Is the BMPCC still relevant?

[mercer]

Whew what a year, I think I have tested nearly every brand of camera and I keep getting pulled back to the BMPCC. I briefly had it back in October, but my copy had some overheating issues and I returned it. I quickly got caught in my day job and didn't get the chance to process any of the footage. Since then other cameras caught my eye, but I recently sat down and spent some time with ProRes HQ footage. This is what I came up with...

Even with my color massacre, I find the image out of that camera to be the most robust, filmic image I have ever achieved on any sub-$1000 camera... so is the BMPCC still a relevant option with all of the 4K consumer cameras on the market and soon to be on the market?

[Cinegain]

Looks good, you're absolutely right, it is an amazing camera with the true cinema camera touch. Too bad the Micro Cinema Camera wasn't quite the replacement for it. Though, the BMPCC could really use that Mosaic Engineering VAF, IR cut filter, image stabilization, vari-angle touchscreen and better battery life. I hope they get to read this and take it into account for their new year's resolutions. Imagine something like that in the G85 body. Gold!

[mercer]

@Cinegain thanks, it turned out okay... I still struggle with color, but I think I am finally starting to get a little better. Anyway, yeah it has its issues... it definitely needs IR filtration and in a lot of instances it needs a VAF filter... the next gen of mosaic is supposed to have an IR filter built into the VAF filter, so that should be helpful. But damn that image is nice... not necessarily mine but I've seen some of my favorite work shot with it.

With a native lens and OIS, it can be a true compact cinema cam. It reminds me of old 110 film cameras... just point and shoot the damn thing.

I have been obsessing over cameras for far too long and I am really tempted to dump everything, pick up another Pocket and stop reading any post about upcoming cameras... unless it's the Pocket ii... Lol.

[dbp]

I think so, unless 4K requirements really become an issue. I've been shooting with mine a lot more lately and it really does look better than the GH4 pretty much all of the time. It's quite sharp at 1080p, too.

Moire is definitely a bummer at times, though. 

But of all the cameras I ever shoot with (GH4, C100, canon / nikon DSLRS), it's the only one that gives a hint of the really high end camera look at times. 

[Alex Uzan]

Moiré and the small sensor are the two points that stop me to buy it.

Hope the Pocket II will fix this.

[mercer]

44 minutes ago, dbp said:

I think so, unless 4K requirements really become an issue. I've been shooting with mine a lot more lately and it really does look better than the GH4 pretty much all of the time. It's quite sharp at 1080p, too.

Moire is definitely a bummer at times, though. 

But of all the cameras I ever shoot with (GH4, C100, canon / nikon DSLRS), it's the only one that gives a hint of the really high end camera look at times. 

I could not agree more! The obtainable image, from that camera, at that price point, is just insane... I don't know why I even bother messing around with 4K this or downsampled 1080p that...

[dbp]

I find that it also just looks a little different than most, and that's big to me. Same with the Digital Bolex. They have a unique look that's welcome after seeing the 9000th DSLR/C300/FS7 video. 

 

 

 

Gotta add, one of my big complaints about the pocket was lack of slow mo, but that can be a blessing in a way. I tend to over-rely on it at times, so it's nice being forced to get away from it. 

[mercer]

41 minutes ago, dbp said:

I find that it also just looks a little different than most, and that's big to me. Same with the Digital Bolex. They have a unique look that's welcome after seeing the 9000th DSLR/C300/FS7 video. 

 

 

 

Gotta add, one of my big complaints about the pocket was lack of slow mo, but that can be a blessing in a way. I tend to over-rely on it at times, so it's nice being forced to get away from it. 

Do you shoot in 23.97 or 24p? I know the benefits of shooting 23.976 but it almost seems like the motion looks a little more pleasing in 24p... it's probably just in my head though. 

The one thing I cannot get right with BM footage are the greens... even with IR filtration they just don't seem to react to coloring the way other cameras do. Have you noticed that?

But all in all, the depth to the image is night and day compared to the slew of Panny, Sony, Canon and Samsung cameras I have used the past year.

I was planning on getting another BMPCC anyway, but now I am seriously comsidering selling or returning all my other cameras (except my D5500 because I paid next to nothing for it and I use it for family stills) and spend 2017 working on craft with the BMPCC instead... unless a 2.5K BMPCC ii is released with 60p at NAB. 

[dbp]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Do you shoot in 23.97 or 24p? I know the benefits of shooting 23.976 but it almost seems like the motion looks a little more pleasing in 24p... it's probably just in my head though. 

The one thing I cannot get right with BM footage are the greens... even with IR filtration they just don't seem to react to coloring the way other cameras do. Have you noticed that?

But all in all, the depth to the image is night and day compared to the slew of Panny, Sony, Canon and Samsung cameras I have used the past year.

I was planning on getting another BMPCC anyway, but now I am seriously comsidering selling or returning all my other cameras (except my D5500 because I paid next to nothing for it and I use it for family stills) and spend 2017 working on craft with the BMPCC instead... unless a 2.5K BMPCC ii is released with 60p at NAB. 

How so? I've generally found the greens to be pleasing. Do you use LUTs or grade from scratch? I have heard that IR filtration can actually make things worse in specific scenes where there's a lot of green, like shooting in a forest. My big issues color wise are tungsten lights. Do you use your IR filter indoors? I'm thinking I might need one for that. 

I do 23.976. Only to match other cameras, haven't really tried 24fps, but I'm curious now based on your comments.

I get tempted to ditch my stuff and grab a micro for the 60p, but we'll see what Blackmagic does in 2017. 

[Axel]

13 hours ago, mercer said:

... but I recently sat down and spent some time with ProRes HQ footage. This is what I came up with...

 

On Vimeo you wrote:

Quote

This is some BMPCC ProRes HQ test footage I shot handheld with the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 lens. It was shot wide open with a B&W Vario ND Filter. I used no IR filtration, but i think it would have helped with the overall color. All color correction/grading was done with Colorista IV with a hit of grain added with Renoiser.

Excuse me for emphasising some points you already made. This camera needs only a very basic and minimalistic "rig" (there are terrific solutions in other threads, two of them my own) to get rid of the shakiness. But one has to admit: it can't be operated without.

By far the best lens combo for it is the BMPCC speedbooster with Sigma 18-35. Less moire in ProRes = better resolution (moire is a symptom for poor resolution), pristine, sharp image. Easiest lens to focus perfectly due to the buttery smooth manual focus ring. Imo it doesn't need the VAT filter, but definitely an IR-cut. Some of the weird colors and noise in your clip apparently come from IR pollution (worse with an ND), which cannot be fixed in post. 

10 hours ago, dbp said:

But of all the cameras I ever shoot with (GH4, C100, canon / nikon DSLRS), it's the only one that gives a hint of the really high end camera look at times. 

I repeated the same test shots with an A7Rii and compared them to my two years old Pocket shots. Comparing apples to oranges? Yes, but I could just cry and really rue having sold the whole stuff because of UHD.

Next week I'll borrow the UM 4,6k. Know the manual like the back of my hand and think I can operate it from the start. Now that the latest firmware fixed the FPN issue, I think that's the ultimate answer to my prayers, camerawise.

*Don't* *sell* *your* *Pocket*. I should've kept it and shoot all my test shots and video sketches with it. 

 

[mercer]

4 hours ago, Axel said:

On Vimeo you wrote:

Excuse me for emphasising some points you already made. This camera needs only a very basic and minimalistic "rig" (there are terrific solutions in other threads, two of them my own) to get rid of the shakiness. But one has to admit: it can't be operated without.

By far the best lens combo for it is the BMPCC speedbooster with Sigma 18-35. Less moire in ProRes = better resolution (moire is a symptom for poor resolution), pristine, sharp image. Easiest lens to focus perfectly due to the buttery smooth manual focus ring. Imo it doesn't need the VAT filter, but definitely an IR-cut. Some of the weird colors and noise in your clip apparently come from IR pollution (worse with an ND), which cannot be fixed in post. 

I repeated the same test shots with an A7Rii and compared them to my two years old Pocket shots. Comparing apples to oranges? Yes, but I could just cry and really rue having sold the whole stuff because of UHD.

Next week I'll borrow the UM 4,6k. Know the manual like the back of my hand and think I can operate it from the start. Now that the latest firmware fixed the FPN issue, I think that's the ultimate answer to my prayers, camerawise.

*Don't* *sell* *your* *Pocket*. I should've kept it and shoot all my test shots and video sketches with it. 

 

Yeah, I agree I should have had an IR filter. And I am sure it would have fixed some of those funky colors. I already have a Nikon-BMPCC Speedbooster but I disagree about the Sigma for my purposes. I have some old Tokina zooms and Nikkor primes that will work beautifully with the pocket and speedbooster, but I think the best, most easiest set up is any lens that has OIS. Maybe a native Panny zoom or one of their macro lenses, or an EF zoom with an electronic adapter that powers the OIS... like the 10-18mm or if you don't need the wide angle, the Sigma 17-50mm is a nice lens. Do you have a link to those other threads, I'd love to read your simple rig solutions. 

[Shirozina]

There are cameras with higher resolutions, that are easier to use, have better low light capability, etc etc  but when it comes to the actual 'look' of the image and it's liquid malleability in post it's in a class of it's own - I'll never sell mine. 

[mercer]

11 hours ago, dbp said:

How so? I've generally found the greens to be pleasing. Do you use LUTs or grade from scratch? I have heard that IR filtration can actually make things worse in specific scenes where there's a lot of green, like shooting in a forest. My big issues color wise are tungsten lights. Do you use your IR filter indoors? I'm thinking I might need one for that. 

I do 23.976. Only to match other cameras, haven't really tried 24fps, but I'm curious now based on your comments.

I get tempted to ditch my stuff and grab a micro for the 60p, but we'll see what Blackmagic does in 2017. 

I didn't have an IR Cut Filter when I had the Pocket, but I did when I had the Micro... I tried a lot of cameras the past year... and yeah I kept it on the lens constantly, even under Tungsten lights... it definitely helps.

But even with IR cut, I still noticed a paleness with greens, I never heard that they can make greens worse in the forest... that's usually where I shoot, I'll test that when I get another pocket.

 I like a dark, muted image and no matter what I tried, I couldn't get the greens dark enough... maybe I just wasn't used to the extra color information and I'm sure a better colorist can do it... I've seen it done... I'm just at a loss... so to answer your question... yes I used LUTS, to help me darken the greens and I like what the BM 4K LUT does to the image but I have been trying not to use them and grade from scratch.

I also did some lazy 4400 degree WB (I know, I was schooled in another thread for doing it) so I'm sure that isn't helping either.

But even with the funky colors, I still like the image way better than the pristine 4K image I was getting from the A6300 I tested last month.

And let me know what you think about the 23.976 vs. 24. I assume it's probably in my head as I cannot imagine an extra .024 of a frame would make that much of a difference with the motion cadence.

[cantsin]

The best thing to do for accurate color is to shoot an X-Rite color test chart (photo or video, passport or full size - doesn't matter) and use the color chart matching function in Resolve. You will get 100% accurate and realistic colors, much better than any of Blackmagic's standard LUTs.

If you don't edit and/or grade in Resolve, you can still use the color matching function, export the resulting color correction as a LUT and use that LUT in Premiere/Lumetri, FCPX/Color Finale etc.

(Also make sure that your monitor is properly color-calibrated, for example with DisplayCAL.)

[mercer]

53 minutes ago, cantsin said:

The best thing to do for accurate color is to shoot an X-Rite color test chart (photo or video, passport or full size - doesn't matter) and use the color chart matching function in Resolve. You will get 100% accurate and realistic colors, much better than any of Blackmagic's standard LUTs.

If you don't edit and/or grade in Resolve, you can still use the color matching function, export the resulting color correction as a LUT and use that LUT in Premiere/Lumetri, FCPX/Color Finale etc.

(Also make sure that your monitor is properly color-calibrated, for example with DisplayCAL.)

How accurate are neutral gray cards? Lately, I have been using Colorista iv and it has an eye dropper, gray card, WB corrector.

For instance if I take a gray card, laminate it... so I can write on it with a dry erase marker, and then attach it to my slate can I get an accurate WB using the dropper tool in Colorista?

Or do they make a slate that already has neutral gray on it?

[cantsin]

2 minutes ago, mercer said:

How accurate are neutral gray cards?

They're only meant for white balance. A color like the X-rite in combination with Resolve chart gives you full color correction/calibration. 

[mercer]

3 minutes ago, cantsin said:

They're only meant for white balance. A color like the X-rite in combination with Resolve chart gives you full color correction/calibration. 

I think Color Finale has the X-Rite function now... so if I get the color chart in my shot at the beginning of each take, then it's just a one click solution in Resolve or FCPX with Color Finale?

[cantsin]

12 minutes ago, mercer said:

so if I get the color chart in my shot at the beginning of each take, then it's just a one click solution in Resolve or FCPX with Color Finale?

Exactly. (And you can still grade from there if you want to stylize the image.) The ca. $80 for the X-Rite Color Checker passport was one of my best investments. - Helps me all the time to get good color even in the most difficult light situations like this one, where I recorded a gig/performance in near darkness and had to push the CinemaDNG material to 12800 ISO:

 

[Cinegain]

It's always a last resort, but you can always try and 'fix it in post'.

I think the trick is to remove the reds from the highlights, then pump them back into the mids. And balance things out with the other color channels.

This is just a quick adjustment with highlights red -35 and midtones red +60 without even further tinkering around with it... So, before:

After:

[mercer]

42 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

It's always a last resort, but you can always try and 'fix it in post'.

I think the trick is to remove the reds from the highlights, then pump them back into the mids. And balance things out with the other color channels.

This is just a quick adjustment with highlights red -40 and midtones red +73 without even further tinkering around with it... So, before:

After:

I lifted the reds to try and give it a golden, late afternoon look to the highs, but with the LUTS and whatever else I pushed, it just did not go as planned.

So, I actually sat down this morning, removed the LUTS and the grain, and basically started from scratch.

I tend to be impatient, so it took a little longer but I think it's much more balanced, with a very, very light grade. 

BTW, I deleted that shot... it's been my Achilles Heel... no matter what I do, I just cannot get it to look right.

The new, replacement, version is uploading now, but it's taking forever...