Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

[IronFilm]

45 minutes ago, kye said:

• He loves the image but the camera is a pain to use and so often stays at home in favour of his 2 x C100 mk2

And I bet for low budget fast paced shoots (such as when you need to knock out a half a dozen corporate interviews in just a single afternoon) then having two matching cameras is very handy. 

Am quite tempted to myself buy a 2nd Sony PMW-F3

 

46 minutes ago, kye said:

•  It was expensive, and the battery life, proprietary accessories like touchscreen, storage, media readers, handle, chargers, and everything else cost about $25K US about two years ago

So basically he lost $5K over a year and a half, which is both a lot and "not too bad", depending on your perspective. 

 

[jonpais]

@kye I guess I should clarify I’m not taking a piss on the Pocket - and in no way, shape or form would I claim the a7 III has nicer color or a better codec than the P4K. I still think both you and I are waiting to see how this whole thing plays out before plunking more money down. 

[IronFilm]

47 minutes ago, kye said:

•  In fact it was so expensive that he left it locked up because of fear of using it (despite having insurance)

Let's say he drops it and got a deep scratch on the body, his insurance would never cover this, yet it would hit hard its resell value vs a mint condition one.  Plus you're always left with the nagging feeling "did it do more damage internally that will pop up at the worst moment on a shoot?"
 

[jonpais]

2 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

And I bet for low budget fast paced shoots (such as when you need to knock out a half a dozen corporate interviews in just a single afternoon) then having two matching cameras is very handy. 

Am quite tempted to myself buy a 2nd Sony PMW-F3

 

So basically he lost $5K over a year and a half, which is both a lot and "not too bad", depending on your perspective. 

 

I think Caleb makes a six-figure income.

[IronFilm]

49 minutes ago, kye said:

In summary - two years ago one of the most affordable cinema cameras cost $20K plus, was such a PITA to use that he didn't take it places, and he used C100s instead.

Now in 2018, they release a 4K60 RAW cinema camera that costs less than 10% of the above RED, is smaller than the C100s but a significant margin, gets similar battery life, is easily hand-holdable, works with all kinds of third-party accessories, and comes with a free copy of an industry leading NLE.

Anyone who bitches about the battery life, size, cost or anything like that clearly don't have the faintest idea what a real cinema camera is like.

Get a grip - you're just embarrassing yourselves.

BINGO!
 

[TurboRat]

41 minutes ago, kye said:

I think this thread needs a reality check, and luckily Caleb Wojcik just posted one.

Some of the points he made were:

• He loves the image but the camera is a pain to use and so often stays at home in favour of his 2 x C100 mk2
• It was expensive, and the battery life, proprietary accessories like touchscreen, storage, media readers, handle, chargers, and everything else cost about $25K US about two years ago
• In fact it was so expensive that he left it locked up because of fear of using it (despite having insurance)
• It's hugely heavy and impractical to use, he had to buy four batteries because two wasn't enough, and it basically requires a team to build and operate it

In summary - two years ago one of the most affordable cinema cameras cost $20K plus, was such a PITA to use that he didn't take it places, and he used C100s instead.

Now in 2018, they release a 4K60 RAW cinema camera that costs less than 10% of the above RED, is smaller than the C100s but a significant margin, gets similar battery life, is easily hand-holdable, works with all kinds of third-party accessories, and comes with a free copy of an industry leading NLE.

Anyone who bitches about the battery life, size, cost or anything like that clearly don't have the faintest idea what a real cinema camera is like.

Get a grip - you're just embarrassing yourselves.

It's fine that you consider the P4k as a cinema camera since it has a 'Cinema' on it and interestingly not a 'Pocket' camera. Everybody have their own preference and should not influence your own. 

Honestly it's still debatable for the new P4k to be grouped with the Reds or Arris. Will wait for EBU or other technical bodies for their tests. 

That said I think the concerns about the P4k are the result of comparisons with existing cameras like the A7III, Fuji, Pana mirrorless. It's clear that Blackmagic's target market for the P4k are non-Red/C100 using consumers hence the comparison

 

[jonpais]

2 minutes ago, TurboRat said:

That said I think the concerns about the P4k are the result of comparisons with existing cameras like the A7III, Fuji, Pana mirrorless. It's clear that Blackmagic's target market for the P4k are non-Red/C100 using consumers hence the comparison

 

I also believe most potential buyers are comparing to mirrorless offerings from Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, Nikon and Canon. And if the image quality is as good as Arri, so much the better! ?

[Mattias Burling]

I still find it funny that reviewers of the old BMPCC pulled out the word "pocket" and pretended it belong with the RX100x. 
IMO, its a Cinema camera. A pocket sized cinema camera. No matter how much you say that lenses, batteries etc makes it bigger.
That does not take away the fact that this is a cinema camera. A pocket sized cinema camera.

[kye]

11 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

And I bet for low budget fast paced shoots (such as when you need to knock out a half a dozen corporate interviews in just a single afternoon) then having two matching cameras is very handy. 

Am quite tempted to myself buy a 2nd Sony PMW-F3

So basically he lost $5K over a year and a half, which is both a lot and "not too bad", depending on your perspective. 

Having two cameras is handy..  for the price of the RED anyone could have 3, 4, 5, or more P4K rigs, and those combined would probably be comparable in terms of weight and size.

My take-away from Calebs video was that he thought that buying the RED was a mistake because of a number of reasons, most of which the P4K doesn't suffer with.

10 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@kye I guess I should clarify I’m not taking a piss on the Pocket - and in no way, shape or form would I claim the a7 III has nicer color or a better codec than the P4K. I still think both you and I are waiting to see how this whole thing plays out before plunking more money down. 

I understand

I'm not waiting anymore.  I've had a few people recommend I get the EM1 mk2 over the GH5 because of the IBIS, but I'm not sure because the Oly has some other limitations.  Either way, I've got some vintage lenses and adapters on the way, and I'm planning on buying something this week.  I leave for India in about 3 weeks and was going to shoot it with the GF3 but the wife talked me into upgrading before the trip instead of afterwards when I was planning on it, so that the footage from the trip is nicer.

5 minutes ago, TurboRat said:

It's fine that you consider the P4k as a cinema camera since it has a 'Cinema' on it and interestingly not a 'Pocket' camera. Everybody have their own preference and should not influence your own. 

Honestly it's still debatable for the new P4k to be grouped with the Reds or Arris. Will wait for EBU or other technical bodies for their tests. 

That said I think the concerns about the P4k are the result of comparisons with existing cameras like the A7III, Fuji, Pana mirrorless. It's clear that Blackmagic's target market for the P4k are non-Red/C100 using consumers hence the comparison

"Cinema" and "Pocket" are both in the title, and let's be honest, it's reaching for both.  Cinema is a stretch because it doesn't have SDI outs, and a range of other things that a Venice or RED or ARRI would have.  Is it fair to compare the $1300 camera with a $100K camera because it has "cinema" in the title?  No, so we're not doing that.  That kind of a comparison is unreasonable because the cameras are for vastly different users and offer vastly different features at vastly different prices.

And yet because it has the word "Pocket" in the name we're comparing it to genuine pocket cameras.  I say that kind of comparison is also unreasonable, also because the cameras are for vastly different users and offer vastly different features at vastly different prices.

Then we compare it to cameras that neither claim to be pocketable or to be cinema cameras, and don't have the features or form-factor of pocket or cinema cameras, like the A7III or 5D or GH5, but somehow this is a fair comparison for batteries.

And we do so because we don't want to buy a few extra and carry them in a bag with the lenses, filters, and media cards that we are inevitably carrying around, or if we want long battery life we're not willing to buy an external solution?  If it came with 10 spare batteries, a V-Mount with mounting hardware, and cost a few hundred extra then people would moan that they're paying for things they don't need.  If it came with a larger internal battery then people would moan that it was too large.

All this talk makes me wonder if anyone understands the concept of things being "modular".

In terms of everyone having their own preference, I think it's designed perfectly - it can be used in either a small setup or a large one, making this the flexible approach to meet everyones needs.  Making it heavier to hold or requiring a larger gimbal for those willing to swap batteries and wanting a small and light setup is imposing your views on those users.

[jonpais]

@kye So which camera will you be taking with you to India?

[Anaconda_]

Philip Bloom has shared a small edit which he says is from one continuous shot. He’s also given a link to download the original file... it’s 22gb.

 

[Snowfun]

At least I’m not worried about battery life... my cFast card (128Gb £275) records for three minutes (UHD raw uncompressed 60fps). And I’ve got six Canon LPE6s so I should be ok.

Said in jest, obviously. I’ll never record uncompressed raw. And I have 2 500Gb T5s on order.

But the other half did seem pleased that she wouldn’t have to sit through more than 180s of my cinematic holiday films!

[kye]

21 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

Philip Bloom has shared a small edit which he says is from one continuous shot. He’s also given a link to download the original file... it’s 22gb.

I'm downloading it.

If anyone has any questions or requests for things I can (quickly / easily) do in Resolve, just ask

6 minutes ago, Snowfun said:

At least I’m not worried about battery life... my cFast card (128Gb £275) records for three minutes (UHD raw uncompressed 60fps). And I’ve got six Canon LPE6s so I should be ok.

Said in jest, obviously. I’ll never record uncompressed raw. And I have 2 500Gb T5s on order.

But the other half did seem pleased that she wouldn’t have to sit through more than 180s of my cinematic holiday films!

A three minute film is a good length..  just edit in-camera like first year of film-school and you'll be set!

[JordanWright]

Ive just bought 4 Canon LPe6 batteries but with a majority of the long form stuff I shoot, we are use lights and an audio recorder anyway so Ill just plug the camera into the wall.

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, kye said:

My take-away from Calebs video was that he thought that buying the RED was a mistake because of a number of reasons, most of which the P4K doesn't suffer with.

I have to say that my takeaway from it was wondering why he bought it in the first place because those list of reasons in his description were all there before he wrote the cheque.

I'm not sure it particularly validates the P4K either to be honest as that camera wouldn't move the story on significantly for him either in a lot of those criteria that he listed against the RED.

• * My clients don’t need or ask for 4K  - So its no different there.
• * I don’t end up taking it because I’m worry about it getting stolen and it is so heavy - Obviously different there.
• * The batteries only last an hour, so I have to bring a bunch - So its no different there.
• * No autofocus (which matters more when you’re a one man band or are filming yourself) - Obviously different there.
• * I find the image is actually really noisy. - From what I've seen, the Pocket4K will be a win there.
• * Filming with it is just slower and more work. - So its no different there due to it sharing the same issues he lists in his next 4 points.
• * Footage takes a longer time to backup. - So its no different there (relative to the type of cameras he lists that he does want to use in his last point)
• * Takes longer to make proxies. - So its no different there (relative to the type of cameras he lists that he does want to use in his last point)
• * Takes longer to export. - So its no different there (relative to the type of cameras he lists that he does want to use in his last point)
• * No built-in ND Filters - So its no different there.
• * No built-in XLRs - Its singular but obviously different there.
• * $1750 for the module with a mic input jack + HDMI/SDI out - Obviously different there!
• * Really want to go back to using hybrid cameras (I hate packing two kinds of cameras for photo + video needs) - So its no different there.

I think the video could equally have been called "Why I Don't Need A 4K RAW Cinema Camera Irrespective Of How Much It Costs" as when it comes to the most important aspects the only difference between the two is where the decimal point is in the price.

[MattH]

2 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Philip Bloom has shared a small edit which he says is from one continuous shot. He’s also given a link to download the original file... it’s 22gb.

 

Not a chance I would waste my time watching such a boring slow motion shot.  I stopped after 10 seconds.  Its people walking. Why do I need to see it in slow motion? How long does the video last anyway?

[Chrad]

3 hours ago, kye said:

Now in 2018, they release a 4K60 RAW cinema camera that costs less than 10% of the above RED, is smaller than the C100s but a significant margin, gets similar battery life, is easily hand-holdable, works with all kinds of third-party accessories, and comes with a free copy of an industry leading NLE.

Anyone who bitches about the battery life, size, cost or anything like that clearly don't have the faintest idea what a real cinema camera is like.

Get a grip - you're just embarrassing yourselves.

This camera is not what a real cinema camera is like though. An Arri or a Red is built around requiring external power and has a clear and logical place to mount the power supply. Usually a battery is placed behind the camera on a real cinema camera, but you can't do that here without obstructing your view of the screen. You could mount it underneath, but most people won't have access to that. 

This is why I refer to it as a broken design. It requires the rigging of a cinema camera for a lot of uses but it's built like a VDSLR.

[kye]

2 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

I have to say that my takeaway from it was wondering why he bought it in the first place because those list of reasons in his description were all there before he wrote the cheque.

I'm not sure it particularly validates the P4K either to be honest as that camera wouldn't move the story on significantly for him either in a lot of those criteria that he listed against the RED.

• * My clients don’t need or ask for 4K  - So its no different there.
• * I don’t end up taking it because I’m worry about it getting stolen and it is so heavy - Obviously different there.
• * The batteries only last an hour, so I have to bring a bunch - So its no different there.
• * No autofocus (which matters more when you’re a one man band or are filming yourself) - Obviously different there.
• * I find the image is actually really noisy. - From what I've seen, the Pocket4K will be a win there.
• * Filming with it is just slower and more work. - So its no different there due to it sharing the same issues he lists in his next 4 points.
• * Footage takes a longer time to backup. - So its no different there (relative to the type of cameras he lists that he does want to use in his last point)
• * Takes longer to make proxies. - So its no different there (relative to the type of cameras he lists that he does want to use in his last point)
• * Takes longer to export. - So its no different there (relative to the type of cameras he lists that he does want to use in his last point)
• * No built-in ND Filters - So its no different there.
• * No built-in XLRs - Its singular but obviously different there.
• * $1750 for the module with a mic input jack + HDMI/SDI out - Obviously different there!
• * Really want to go back to using hybrid cameras (I hate packing two kinds of cameras for photo + video needs) - So its no different there.

I think the video could equally have been called "Why I Don't Need A 4K RAW Cinema Camera Irrespective Of How Much It Costs" as when it comes to the most important aspects the only difference between the two is where the decimal point is in the price.

Totally agree.

I think I worded that part of my post badly..  I should have separated the two points, that Caleb said the RED was a mistake for a number of reasons, and that MY interpretation of those reasons applied to the P4K.

Like @Mattias Burling said - this is a cinema camera.  If you accept that it's a cinema camera then it needs to be understood in that context.  Including the size...  for a cinema camera it may as well be called the Black Magic Microscopic Cinema Camera!

It's another effect of convergence of technology.  People who are part of the DSLR revolution don't understand how cinema cameras work (thus the complaining about the battery life, screen, file sizes, AF, etc) and so they compare it to cameras of the same price or physical size.   Just like you wouldn't do any serious overall comparison between a $1000 iPhone camera and a $1000 DSLR because they're the same price (what do you mean the camera can't make phone calls???), or a 5D with a film camera because they're the same shape (why doesn't the 5D take Ektar???), comparing the P4K with A7III GH5 etc also makes no sense because they're built for completely different things.

10 minutes ago, Chrad said:

Usually a battery is placed behind the camera on a real cinema camera, but you can't do that here without obstructing your view of the screen.

I wonder how people see the screen on the back of their real cinema cameras?

[jonpais]

Sorry kye, that’s not how I understood your comments, and you are a pretty articulate man.

But what I wonder about is how you come up with how AF suddenly doesn’t matter to you anymore. Don’t mean to put you on the spot: just curious what changed your mind about autofocus.

3 hours ago, kye said:

I want IBIS and was also wanting AF until I recently changed approach.  

 

[Chrad]

19 minutes ago, kye said:

I wonder how people see the screen on the back of their real cinema cameras?

Isn't the whole point of the big monitor that this is a pocket camera and you don't need an external monitor? 

If you need to rig up a monitor to mount external power without some unorthodox rigging whatsit designed to prevent blocking the view of the screen, then the rear monitor is just a waste of space and energy. 

Or are you saying this isn't a real cinema camera because they included a screen on the back? 

Broken design: halfway between a cinema camera that requires rigging and a low form factor device, in ways that are trampling on each other. The least they could have done here is add a hinge for the screen and then this would be a non-issue.