Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

[Kisaha]

13 minutes ago, Jonesy Jones said:

Here is a list of terms to help your Now, if those alone aren't getting you the status you deserve, try these ones. They almost sound made up, but no one will ever question you and will repeat them until they become an actual thing.

• Sharpening halos
• Pixel fringing
• Quasar vignette 
• Noise population ratio
• Telecentric converters

Add Tachyon polution and Spatial rendering to those!

[Shirozina]

41 minutes ago, Jonesy Jones said:

I've just discovered the secret to success in this industry -- be very critical of the image made by any camera other than Alexa, and you are instantly a top notch dp in the class of Roger Deakins.

Here is a list of terms to help your complaints sound more legit:

• Lacks DR (dynamic range)
• Poor highlight roll off
• Contrasty
• Not contrasty
• Bad motion cadence
• Too digital
• Too flat
• Plasticy
• Too noisy
• Too clean
• Poor focus roll off
• Macro blocking
• Micro jitters
• Sucky suck suck

Now, if those alone aren't getting you the status you deserve, try these ones. They almost sound made up, but no one will ever question you and will repeat them until they become an actual thing.

• Sharpening halos
• Pixel fringing
• Quasar vignette 
• Noise population ratio
• Telecentric converters

And if you find you need to take it even further, take a screenshot of footage that you put zero production value in, like a chair in a poorly lit office, magnify 300 percent, and then... wait for it......... wait for it......... draw a friggin arrow to the pixel in question.

I'll have plenty more suggestions in my upcoming mzed class...

 

Seriously, there is a clear world of difference between being a negative Nelly and simply recognizing a camera's pros and cons. ALL CAMERAS have pros and cons. Looking at them in those terms is about making decisions and problem solving , not complaining. 

You are forgetting 'not as good as the camera it replaced'

[anonim]

@Jonesy Jones

It might be pretty applicable irony for someone, but actually somebody here post ambitious comparison between Arri and P4K asking for comments and, as it seems, seriously calling to acclamation agreement that they are extremely similar. Me, personally, unfortunately and in spite to my wish, had to admit that for me they don't look so close as I expected, at least at concrete case... judging about traits that I not invented, but found here as usually pointed and quoted as proof of close quality (and, I'm sure, used by yourself also in commenting some other topic). As I understand, most of us here will be glad to the highest degree to buy P4K immediately if we could, but I can't pretend that in given example - and from whatever reason - it really looks to me and on my laptop screen as easy-to-match given Arri side-by-side results. Alas, they don't - but probably I'm wrong and curse just to my own modest angle and capacity of view.

It seems to me that somebody has to be little bit silly not to highly esteem and praise BM achievement with P4K, but why it is so bad if some other (obviously) long time admirers and users of BM products express some kind of reservation over some results - when it is clear that indeed BM makes pretty distinctive decisions? Is it the must for of all us to - being faced with her majesty P4K - use exclusively expressions type of high-suspense emotional connection, of being-professionally-reborn, of inner-mind revolution and revelation, of heavenly adoration and consciousness of turning point in aesthetic history 

[Shirozina]

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

For convinience, and the AngelBird match pack (512GB SSD and 256 CFast) is only 399.9$ (more in Europe, but everything is more here).

You can get a 1TB T5 for 200Euros or thereabouts. 

[Jonesy Jones]

Its the way the complaints are communicated that is driving me nuts. And maybe not yours, honestly I have not been keeping track. But for camera that cost $1,300 that produces the images it does to be criticize with words like sharpening halos and mojo, well, I just can't abide that. 

My point is that, instead of pointing out flaws as though I'm going to receive an award for finding them, to bring them up in terms of how can we solve this or mitigated or, is there another tool I can use in situations where this particular drawback is not an issue. Negativity creates doubt and hold us back. Problem solving inspires us to move forward. This is a great forum when all our minds are solving these issues and creating workarounds for the ones we can't solve. Otherwise we end up pixel peeping and making no progress in the storytelling we all want to do.

[thebrothersthre3]

Differences look pretty minimal to me honestly. 

I think its obvious the cameras will look different. The Arri probably has about 3 stops more dynamic range, with a larger sensor and higher bit depth. That said if you are a good colorist and the scene isn't pushing the pockets Dynamic range one should be able to get the cameras looking pretty identical. 

To just throw a LUT on there that isn't even supposed to match an Arri and think it will look the same is silly. There is a reason an Alexa costs 10,000 and up. 

[mercer]

Why does every new camera that is released inevitably have a “... vs Alexa” video, anyway?

I mean, if any of these cameras were as good as an Alexa, then Roger Deakins would surely buy them and use them in their Hollywood films. Weirdly enough, I have heard, somewhere, that a lot of Hollywood DPs own Fuji cameras as their personal camera...

But seriously, it’s not the end of the world if your sub-2000 dollar camera isn’t as good as an Alexa. Most people believe the best Red doesn’t look as good as an Alexa, so it’s highly unlikely that a $1300 camera will either.

Stop watching and reposting these stupid comparisons and maybe they’ll stop making them.

With that being said, the OG Pocket was often referred to as a Baby Alexa, maybe the P4K will earn that moniker as well one day, but until then, what’s the harm in mentioning a flaw or two? And a strength or two?

4 hours ago, Shirozina said:

but what do I know as I'm not looking at it via youtube on a cellphone?

Cell phones are the great equalizer and how most people will watch most of your videos, so if a camera’s image looks noticeably better on a cell phone screen, I find, there’s usually something to it. YMMV.

[Jim Giberti]

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Truth is happening only online, preferably watched on a phone. This is where we live now!

That's the most depressing thing I've read in a long time.

[Kisaha]

5 minutes ago, Jim Giberti said:

That's the most depressing thing I've read in a long time.

Is true though, isn't it?

We better get used to it!

Personally, I do not own any social media account, and do not follow any youtuber, but it is just me, I do not form political or advertising campaigns, while FB and Felix Kjellberg do.

[AlexTrinder96]

10 hours ago, Newway12 said:

What lense is that?

Celere HS

[Jonesy Jones]

 

[mercer]

19 minutes ago, Jonesy Jones said:

 

Definitely some of the best P4K footage I’ve seen. Really quite perfect. Good find. 

[Emanuel]

Savoir fair. Know-how. There's no free soup, fellas ; -)

[terraform]

Not sure if this has been discussed but can you use the BMD EVF (for the Ursa's) with the BMPCC4k? and also has anyone seen a rig that would "accommodate" that?

[leslie]

10 hours ago, Jim Giberti said:

That's the most depressing thing I've read in a long time.

 

9 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Is true though, isn't it?

We better get used to it!

 

i think thats just hilarious.

the whole forum is about making the best footage possible from some pricey cameras (alexia)  to not so pricey (bmp4k) and others. People are talking 4k,  6k, 8k grading like a hollywood blockbuster and now we are comparing results or watching it on a phone. Is that some irony or what ?. I really cant be bothered watching stuff on my phone. Dont get me wrong, phones are great  and i use the camera quite a bit for pictures for work and personal stuff. i also have about half my cd collection on a card in the phone to listen to. But to watch stuff online, i'll spend a whole extra minute and turn the phone into hotspot mode, fire up the laptop and watch it on that or the desktop at home. i personally dont find phone screens immersive or captivating enough (if immersive is the right word).

[Emanuel]

Buddy, I see you've lost the whole point of their comments though. Nothing related to footage. The way people live inside their tiny screens instead. Lack of multiple perspective(s) to mention only a part of the equation, that's their major concern I entirely subscribe, that's the most I can add actually.

[thephoenix]

 

[kye]

18 hours ago, Jonesy Jones said:

 

 

I've just discovered the secret to success in this industry -- be very critical of the image made by any camera other than Alexa, and you are instantly a top notch dp in the class of Roger Deakins.

Here is a list of terms to help your complaints sound more legit:

• Lacks DR (dynamic range)
• Poor highlight roll off
• Contrasty
• Not contrasty
• Bad motion cadence
• Too digital

......

You forgot Mojo!!

17 hours ago, anonim said:

@Jonesy Jones

It might be pretty applicable irony for someone, but actually somebody here post ambitious comparison between Arri and P4K asking for comments and, as it seems, seriously calling to acclamation agreement that they are extremely similar. Me, personally, unfortunately and in spite to my wish, had to admit that for me they don't look so close as I expected, at least at concrete case... judging about traits that I not invented, but found here as usually pointed and quoted as proof of close quality (and, I'm sure, used by yourself also in commenting some other topic). As I understand, most of us here will be glad to the highest degree to buy P4K immediately if we could, but I can't pretend that in given example - and from whatever reason - it really looks to me and on my laptop screen as easy-to-match given Arri side-by-side results. Alas, they don't - but probably I'm wrong and curse just to my own modest angle and capacity of view.

It seems to me that somebody has to be little bit silly not to highly esteem and praise BM achievement with P4K, but why it is so bad if some other (obviously) long time admirers and users of BM products express some kind of reservation over some results - when it is clear that indeed BM makes pretty distinctive decisions? Is it the must for of all us to - being faced with her majesty P4K - use exclusively expressions type of high-suspense emotional connection, of being-professionally-reborn, of inner-mind revolution and revelation, of heavenly adoration and consciousness of turning point in aesthetic history 

I agree.  Comparing a Corolla to a Ferrari requires some accommodation of pricing.

15 hours ago, mercer said:

Why does every new camera that is released inevitably have a “... vs Alexa” video, anyway?

I mean, if any of these cameras were as good as an Alexa, then Roger Deakins would surely buy them and use them in their Hollywood films. Weirdly enough, I have heard, somewhere, that a lot of Hollywood DPs own Fuji cameras as their personal camera...

But seriously, it’s not the end of the world if your sub-2000 dollar camera isn’t as good as an Alexa. Most people believe the best Red doesn’t look as good as an Alexa, so it’s highly unlikely that a $1300 camera will either.

Stop watching and reposting these stupid comparisons and maybe they’ll stop making them.

With that being said, the OG Pocket was often referred to as a Baby Alexa, maybe the P4K will earn that moniker as well one day, but until then, what’s the harm in mentioning a flaw or two? And a strength or two?

Cell phones are the great equalizer and how most people will watch most of your videos, so if a camera’s image looks noticeably better on a cell phone screen, I find, there’s usually something to it. YMMV.

I like the "X vs Alexa" because it serves as a good reference for the state of the art.  It also does some small good to educate people that are new to this space and think that their $3k camera setup should be the best in the world.  

I also like that it (can) spawn some interesting conversations around various cameras having strengths and weaknesses.  A cellphone is a lot more 'professional' a camera when the shot required is wide angle and in plenty of light with deep DOF, for example.  That knowledge is useful to those people who respond to the "$100k movie camera" clickbait titles.

We could definitely do with more nuanced debate around things though, sadly it seems that the world has become more polarised and succumbed to more black-or-white thinking now that globalisation is really kicking in.  

4 hours ago, leslie said:

 

i think thats just hilarious.

the whole forum is about making the best footage possible from some pricey cameras (alexia)  to not so pricey (bmp4k) and others. People are talking 4k,  6k, 8k grading like a hollywood blockbuster and now we are comparing results or watching it on a phone. Is that some irony or what ?. I really cant be bothered watching stuff on my phone. Dont get me wrong, phones are great  and i use the camera quite a bit for pictures for work and personal stuff. i also have about half my cd collection on a card in the phone to listen to. But to watch stuff online, i'll spend a whole extra minute and turn the phone into hotspot mode, fire up the laptop and watch it on that or the desktop at home. i personally dont find phone screens immersive or captivating enough (if immersive is the right word).

Watching on a phone is actually more meaningful than you might think.  

The differences between 1:1 RAW and 12:1 RAW are visible, even through YT compression which must be hundreds-to-one, which tells you something about the nature of compression and signal processing through a signal path.

It's the same with resolution, although most phones are 1080p displays now.

Besides, most camera tests are completely useless at worst, or just a reflection of how well they were graded.

Content and story loose neither dynamic range nor resolution when viewed on a phone...

[matthere]

44 minutes ago, kye said:

We could definitely do with more nuanced debate around things though, sadly it seems that the world has become more polarised and succumbed to more black-or-white thinking now that globalisation is really kicking in.

This.

[majoraxis]

Nice to see a decent zoom lens on the Pocket 4k in the Phil Bloom video. To me the shooting with a good zoom lens allows me to use more of the language of film.

A couple of things that Phil could have mentioned, but it would have taken away from his pitch to sell multiples of each Fujinon zoom lens, is that you can get a m4/3 to E-mount adapter ring, though you would probably want to shoot no rails to make sure it is absolute stable.

Also, there are adapters that will allow Phil to go from a B4 broadcast lens to 35mm for mirrorless cameras. They do eat a number of stops of light, but it can be done and is particularly useful if you are looking for a long parfocal zoom lens.

For adapting B4 lens to the Pocket 4k the light loss is less and you could do it with an Abakus 132 and Olympus 1.4x m4/3 adapter for for slightly less that 2 stops of light loss, so  your 1.8f B4 would be a 3.32f over probably 60% of the zoom range. So 20x B4 Zoom lens would be a 12x parfocal zoom lens with 3.32f constant aperture... but there is the is issue of the sensor glass thickness, which means it is not a idea optical solution, but still many may find it useful slightly stopped down.