Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera S16 Crop Factor & Choosing Lens

[clanterns]

Here's an option for a 24mm-equivalent lens on the BMPCC.  8mm f/1.4 C-mount lens designed for 1" sensors. Roughly $500.

 

http://www.navitar.com/product/navitar-machine-vision-1-format.aspx

So if I take this camera's specs into http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html, do I input it as 8mm, or 24mm (crop factor) for S16?

I think you and I are definitely on the same page as far as what we want.

[Rungunshoot]

Wow, that DOF master thing is complicated.  Here's the short answer:

 

On a full-frame camera, this would be like using a 24mm f/4 lens.

 

Practically speaking, you'd get a blurry background if your subject is closer than like 2 or 3 feet away.

[Bioskop.Inc]

Or you could just fake it in post with a minimal fisheye type effect or something similar that will distort the image to your exact requirements - will save time, money & possibly buying the wrong lens.

[clanterns]

Wow, that DOF master thing is complicated.  Here's the short answer:

 

On a full-frame camera, this would be like using a 24mm f/4 lens.

 

Practically speaking, you'd get a blurry background if your subject is closer than like 2 or 3 feet away.

I don't think f/4 gives you much of a blurry background as you say, at least none that I've noticed...EDIT: sorry, I misread, f/4 would produce blurriness.

 

Or you could just fake it in post with a minimal fisheye type effect or something similar that will distort the image to your exact requirements - will save time, money & possibly buying the wrong lens.

I may have to do that if cost get out of hand, but even then I don't think it'd offer a very professional look.

[MattThomasFilm]

Choosing lenses will be one of the most cruical things for the Pocket camera. My Samyang 14mm 2.8 will be equivelent to a full frame 42mm on the pocket camera.

 

I was thinking of getting the Samyang fisheye 8mm 3.5 as a wide, which would be equivelent to full frame 24mm on the pocket, but wasn't sure if there will be something better.

 

My inital thought was to get something to cover were 8mm, 12mm, 14mm, 16mm, 24mm, 35mm and 85mm, which there full frame equivelents would be 24, 35, 42, 50, 72, 105 and 255mm.

 

I already own both Samyang 14mm and 85mm, hence the 85mm being listed/ otherwise I'd have stoped at 105mm.

 

I mean I'd like to have a lens like this with it, mainly to use for live events, weddings or similar kind of projects - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDh_mrPuTJg

I know I'd either need a lot of cards and shoot in Prores or an external recorder but I'd recon it would work well. Then again, I don't know if there's a better alternative lens.

[Axel]

Wow, that DOF master thing is complicated. Here's the short answer:

On a full-frame camera, this would be like using a 24mm f/4 lens.

Practically speaking, you'd get a blurry background if your subject is closer than like 2 or 3 feet away.

Closer than 2 or 3 feet @ 8mm, which is an ultra wide, will distort the foreground object, which doesn't fit to an aesthetically satisfying image. So thanks to the DoF master, we now know we have to change tactics.

Choosing lenses will be one of the most cruical things for the Pocket camera. My Samyang 14mm 2.8 will be equivelent to a full frame 42mm on the pocket camera.

Sounds reasonable.

I was thinking of getting the Samyang fisheye 8mm 3.5 as a wide, which would be equivelent to full frame 24mm on the pocket, but wasn't sure if there will be something better.

To get bokeh, we need to get used to longer lenses. With 35 mm f1.4, you'd get enough DoF for a close shot from 10-15 feet distance (of course, since the lens behaves like a 105 mm, it might be a rather close shot). But wide angle lenses, let's face it, don't have shallow DoF worth mentioning.

The extreme wide lenses are less attractive on a BM Pocket.

I mean I'd like to have a lens like this with it, mainly to use for live events, weddings or similar kind of projects -
I know I'd either need a lot of cards and shoot in Prores or an external recorder but I'd recon it would work well.

How would you connect the external recorder?

It may very well be, that as of now, there is no RAW DNG with the Pocket CC. Watch this:
http://vimeo.com/63597094#

They say, somewhere, that on a 128 GB SD card fit half an hour DNG and more than double that of ProResHQ. Bitrate Pro says, that ProResHQ 1920 @ 24 fps has an average datarate of only 147 mbps, and then 1h 56m would fit. Lets assume the DNG has 300 mbps (57 m recording time), then it would with 38 MB/s still be recordable on a SanDisc Extreme for 45 MB/s. It should at least work with an Extreme Pro.

BTW: I love that Fujinon zoom.

[Rungunshoot]

Ok so here's my virtual BMPCC kit:

 

Wide: 8mm f/1.4 c-mount for 1" sensors (mfr undecided) - about $500

 

Normal: Voigtlander 17.5mm f/.95 ($1250)

 

Portrait: Voigt 25mm f/.95 ($1000)

 

That kit is expensive as hell (to me), but it would cover 95% of what I would want to shoot with a satisfying amount of bokeh.  And 2 of the lenses will benefit from the mythical M43 Speedbooster.

[andy lee]

Fujinon zooms are great I cannot stress how good they are

so versitile !

I use them alot

especially if you want insane long par focal zooms

[richg101]

all this worry seems like nonsense to me.  im gonna make do with a speed booster and some dslr lenses such as my rollei zeisses on my pocket.  might invest in a 25 distagon as my widest option, but if i need more in frame i'll move back or be creative with my shots.  wide shots are impossible to make look good unless you got big budgets.  my 25mm will be the equivalent of a 50mm on s35, and 50mm on s35 is the best focal length in terms of dof and width.IMO

[MattThomasFilm]

all this worry seems like nonsense to me.  im gonna make do with a speed booster and some dslr lenses such as my rollei zeisses on my pocket.  might invest in a 25 distagon as my widest option, but if i need more in frame i'll move back or be creative with my shots.  wide shots are impossible to make look good unless you got big budgets.  my 25mm will be the equivalent of a 50mm on s35, and 50mm on s35 is the best focal length in terms of dof and width.IMO

 

I'm not worrying, I just know I'll need to get more lenses when I get the Pocket camera, all I have at the minute is a Samyang 14mm and 85mm and a Sigma 24 - 70mm for my Canon 550D and only the 14 and 85 will be useful on the Pocket (due to them having manual aperture rings).

From the way I shoot, I know I need something equivelent of the 24mm on a APS-C (so equiv to 38.4mm on FF) so that would need something around the 12mm mark.

 

 

To get bokeh, we need to get used to longer lenses. With 35 mm f1.4, you'd get enough DoF for a close shot from 10-15 feet distance (of course, since the lens behaves like a 105 mm, it might be a rather close shot). But wide angle lenses, let's face it, don't have shallow DoF worth mentioning.

The extreme wide lenses are less attractive on a BM Pocket.

How would you connect the external recorder?

They say, somewhere, that on a 128 GB SD card fit half an hour DNG and more than double that of ProResHQ. Bitrate Pro says, that ProResHQ 1920 @ 24 fps has an average datarate of only 147 mbps, and then 1h 56m would fit. Lets assume the DNG has 300 mbps (57 m recording time), then it would with 38 MB/s still be recordable on a SanDisc Extreme for 45 MB/s. It should at least work with an Extreme Pro.

BTW: I love that Fujinon zoom.

 

I'd have to use one of those HDMI output recorders (I don't know much about them tbh as I've never felt I needed them with a 550D, haha.

 

I'm not overly into Bokeh or really Shallow depth of field, Don't get me wrong, I do like some so it doesn't feel like video with everything in focus.

 

I'd love to get an anamorphic adapter to shoot stuff like this with it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVKTk2VTApg

but they look expensive.

 

You can get shallow depth of field with the 14mm on the 550D if the subject is quite near the lens -

 

If I can achieve that sort of shallow focus on the Pocket, I'd be very pleased.

 

Hopefully you can fit quite a bit of ProRes on to a 128GB card, as I like to have a least 3 hours of space when shooting.

[clanterns]

Ok so here's my virtual BMPCC kit:

 

Wide: 8mm f/1.4 c-mount for 1" sensors (mfr undecided) - about $500

 

Normal: Voigtlander 17.5mm f/.95 ($1250)

 

Portrait: Voigt 25mm f/.95 ($1000)

 

That kit is expensive as hell (to me), but it would cover 95% of what I would want to shoot with a satisfying amount of bokeh.  And 2 of the lenses will benefit from the mythical M43 Speedbooster.

Wouldn't the 17.5mm be good for portraits? (52.5mm equiv), and the 25mm would be more telephoto? How do you think bokeh will look with an 8mm f/1.4? This is driving me crazy, especially with the FF 4K for $4k... Too much though, still.

[Ernesto Mantaras]

Wouldn't the 17.5mm be good for portraits? (52.5mm equiv), and the 25mm would be more telephoto? How do you think bokeh will look with an 8mm f/1.4? This is driving me crazy, especially with the FF 4K for $4k... Too much though, still.

Rungunshoot said it right. A 50mm is a normal lens, while an 85mm is a portrait lens, and a 75mm would be close (that 25mm by 3 on the BMPC).
The idea of 4K for $4K is great but the EF mount turns me off. E mount would've been the ideal choice! And right now I wouldn't be able to handle 4K RAW. Now HD and 2.5k are a different thing... The BMCC, with that same sensor and more physical buttons (and a swivel screen... and a compressed RAW codec like Cineform RAW...) would be the ideal camera for me right now. But the BMPC looks to be quite sexy in its own right.

[clanterns]

Rungunshoot said it right. A 50mm is a normal lens, while an 85mm is a portrait lens, and a 75mm would be close (that 25mm by 3 on the BMPC).
The idea of 4K for $4K is great but the EF mount turns me off. E mount would've been the ideal choice! And right now I wouldn't be able to handle 4K RAW. Now HD and 2.5k are a different thing... The BMCC, with that same sensor and more physical buttons (and a swivel screen... and a compressed RAW codec like Cineform RAW...) would be the ideal camera for me right now. But the BMPC looks to be quite sexy in its own right.

Hmm, so why is 75mm considered portrait, if what we see is 50mm? Just trying to learn here. And does anyone know how long after the original BMPC was announced, that footage was released?

And If the BMPCC had clean output, we could record higher rez/fps, like the 4k, right?

[andy lee]

if you are shooting people - which I do for pop videos all the time

75mm -85mm is considered portrait because it gives you a head and shoulder shot

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/21-freak-asylum-you-better-leave-video/

50mm gives you a waist upwards shot

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/22-throwaway-girl-video-shoot/

35mm gives you a knees upwards shot

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/24-throwaway-girl-video-shoot/

28 is usually the whole body from feet up

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/23-throwaway-girl-video-shoot/

 

thats how I personally use them to shoot girls for pop videos

[clanterns]

if you are shooting people - which I do for pop videos all the time

75mm -85mm is considered portrait because it gives you a head and shoulder shot

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/21-freak-asylum-you-better-leave-video/

50mm gives you a waist upwards shot

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/22-throwaway-girl-video-shoot/

35mm gives you a knees upwards shot

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/24-throwaway-girl-video-shoot/

28 is usually the whole body from feet up

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/23-throwaway-girl-video-shoot/

 

thats how I personally use them to shoot girls for pop videos

Very interesting, I suppose DOF could be done reasonably when on human subjects if following these guidelines. 24mm DOF wouldn't look too good on humans with BMPCC, might give off a "miniaturized" effect... 

[Bruno]

And right now I wouldn't be able to handle 4K RAW. Now HD and 2.5k are a different thing...

The 4k camera shoots compressed raw in both 4k and HD, and the same for prores. 4k compressed raw might actually produce smaller files than the current BMCC uncompressed raw files.

[Axel]

From the way I shoot, I know I need something equivelent of the 24mm on a APS-C (so equiv to 38.4mm on FF) so that would need something around the 12mm mark.

 

I have two 12mm already. I don't love the Olympus, but I need it occasionally, because it's my "P"-mode-lens on the GH2 (the automatic mode), i.e. for stabilizer shots. I do love the SLR magic. A lot of slight differences add up to a completely different look, the Oly more videoish, the SLR 'cinematic'. 

I hope - but can't know yet - that both will be good on the BMPCC.

 

I'd have to use one of those HDMI output recorders (I don't know much about them tbh as I've never felt I needed them with a 550D, haha.

(...)

Hopefully you can fit quite a bit of ProRes on to a 128GB card, as I like to have a least 3 hours of space when shooting.

 

Then you shouldn't buy this camera. I trust my Videospec app (containing Bitrate Pro), which says you can record two hours of ProResHQ on a 128 GB card. Full stop. What wedding ceremony lasts longer?

 

You can get shallow depth of field with the 14mm on the 550D if the subject is quite near the lens ...

 

 

Hmm, so why is 75mm considered portrait, if what we see is 50mm? 

 

A wide angle allows (i.e. in a room) to show a person from head to feet. This is the basic idea. A 'portrait lens', i.e. an 80 mm, is better for close ups for three reasons:

1. Assumed you don't change your position from the establishing shot, it will allow to now only frame neck and head of the same person.

2. You don't need to move too close, entering the privacy distance (or whatever it is called in english), forcing the person to behave unnatural, to act to the camera.

3. To get the same framing with a wider lens, you'd have to come so close, the person's face would be distorted, making it ugly, comiclike. Watch Men in Black.

 

We see much more wide angle shots today than a few decades before, due to the steadicam. That doesn't contradict the rule that the original purpose of the wide angle is to show a character surrounded by the set (with absolute DoF) and that of a portrait lens to isolate the person (with shallow DoF). 

 

As long as a film doesn't have persons as motifs, wide angle lenses produce an artificial feeling of depth through distorting perspectives, something that was considered bad photography once. And I think there is a truth in that. If we have to distort rooms, it must at least be some kind of trip or nightmare.

 

Why I say we can't know about lenses in advance: 

On the GH2 'worse' lenses look better. All in all, you have comparatively subtle DoF effects. On the 5D, the better the lenses, the better the look. You have DoF effects everywhere, you don't have to worry about it. I shot on 16mm (Bolex), and I don't remember mentionable DoF effects. If something was out of focus, it was annoying ...

[MattThomasFilm]

Then you shouldn't buy this camera. I trust my Videospec app (containing Bitrate Pro), which says you can record two hours of ProResHQ on a 128 GB card. Full stop. What wedding ceremony lasts longer?

 

Why not? The main reason I'd buy this camera is for Film and corporate work. Shooting longer running things would be a bonus as I always like to try and get the most out of a camera.

[P337]

Then you shouldn't buy this camera. I trust my Videospec app (containing Bitrate Pro), which says you can record two hours of ProResHQ on a 128 GB card. Full stop. What wedding ceremony lasts longer?

 

I made a huge post about this the original Pocket thread: 

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/2461-blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera/page-3

To help us better expect what we're getting into I compiled a list of SD Card options for the PocketCC and their approximate footage capacity.

 

For ProRes HQ (assuming 220Mbps~27.5MB/s):

SanDisk "Extreme Pro 45MB/s" 128GB 45MB/s write ($139.94) holds 77 mins

PNY "Professional X 233x" 128GB 35MB/s write ($144.99) holds 77 mins

[Gibbsy]

depth of field is pretty much non existant

 

here´s a calculator:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

 

That statement doesn't make any sense. If what you are trying to say is that you can't get shallow DOF from s16 mm then that's patently untrue, not crazy shallow like FF, but still possible. It all depends on lens size, distance from your subject and aperture.

In fact I bet 95% of people slagging off s16mm sensors have never even worked with the medium........ But you know what they say "got a 5D, you're a DOP".