Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

[Anaconda_]

2 hours ago, Damphousse said:

A Sandisk CFast 2 card reader costs less than the sales tax on a 256 GB Cfast 2 card.  What are we really trying to accomplish here?

If someone doesn't have $50 they should stay far away from the Cfast 2.0 game.

Wow, so much judgement. I have C.Fast 2.0 cards ready to be delivered, but since I already own C.Fast 1.0 cards and a reader, I was wondering how useful these are going to be, or if I should add a new reader to the order. Chill.

2 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

Do you own Cfast 1.0 cards? 

I do indeed, I have, and regularly still use the Atomos Ninja Star, with 128gb card and a reader.

2 hours ago, Damphousse said:

I would touch that USB C port as little as humanly possible.  No way I would routinely plug it in to my computer just for downloading content.

At worst I'll plug the camera into my computer 5 times between ordering and receiving the C.Fast 2.0 reader, should I need one... I can deal with that. 

[kye]

I use the Transcend CFast cards in my XC10 and they work fine, but at 305Mbit I'm not exactly pushing their performance limits!  When I first researched them I read lots of reviews about the cheaper cards and these were the cheapest cards that people said were reliable in the higher bitrate cameras.

If I didn't already have any CFast cards then I'd use USB for the Pocket 2 for as long as possible, and only then buy CFast.  

CFast is something like 8x more expensive per GB than SSD!  The Transcend are currently $2 per GB (128Gb $250 at B&H) but the Samsung T5 is 25c per GB.  

There are probably cheaper reliable CFast now available, but the T5 is also probably not the most economical device either, and even if it's only 5X or 3X difference, that's still a huge cost considering the amount of storage required for the high-bitrate codecs.

 

[Savannah Miller]

If you have been wondering, the komputerbay seem to be the cheapest.

https://www.amazon.com/Komputerbay-Professional-256GB-CFast-560MB/dp/B01NBAVA26

Only $220 for 256gb and a lot of people have good results.  The new BM camera will sell so many units that CFast 2.0 prices might drop even more.

That current price is the cheapest I've ever seen the Komputerbay cards, so maybe it's a good time to buy.  They're normally $250-300

10 hours ago, JordanWright said:

Anyone tried transcend CFX650 or CFX600 CFast Cards? They seem quite reasonably priced.

Those cards are priced kinda high compared to angelbird, komputerbay, etc.

BIWIN was another brand competitively priced similar to that of Komputerbay, but they seem to be harder to come by these days.

[Damphousse]

9 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

At worst I'll plug the camera into my computer 5 times between ordering and receiving the C.Fast 2.0 reader, should I need one... I can deal with that. 

Cool.  Just didn't want people to have the wonderful experience they had with the BMPCC and the microHDMI port.

The little handheld demonstration they did with the BMPCC 4k USB C port is definitely going to result in some broken hearts down the road.

14 minutes ago, kye said:

There are probably cheaper reliable CFast now available, but the T5 is also probably not the most economical device either, and even if it's only 5X or 3X difference, that's still a huge cost considering the amount of storage required for the high-bitrate codecs.

The problem is there are significant speed differences with other brands and models.  Only time will tell how low you can go.

 

12 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

If you have been wondering, the komputerbay seem to be the cheapest.

https://www.amazon.com/Komputerbay-Professional-256GB-CFast-560MB/dp/B01NBAVA26

 

Are you aware of Komputerbay's business model?  I haven't kept up with them for the last couple of years.  I am looking right at a Komputerbay Compactflash card I bought for my 50D raw magic lantern shoots years ago.  Back then they would buy factory rejects or something like that from people like Lexar and sell them at cut rate prices.  The problem was sometimes people had to return the cards because they did not perform as advertised.  Komputerbay seemed to be good about replacing the cards.  There are a number of stories of buying and returning on the internet.

I don't know how they do things these days.  Just thought I would add my 2 cents.

 

[JordanWright]

5 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

Those cards are priced kinda high compared to angelbird, komputerbay, etc.

 

On Amazon UK, there is the 256GB Transcend for £180 https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00LL4QVAW/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_7?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

[Anaconda_]

1 hour ago, JordanWright said:

On Amazon UK, there is the 256GB Transcend for £180 https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00LL4QVAW/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_7?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

Don't buy this card. The write speed is only 160mb/s. These are the data rates specified in the Tech Specs for this camera on the BMD  website. These are also based in 30fps recordings, so basically double it for 60p.

4096 x 2160
CinemaDNG RAW - 272 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 3:1 - 129 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 4:1 - 97 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 HQ - 117.88 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 - 78.63 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 LT - 54.63 MB/s
Apple ProRes Proxy - 24.25 MB/s

3840 x 2160
CinemaDNG RAW - 255 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 3:1 - 122 MB/s
CinemaDNG RAW 4:1 - 92 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 HQ - 110 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 - 73.6 MB/s
Apple ProRes 422 LT - 51 MB/s
Apple ProRes Proxy - 22.4 MB/s

 

[Savannah Miller]

That's a pretty strong accusation to accuse a brand of buying factory rejects.  Do you have proof of this? Sure the cards did not perform as advertised and you maybe had to buy a few and return the slow ones, but those cards are half the price of everyone else.  Biwin was also really cheap, but they don't seem to be easy to buy anymore.

But if you really want to find the cheapest, at $208 for 256gb, this is the cheapest I can find on the internet.

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/ATOMOS-NINJA-256GB-CFAST-2-0-Memory-Cards-240GB-SSD-Hard-Memory-Disk-for-4K-HD/32523607737.html?spm=2114.search0104.3.67.76886aa7oHHkZw&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_1_10152_10151_10065_10344_10130_10068_10324_10547_10342_10325_10546_10343_10340_10548_10341_10545_10696_10084_10083_10618_10307_10059_100031_10103_10624_10623_10622_10621_10620,searchweb201603_1,ppcSwitch_5&algo_expid=449fee53-93a1-4a6d-a8b6-94b429018733-10&algo_pvid=449fee53-93a1-4a6d-a8b6-94b429018733&transAbTest=ae803_2&priceBeautifyAB=0

 

There are no reviews of the goldendisk brand so I don't know anything about the specs or reliability.

[Anaconda_]

This seems like the best card, speed for money wise. I also like that they print the read and write on the face - makes me trust them somehow. At least a lot more than those who hide their speeds. Reviews are also very good.

https://www.mymemory.co.uk/integral-128gb-ultimapro-x2-cfast-2-0-card-550mb-s.html

[webrunner5]

23 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

This seems like the best card, speed for money wise. I also like that they print the read and write on the face - makes me trust them somehow. At least a lot more than those who hide their speeds. Reviews are also very good.

https://www.mymemory.co.uk/integral-128gb-ultimapro-x2-cfast-2-0-card-550mb-s.html

I see they have 32GB | 64GB | 128GB. No 256GB one, but the price is right if they really work as advertised.

[Damphousse]

1 hour ago, Savannah Miller said:

Do you have proof of this?

Sorry.  It's been common knowledge for over half a decade.  You'll just have to google around if you want to see the myriad of posts concerning the matter.  I certainly was not the originator of the story.  Unlike you I am not 1000% certain about everything I post.  Years ago the online forum consensus was there was something funky with their supply chain.  What the specific issue was is really irrelevant.  Fill in whatever reason makes you happy.  The fact was a decent number of customers were not getting advertised speeds and they had to buy and exchange.  That's the main take home message.

And as I stated in my original post 100% of my experience and knowledge of the brand was from years ago and regarded CompactFlash.  I have not heard anything regarding Cfast 2.0 or any product in 2018.

I was just providing some free information so people can do their own research and make an informed decision.

 

[Savannah Miller]

Yes but maybe they're just buying the memory from the same places that the other guys do and have lesser quality control? RED, for example, sources their SSD's from multiple companies.

The variance in speed of the compact flash could be due to the different companies where they get their memory from.

https://www.amazon.com/FreeTail-EVOKE-Memory-VPG-130-FTCF256A37/dp/B074PDD1B6/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1532299720&sr=1-3&keywords=cfast+2.0+256gb#customerReviews

Ok this one is even cheaper.  It's 199.99 on Amazon for 256gb.  A lot of these brands seem to be going on sale or something.

[kye]

15 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Don't buy this card. The write speed is only 160mb/s. These are the data rates specified in the Tech Specs for this camera on the BMD  website. These are also based in 30fps recordings, so basically double it for 60p.

I own two of the Transcend 128GB CFast 2.0 cards.  I don't know if they're a different model to the link posted, but mine both say CFX650.

Anyway, card #1:

Card #2:

Not quite enough for 4K60 at RAW uncompressed, but can do 4K30 RAW and can do 4K60 RAW 3:1 compression.

IIRC someone said that most commercial productions (TV I think) find shooting Prores sufficient quality and don't need RAW.  Especially if you're shooting 4K for a 1080 output.

[Savannah Miller]

John Brawley said that and it's true. 90% of American TV shows seem to be shot on the Alexa in 1080p Prores 4:4:4.  Very few people do RAW or 4K, and if they do 4K it's usually Sony cameras shooting XAVC.  Only times you see raw are very high-end TV shows and RED shows for Netflix.  With now the Alexa LF, I'm sure a lot of shows will switch back to Arri.

It's not because of storage either because a lot of productions are fine with shooting even prores XQ, it's the extra costs of shooting RAW which people don't like.

I work in VFX where you occasionally will have shots where you push the Prores files harder than you ever would in grading and I generally see no issues.

Even when I do greenscreen stuff, the Alexa does 4:2:2 HQ during slow motion shots, and even then, those files are pretty robust too.

[Anaconda_]

1 hour ago, kye said:

I own two of the Transcend 128GB CFast 2.0 cards.  I don't know if they're a different model to the link posted, but mine both say CFX650.

Fair enough, I was just going by the product details. Seems strange to under estimate the speed so much haha. 

[Savannah Miller]

There's maximum speed then there's minimum speed.  Not all cards can sustain the max speed for extended recording.  SD cards are particularly bad at this, that's why V60 and V90 standards exist.

[Tone1k]

2 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

John Brawley said that and it's true. 90% of American TV shows seem to be shot on the Alexa in 1080p Prores 4:4:4.  Very few people do RAW or 4K, and if they do 4K it's usually Sony cameras shooting XAVC.  Only times you see raw are very high-end TV shows and RED shows for Netflix.  With now the Alexa LF, I'm sure a lot of shows will switch back to Arri.

It's not because of storage either because a lot of productions are fine with shooting even prores XQ, it's the extra costs of shooting RAW which people don't like.

I work in VFX where you occasionally will have shots where you push the Prores files harder than you ever would in grading and I generally see no issues.

Even when I do greenscreen stuff, the Alexa does 4:2:2 HQ during slow motion shots, and even then, those files are pretty robust too.

Even high end TVC's don't shoot RAW a lot of the time. Mainly ProRes4444 and the VFX bunch are more than happy with it. This is why I just dont get why people are wanting to record uncompressed RAW on Blackmagic Cameras. Don't get me wrong, RAW is great but 3 or 4:1 compressed RAW is plenty for everything.

[IronFilm]

Aside from a few RED shoots (which are doing a heavy ratio of compression with theirs anyway, so not exactly a fair example. Probably like 12:1 or higher ) I can't even think of a shoot I've been on recently that did raw.

Raw just doesn't happen out there as often as many forum goers think. 

 

[kye]

3 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Fair enough, I was just going by the product details. Seems strange to under estimate the speed so much haha. 

Yeah, I saw that and wondered if it was a different model, which is why I mentioned the model number on mine.

On looking a bit further the CFX650 seems to be a better model with the performance I got in my tests: https://www.transcend-info.com/Products/No-672

Something to look out for when purchasing I guess!

2 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

There's maximum speed then there's minimum speed.  Not all cards can sustain the max speed for extended recording.  SD cards are particularly bad at this, that's why V60 and V90 standards exist.

If there are any tests you'd like me to perform just ask.

47 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Raw just doesn't happen out there as often as many forum goers think. 

Just people recording their kids and pets then...  I guess if you already own some m43 lenses then $1300 is worth it to have 4K 60P in RAW of Mr Mittens!!!

[Anaconda_]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Raw just doesn't happen out there as often as many forum goers think. 

34 minutes ago, kye said:

4K 60P in RAW of Mr Mittens!!!

2 hours ago, Tone1k said:

It's not because of storage either because a lot of productions are fine with shooting even prores XQ, it's the extra costs of shooting RAW which people don't like.

I wonder how that's going to change once ProRes RAW is more available and has been tested a bit more. From my understanding, the file sizes aren't much different to normal ProRes options, and the workflow should be much easier that working with CinemaDNGs once more editing software is updated to work with it. I guess it'll be like working with "hyper-LOG". ?

[kye]

1 minute ago, Anaconda_ said:

I wonder how that's going to change once ProRes RAW is more available and has been tested a bit more. From my understanding, the file sizes aren't much different to normal ProRes options, and the workflow should be much easier that working with CinemaDNGs once more editing software is updated to work with it. I guess it'll be like working with "hyper-LOG". ?

I'm curious to understand a bit more about how RAW differs to Prores in post.

To preface this, I'm a Resolve user and I don't know much about PP or FCPX, so maybe there are larger differences there?

In terms of Resolve, when you shoot DNG sequences:

• the sequence appears in the media browser and other windows as one item, the same as a clip, and behaves like one throughout
• the RAW panel is available (which isn't for other file formats obviously) but I think the defaults are just to defer to the camera metadata, so you don't have to change anything here if you don't need / want to (this is the part I'm less familiar with so maybe there are things you need to do here?)
• everything else behaves the same way a clip would

Assuming the above is correct and I'm not missing something, where is the extra difficulty?

Is it in extra processing power required to debayer the files perhaps?  Or does PP / FCPX not handle image sequences as clips?

People online talk about image sequences from time lapses as an extra bother because you have 'lots of files' or 'you have an extra step to combine them' but in Resolve that's completely automated.