Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

[IronFilm]

12 hours ago, kye said:

From what I understand it took a number of firmware updates to get the BMPCC to where it is now.  I'd imagine the newer one will be the same?

 If so, just think about it like you're buying a software subscription with free upgrades

The BMPCC had to start from a fairly low starting point, it could leverage some of the early work done with the BMCC, but that was all. Thus the original BMPCC still had a long long way to go. 

So while I expect the BMPCC4K will indeed improve with time, I don't expect it to have such a radical leap forward as the original BMPCC did. As the BMPCC4K has the benefit of being able to take advantage of all their years of software development on their other cameras, and the BMPCC4K is able to to start off from Day One as a much more fully developed camera (relatively speaking). 

 

12 hours ago, Emanuel said:

 

David is surely a reputable voice not connected with BMD as much as RED : D or any other manufacturer. I see him as brand agnostic as me, I guess : )

I don't believe shills are coming here, not BMD type, I think. My beef with them is just related to business policies and their obsession with broadcast market. Even though, they struggle to move on. Just not as quick as a few people, myself included, would like. I am their supporter from day one. I believe and know they could care about us outside better than they actually do. Too stuck on their organization chain. It is necessary to listen everyone. That's what I'd much appreciate to see from their own : -)

Even because there's no other Pocket 4K out there. With RAW acquisition as for instance amongst other Goodies?! Where...? ; -)

 

What obsession with the broadcast market by BMD?

Yes they make a lot of products for the broadcast market (such as ATEM etc etc), but they've done this for years, long before getting into camera manufacturing themselves. And the money and expertise they get from this is what helped allow them to build the BMCC! 

But when it comes to the cameras themselves, out of the many models they've put out, they've only made, what... three dedicated to the broadcast market? (Studio Camera / Micro Studio Camera / URSA Broadcast)

 

11 hours ago, Snowfun said:

Expert (often cynically defined as someone who has been doing it badly for a long time)

So very very true. 

 

[IronFilm]

10 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

While there's people pointing a finger at Blackmagic, the big boys put out the most dismal, boring and often unflattering "launch videos" you're ever bound to see. What happens in the creative process?? - "Hey - we've got a $10k camera to sell here. Let's shoot some trees, houses and people walking around. Throw on that Yoga music you like." 

 

With the exception of.... Fujifilm! They've done a darn good job with their latest release

Also RED often puts out fairly slick release videos too. 

 

7 hours ago, sobrietyrefund said:

Do you think this battery would be a good option to power the Pocket 4k?

I'm quite partial to using my BP-U30 (and BP-U60 batteries) to powering my original BMPCC, the check light on the battery is handy to have. 
 

3 hours ago, deezid said:

I was kinda shocked after shooting with the RED Gemini last week at how clean and realistic the image looks using IPP2.
Without some crazy post production it won't look cinematic at all - even though it has some amazing dynamic range. It's just way too clean. Older RED cameras didn't suffer from this "problem".

Same happens with the Pocket 4K. You'll get better dynamic range, no more noise, very natural color - an overall way more realistic looking image which is almost flawless.

Which is a problem - at least in film. You don't wan't a realistic looking image.

Oh no, it is too good!

 

[Jim Giberti]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

 I just realized that you’re the guy that made one of my favorite Micro videos... the horses in the snow.

Thanks.

That was in the first hour or so after the Micro arrived. I was still charging the battery and looked out the studio window at the farm and saw the snow falling so I stuck the battery in and ran out to the pasture to grab a few shots of some of our critters.

Still love the image from the Micro.

Think of the P4K as that on steroids as far as a camera is concerned. The image itself is a bit more detailed (in 1080).

I would have gladly paid the same to have the Micro sensor with the new P4k body/interface.

[kye]

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

The BMPCC had to start from a fairly low starting point, it could leverage some of the early work done with the BMCC, but that was all. Thus the original BMPCC still had a long long way to go. 

So while I expect the BMPCC4K will indeed improve with time, I don't expect it to have such a radical leap forward as the original BMPCC did. As the BMPCC4K has the benefit of being able to take advantage of all their years of software development on their other cameras, and the BMPCC4K is able to to start off from Day One as a much more fully developed camera (relatively speaking). 

Makes total sense

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Oh no, it is too good!

Luckily the internet is awash with people that can't shoot or grade very well!

[TurboRat]

4 hours ago, Jim Giberti said:

Still love the image from the Micro.

Think of the P4K as that on steroids as far as a camera is concerned. The image itself is a bit more detailed (in 1080).

I would have gladly paid the same to have the Micro sensor with the new P4k body/interface.

I think this is the concern from pocket and micro users that the P4k doesnt have that BMPCC factor that made that camera amazing.

[Inazuma]

There seems to be a lot of speculation in here about how the original looked more cinematic than the p4k, which I believe. But has anyone shot any side by side videos to prove it? And to ascertain whether it is simply due to the higher resolution or is it something more?

[graphicnatured]

6 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

There seems to be a lot of speculation in here about how the original looked more cinematic than the p4k, which I believe. But has anyone shot any side by side videos to prove it? And to ascertain whether it is simply due to the higher resolution or is it something more?

Still waiting for mine or I could compare P4k to OG Pocket, Micro and UM4.6kP. Hopefully soon.

[Chrad]

19 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

While there's people pointing a finger at Blackmagic, the big boys put out the most dismal, boring and often unflattering "launch videos" you're ever bound to see. What happens in the creative process?? - "Hey - we've got a $10k camera to sell here. Let's shoot some trees, houses and people walking around. Throw on that Yoga music you like." 

I wish Blackmagic gave the camera to more 'filmmaker' types and less 'promo' types for their sample shorts. The Colour of Light video was nice as a demo but the voice over was poorly written, and the Lost Generation video was pretentious bro douchery. The wedding video was actually the most interesting and artistic footage they put out!

[MattH]

3 hours ago, Inazuma said:

There seems to be a lot of speculation in here about how the original looked more cinematic than the p4k, which I believe. But has anyone shot any side by side videos to prove it? And to ascertain whether it is simply due to the higher resolution or is it something more?

From what I have seen I think the resolution plays the largest factor.  The lower resolution of the og pocket helps to mask other amatuer/video looking things (lighting, colors, composition).  A slight amount of added blur should soften up the image nicely and eliminate most of the difference between them.  (For the record, this would be for narrative work only, if its a documentary you would leave it sharp. Though luckily this proviso is mostly redundant as most people sharpen anyway).

I also think the og pocket may have had a tone curve that is favourable to highlights.    The pocket 4k has different tone curves at different iso's (shown drastically by the dual native iso) so the discerning user will choose the ISO with a tone curve that matches the look they are going for at that particular moment (narrative/documentary), which is a trade off between highlight latitude and noize performance.  In prores the tone curve is baked in,  while the raw iso increments are only metadata but the native iso comes into the equation even in raw, and the chosen iso will indirectly effect how the user chooses to expose.

[webrunner5]

5 hours ago, Inazuma said:

There seems to be a lot of speculation in here about how the original looked more cinematic than the p4k, which I believe. But has anyone shot any side by side videos to prove it? And to ascertain whether it is simply due to the higher resolution or is it something more?

Trouble is most PK4 stuff is in 4K, so it has no hope of looking like a OG one in that resolution. We need more 1080p, "Normal Speed", videos from the PK4 to compare.

[kye]

3 hours ago, MattH said:

I also think the og pocket may have had a tone curve that is favourable to highlights.    The pocket 4k has different tone curves at different iso's (shown drastically by the dual native iso) so the discerning user will choose the ISO with a tone curve that matches the look they are going for at that particular moment (narrative/documentary), which is a trade off between highlight latitude and noize performance.  In prores the tone curve is baked in,  while the raw iso increments are only metadata but the native iso comes into the equation even in raw, and the chosen iso will indirectly effect how the user chooses to expose.

And the technically proficient and discerning user might also shoot a test scene with a bunch of ISOs (controlling exposure via SS) and then compare, select the nicest curve, and then build a set of curves that turn the lesser tone curves into the good one.

If you're careful and organised such a thing would only take a few hours to do from start to finish.

[mercer]

12 hours ago, Jim Giberti said:

Thanks.

That was in the first hour or so after the Micro arrived. I was still charging the battery and looked out the studio window at the farm and saw the snow falling so I stuck the battery in and ran out to the pasture to grab a few shots of some of our critters.

Still love the image from the Micro.

Think of the P4K as that on steroids as far as a camera is concerned. The image itself is a bit more detailed (in 1080).

I would have gladly paid the same to have the Micro sensor with the new P4k body/interface.

Good to know. The Micro was one of my favorite cameras, I just hated rigging it up to make it usable. I still wish BM released a Micro with a screen and maybe a small bump in resolution to 2.5K or 2.7K. Have you noticed any IR issues with the P4K? In some of the Raw samples floating around, the greens seem like they could be affected by some IR pollution. 

[MattH]

13 minutes ago, kye said:

And the technically proficient and discerning user might also shoot a test scene with a bunch of ISOs (controlling exposure via SS) and then compare, select the nicest curve, and then build a set of curves that turn the lesser tone curves into the good one.

If you're careful and organised such a thing would only take a few hours to do from start to finish.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but why would you do that?  (build a set of curves that turn the lesser tone curves into the good one).

The way I saw it that with prores you are first choosing a native iso band and then the iso within that band defines were the midpoint is within the exposure range.  With raw you just choose the native iso. The increments within those bands just alter how bright the image looks on your screen to act as a guide for how much light to put on the sensor.

Are you talking about raw or prores?

[kye]

30 minutes ago, MattH said:

Perhaps I'm missing something, but why would you do that?  (build a set of curves that turn the lesser tone curves into the good one).

The way I saw it that with prores you are first choosing a native iso band and then the iso within that band defines were the midpoint is within the exposure range.  With raw you just choose the native iso. The increments within those bands just alter how bright the image looks on your screen to act as a guide for how much light to put on the sensor.

Are you talking about raw or prores?

I wasn't talking specifically about either.

When you said "The pocket 4k has different tone curves at different iso's (shown drastically by the dual native iso) so the discerning user will choose the ISO with a tone curve that matches the look they are going for at that particular moment (narrative/documentary)" it made me think that for people shooting in less controlled situations they could use whatever settings was appropriate (full sun or low light etc) and still benefit from being able to choose which tone curve they want.

If you're on set then you can just dial in whatever lighting hits your favourite ISO, but that doesn't always work for everyone.  Does that make sense?  Maybe I'm the one missing something

[mercer]

Assuming Raw works on the P4K like it did with other cameras, ISO doesn’t matter so you would shoot at Native ISO. With previous cameras, you’d also get the cleanest ProRes by shooting at the native ISO as well. If that’s still the case, the P4K is still a great advancement because you have 2 native ISOs... one for daylight and one for lowlight. 

@kye

[MattH]

1 hour ago, kye said:

I wasn't talking specifically about either.

When you said "The pocket 4k has different tone curves at different iso's (shown drastically by the dual native iso) so the discerning user will choose the ISO with a tone curve that matches the look they are going for at that particular moment (narrative/documentary)" it made me think that for people shooting in less controlled situations they could use whatever settings was appropriate (full sun or low light etc) and still benefit from being able to choose which tone curve they want.

If you're on set then you can just dial in whatever lighting hits your favourite ISO, but that doesn't always work for everyone.  Does that make sense?  Maybe I'm the one missing something

Well that functionality is essentially built in to raw already.   Your only choices are the physical exposure and the native iso.

Even in prores, the way I understand it is that if you were at iso 100 and you adjusted your exposure so that the sky was just on the edge of clipping, you could increase the iso up to 1000 and the sky wouldn't clip.  Just the average brightness would increase.  So (not that I'm saying you said this) I don't think you would ever gain anything by shooting at one iso and then adjusting it so it resembled another.  It would be preferable if you knew before hand.

But if you are just talking about flexibility, I guess shooting in the middle of the range would make sense.  Probably at the native iso's themselves of 400 or 3200. Then you would have a balance of noise performance and highlight latitude with a little bit of leeway either way. 

But to leave significant leeway to boost the brightness you would have to bake in what looked like an under exposed image and shadow detail would be lost due to insufficient bits in the shadows, or to leave significant leeway to crush the noise out you would have to bake in what looked like an over exposed image and highlights would potentially be clipped.

[Jim Giberti]

10 hours ago, Inazuma said:

There seems to be a lot of speculation in here about how the original looked more cinematic than the p4k, which I believe. But has anyone shot any side by side videos to prove it? And to ascertain whether it is simply due to the higher resolution or is it something more?

Honestly I've been too busy setting it up and incorporating it into our workflow to do direct comparisons but we've been shooting all Blackmagic for a few years including Pockets and Micros.

I have personally shot it on three client films in two weeks and it's definitely not lacking in mojo.

What I think people are dealing with is the new color science which is a big deal - and like the original BMCC and Pocket it took a little time for people to learn how to get the best from it.

And because so few of us have them there isn't any reall workflow buzz and discussion moving things forward.

I've gotten great footage from day one but I'm still tweaking the post process and getting comfortable with it.

I'm thinking of it as a lens with great micro contrast where the image has that presence and 3D pop without being too sharp/contrasty.

But it depends on who's shooting it and how they're posting it and once you start seeeing numbers of good creatives working with it you'll see how it's next level IQ but in a good way.

[webrunner5]

Well I know what happened to a lot of you guys cameras LoL. Sorry. I wanted the one on the Very bottom. ?

 

7 hours ago, Jn- said:

Focus pulling, interactive guide ... 

http://www.focuspulling.com/bmpcc4kguide/

In the Conclusion he sure doesn't sound too enthusiastic about it! Interesting.

[Emanuel]

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

?

 

 

A shill dude being hit by EOSHD squad! : -D

[Emanuel]

 

"Blackmagic Pocket 4K's ISO10,000 still usable? Yes, with Neat Video.

The noise level in ISO10,000 from the new Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K is as noisy as ISO3200 from the Panasonic GH5. The best part about the Pocket 4K's HFR is that there are no signs of banding. Keep in mind that in ProRes, even in 120fps, it is still 10-bit."

source:

https://vimeo.com/294680968