5K sensor and - if possible - 60fps. If it would use LP-E6 or NP-F batteries instead of the internal one, that would already be a big step forward. What I miss a lot on the BMCC is a HDMI port, a lot of cheap external monitors don't have SDI.

Personally I'd love a BMCC v2 (if necessary even in the current body) with LP-E6 batteries, the 5" FullHD display of the VideoAssist, the 60fps & 3:1 RAW of the BMMCC and a HDMI port. If it comes with the Resolve dongle I wouldn't mind a price between 2000 - 3500€.

I realize there's the "buy the Ursa Mini" logic but most here probably don't want the 4k sensor and the 4.6k one with all the rig you need incl. batteries and media brings it quite high in price. And that's completely ignoring that it's not really that mini at all and quite heavy.

[mercer]

11 minutes ago, tweak said:

I was trying to use it but it doesn't work so smooth on my laptop.

Do you shoot with MLV Raw on the 7D? I've only used the original raw on the 50D. I use Raw Magic Lite to turn the files into DNGs... It's a pretty painless process. Then I take them into Resolve where I do a simple exposure and saturation adjustment... Spit them out to prores for edit and final grade in FCPX. It's pretty painless. With any footage I am going to transcode it to prores before I bring it into FCPX anyway, so the only added step is Raw Magic Lite, which is actually lightning fast. 

[tweak]

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

Do you shoot with MLV Raw on the 7D? I've only used the original raw on the 50D. I use Raw Magic Lite to turn the files into DNGs... It's a pretty painless process. Then I take them into Resolve where I do a simple exposure and saturation adjustment... Spit them out to prores for edit and final grade in FCPX. It's pretty painless. With any footage I am going to transcode it to prores before I bring it into FCPX anyway, so the only added step is Raw Magic Lite, which is actually lightning fast. 

Yeah I shoot MLV Raw. I use MLRawViewer because I like to preview shots before I decide what to export. MLVFS would be great if it worked smooth for me.

[mercer]

6 minutes ago, tweak said:

Yeah I shoot MLV Raw. I use MLRawViewer because I like to preview shots before I decide what to export. MLVFS would be great if it worked smooth for me.

Is there a big quality difference between MLV Raw and regular Raw?