Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

[Jimbo]

On 1/11/2019 at 2:38 PM, loloniek said:

I just wanted to share with you my latest music video shot on Ursa and Pocket 4k + Zeiss Cp3 + Black ProMist (how Can i embed a video here : ) ? )

https://vimeo.com/309293561

Wow, yeah, this looks great man! Heavy grade required for that look? What light/lens did you have on her for the close ups?

[pryde]

I ran into an issue I haven't been able to find much talk about so I thought I'd share - 

I'm using the P4K with the Viltrox EF-M2 and primarily the Canon 35mm f2 IS and Sigma 24-105 F4 IS. The viltrox had the same firmware as when i received it, probably 2.2 or something. When I would turn on the P4K, the aperture wouldn't show up. I had to disconnect the adapter and reconnect it with the camera on, and then the aperture would show up and be able to be adjusted.

So, I downloaded the latest firmware (3.2) from Viltrox's website and installed it. Boom! aperture shows up every time now. BUT, image stabilization didn't work anymore. Downgraded to 3.1. IS still didn't work. Did some hunting online and someone recommended downgrading to version 2.3. Did that and now aperture shows up upon boot and IS works every time. 

I had been considering getting an aputure lensregain if the Viltrox wasn't going to work anymore and so i can use it as a follow focus for EF lenses. Maybe I'll still get it and leave the Viltrox on my GH5. We'll see.

[xzobinx]

6 hours ago, pryde said:

I ran into an issue I haven't been able to find much talk about so I thought I'd share - 

I'm using the P4K with the Viltrox EF-M2 and primarily the Canon 35mm f2 IS and Sigma 24-105 F4 IS. The viltrox had the same firmware as when i received it, probably 2.2 or something. When I would turn on the P4K, the aperture wouldn't show up. I had to disconnect the adapter and reconnect it with the camera on, and then the aperture would show up and be able to be adjusted.

So, I downloaded the latest firmware (3.2) from Viltrox's website and installed it. Boom! aperture shows up every time now. BUT, image stabilization didn't work anymore. Downgraded to 3.1. IS still didn't work. Did some hunting online and someone recommended downgrading to version 2.3. Did that and now aperture shows up upon boot and IS works every time. 

I had been considering getting an aputure lensregain if the Viltrox wasn't going to work anymore and so i can use it as a follow focus for EF lenses. Maybe I'll still get it and leave the Viltrox on my GH5. We'll see.

I for one have the issue with viltrox with glowing image at wide open aperture which has been documented in here. https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=81437

Anyone has the same issue or a quick fix ?

most of my work is either outdoor or with light so F2 is where I'm normally at but I would like to use 1.2 on sigma once in a while 

[Shirozina]

2 hours ago, xzobinx said:

I for one have the issue with viltrox with glowing image at wide open aperture which has been documented in here. https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=81437

Anyone has the same issue or a quick fix ?

most of my work is either outdoor or with light so F2 is where I'm normally at but I would like to use 1.2 on sigma once in a while 

I've not noticed any issues wide open on the EF-M2 + 18-35 sigma on either my GH5 or P4k. I reckon the OP of that link had a bad sample or had not set it up correctly.

[seanzzxx]

On 1/14/2019 at 3:53 PM, wyrlyn said:

 

That's a really common problem with the Viltroxes, and it seems to be a quality control thing. I have the same on my 18-35, from 1.8 it's really sharp but at 1.2 it's a ridiculous washed out glow, totally unusable. I didn't bother returning it because I'm 1) lazy and 2) never shoot below f1.8, but it's still annoying. Can't complain for the price, though.

[deezid]

4 hours ago, seanzzxx said:

That's a really common problem with the Viltroxes, and it seems to be a quality control thing. I have the same on my 18-35, from 1.8 it's really sharp but at 1.2 it's a ridiculous washed out glow, totally unusable. I didn't bother returning it because I'm 1) lazy and 2) never shoot below f1.8, but it's still annoying. Can't complain for the price, though.

Had the viltrox as well for a day. Sent it back immediately. The Aputure Lens Regain and Metabones adapters are way better.

[Emanuel]

1 hour ago, deezid said:

Had the viltrox as well for a day. Sent it back immediately. The Aputure Lens Regain and Metabones adapters are way better.

Same here : -)

[pryde]

Other than the issue I mentioned with aperture and IS issues that were fixed via firmware, I haven't had issues with viltrox and I've been shooting with the EF-M2 on the Gh5 for at least a year. I've also used the metabones and the physical quality is much nicer, but image wise I haven't noticed a difference. I'm guessing they just have poor quality control, as was mentioned. I actually own Viltrox speed boosters for m43, eos-m, and fuji x and don't have any serious complaints.

For those who've used the Aputure Lensregain on the P4k , is it a good solution for not having any sort of autofocus control on adapted lenses? Is the focusing controlled and smooth or obnoxious and semi erratic like focus by wire?

[loloniek]

On 1/15/2019 at 1:34 PM, Jimbo said:

Wow, yeah, this looks great man! Heavy grade required for that look? What light/lens did you have on her for the close ups?

Thanks! It was a very simple setup : tungsten light (2 x dedolight Panaura + china ball, some LEDs for background) and Zeiss CP3 50 and 85mm + 1/4 Black Pro Mist on Pocket for Close-ups. The look was mostly made in camera, I was shooting on 5500K white balance and then made a few tweaks in Resolve.

On 1/11/2019 at 11:24 PM, Emanuel said:

What ISOs?

iso was around 800-1200 , but I`ve added analog grain in the grading

On 1/11/2019 at 5:09 PM, kye said:

Nice work.  I really liked the atmosphere and colours, the Tiffen matched really nicely with the smoke too.  The closing shot from inside the control room was a very nice touch too!

Thanks!

[Emanuel]

2 hours ago, loloniek said:

Thanks! It was a very simple setup : tungsten light (2 x dedolight Panaura + china ball, some LEDs for background) and Zeiss CP3 50 and 85mm + 1/4 Black Pro Mist on Pocket for Close-ups. The look was mostly made in camera, I was shooting on 5500K white balance and then made a few tweaks in Resolve.

iso was around 800-1200 , but I`ve added analog grain in the grading

Thanks!

Yes, you can easily (@webrunner5 ; ) provide your look in-camera. This is not pointless. This doesn't mean you're unable of the same anywhere else, just a different level, reason why this camera is pretty unique of a kind.

@loloniek Have you identified @1000 ISO you're going better than with 1250 actually?

[anonim]

Being astonished how it is possible to make so wildly uncontrolled and non-professional test about topic and some questions aroused from this thread - and still called yourself professional...

 

[leslie]

2 hours ago, anonim said:

Being astonished how it is possible to make so wildly uncontrolled and non-professional test about topic and some questions aroused from this thread - and still called yourself professional...

 

welcome to the internet

when my bmp4k finally turns up (which reminds i must email the company and ask if they actually meant nov/dec 2019 delivery not 2018 but i digress ) i plan on doing a full review on the bmp4k and my two gopros. it will be totally impartial, irrelevant, pointless and probably many other things but hey that doesn't seem to stop anyone else so stay tuned....... it will be next level i promise ?

edit: i'm increasingly disenchanted with camera comparisons or maybe its the amateurs doing these vlogs but personally i don't find alot of substance in them. i don't find much new information and at the end i cant help but feel cheated out of a few precious minutes of my life not to mention several megabytes of data  i'll never get back. i guess for me its more i bought my camera have paid for it, now for me i need  to learn what i can do with it.  i really don't care how it compares to other cameras.

[Emanuel]

Well, to be a PRO means to earn for a living from an activity as main or secondary ones. There are different crafts within the same industry, several market segments and distinct level of players in this business, obviously, beyond an identical playground.

Without mention when jacks-of-all-trades but Master of None... : D

 

E : -)

[kye]

7 hours ago, leslie said:

edit: i'm increasingly disenchanted with camera comparisons or maybe its the amateurs doing these vlogs but personally i don't find alot of substance in them. i don't find much new information and at the end i cant help but feel cheated out of a few precious minutes of my life not to mention several megabytes of data  i'll never get back. i guess for me its more i bought my camera have paid for it, now for me i need  to learn what i can do with it.  i really don't care how it compares to other cameras.

I agree.

Camera comparisons can be useful when you're researching what to buy, but there isn't a lot of content around how a certain specification or feature will help you to make a finished product, which is ultimately what matters.

I think there are four levels of review:

1. Useless reviews where you learn nothing about the camera (beyond the specs)
2. Good reviews where you get a sense of what the camera can offer to a real shoot
3. Great reviews where you learn about film-making as well as what the camera is capable of

Most YT commentary is in the first category, there are a smattering of the second, and the occasional flash of the third.  

I think it's mostly the reviewers fault, because mostly they either don't know anything about film-making so can't link camera features to real productions, or assume that you already know everything about film-making and don't have to link camera features to real productions.  The former are the YT vlogger wannabes and the latter are the working cinematographers who often publish their camera / lens / lighting tests for you to decipher yourself.

[Anaconda_]

2 minutes ago, kye said:

mostly they either don't know anything about film-making so can't link camera features to real productions, or assume that you already know everything about film-making and don't have to link camera features to real productions

Don't forget that a lot of reviewers get demo units for a very limited amount of time, so can't really test them in real 'professional' situations. They can only really go for a walk and do some street shooting.

[kye]

1 hour ago, Anaconda_ said:

Don't forget that a lot of reviewers get demo units for a very limited amount of time, so can't really test them in real 'professional' situations. They can only really go for a walk and do some street shooting.

That's true, but I think it's not familiarity with the camera that's the weak point.

Imagine two kinds of reviews..  the first just says things about the camera, the second about what that really means.

Type 1 review: "The GH5 has X stops of DR.  It has 10-bit internal recording."
Type 2 review: "The X stops of DR combined with the 10-bit internal recording means that if I shoot this building against the sky I can bring up the shadows in post to get this image here, exposing the building correctly and not blowing out the sky - here's the same image from my control camera and you can see the noise from the 8-bit means the shot is ruined.  This means that if you're shooting outdoors there is enough latitude for shots of this nature, such as documentary work on location.  This is a real differentiator for those who would typically use an XYZ model camera for this type of shooting".

How many reviews of the GH5 showed what shots the GH5 could get that the other cameras couldn't get?  A reviewer can tell me the specs and I haven't got the faintest idea what that means to me in real life.  If I was trying to figure out which was the better camera for high DR work I'd be screwed if I only got given the stats - shadow recovery depends on ISO noise, bit-depth, codec, bit-rate, DR, and colour space - try getting two cameras with different sets of specs and trading all those things off against each other.  Not to mention if the noise looks nasty or lovely in character.  That's why we have reviewers!!

How many reviews of the BM Micro showed us that do to its size and image quality it would be useful in filming a TV drama like John Brawley showed us he'd done in shooting The Resident?

How many reviews of the C100 explained the practical benefits of having a high-quality and low-bitrate codec in terms that compared to other cameras?  Let's imagine you're getting a similar quality image from two cameras, but one is lower bitrate and more expensive.  At the current HDD prices, how long do you have to record for until the more expensive camera pays for the difference because of the reduced file sizes?  No-one gives us that kind of information!

Most reviewers are only one step away from just getting Siri to read us the spec sheets, giving us an unedited monologue about how they liked the packaging, and putting music and their branding package on it before hitting publish.

I can understand why the working cinematographers don't elaborate on what they're looking for in a sensor / lens / filter or how it matters to the production because they're really in their own space creating content for other working cinematographers.  It's a pity though, because there are people like me who are lurking and trying to learn but don't know that a lens with X optical attribute is good for scenes of type Y lit with lights of type Z.  Sure, I'm not in the market for either of those $100k lens kits, but I'd like to learn the links between equipment and end-result, especially from those who really have depth in that knowledge and experience.

[Yannick Willox]

Does anyone agree it is strange the above tester mentions it is hard to get skintones good on the P4K, while in all his footage the skintones look much worse on the GH5s ?

Or is my monitor calibration off ?

[TurboRat]

4 hours ago, Emanuel said:

 

Without mention when jacks-of-all-trades but Master of None... : D

 

E : -)

...is oftentimes better than Master of One -  really depends on what phrase you read  ? 

[anonim]

1 hour ago, Yannick Willox said:

Does anyone agree it is strange the above tester mentions it is hard to get skintones good on the P4K, while in all his footage the skintones look much worse on the GH5s ?

Or is my monitor calibration off ?

That's one of the magical moments in that test - his white balance settings are everywhere (so consequently color shifting ), especially in case of GH5s, who knows maybe he also set camera to shutter priority ... What is enigmatic question also - did he see/check results before uploading them or just was in hurry to make youtube visitors happy as soon as possible? Or maybe everything was actually intended to be some sort of parody?

[TurboRat]

3 hours ago, anonim said:

That's one of the magical moments in that test - his white balance settings are everywhere (so consequently color shifting ), especially in case of GH5s, who knows maybe he also set camera to shutter priority ... What is enigmatic question also - did he see/check results before uploading them or just was in hurry to make youtube visitors happy as soon as possible? Or maybe everything was actually intended to be some sort of parody?

Yeah I think WB is on auto