Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

[Kisaha]

1 hour ago, drm said:

@Kisaha The difference in sensor stack size between the P4K and other M4/3 cameras should be most visible with native lenses at very wide apertures. I did some quick testing a few days back with my Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 lens. I didn't notice a drop in image quality between my GH5s and my P4K, even using that lens wide open. At some point I am going to try and set up a test scene and look at this issue in more detail. There may be differences with that lens between the two platforms, but my initial look didn't reveal anything that stood out.

Thank you very much, If I had the time I should be doing some testing myself.

Some Zeiss and Voigtlander can go as low as 25! I am not sure about this one, but there must be some difference.

First of all, I have to clear out that my knowledge in optics is like most people in this forum, pretty basic!

Since the Metabones release, I tried to learn as much I could about the subject matter because it is something new to me. e.g. I read in the BM forums that BM cameras and the P4K specifically, are prone to fugus eating the sensor(!) glass. Are those "missing" millimeters from the sensor responsible for that?

I seriously want an official statement address the sensor issue

A) why only BM uses those kind of m43 sensors? Are they cheaper maybe?

B) what is missing from the sensor stack?

C) how does it affect native m43 lenses?

2 of the productions companies I work mostly (the others shoot FS7mkII and one C200 cameras) use GH5, LS300 and Pocket4K cameras, and we already use some Metabones.

Now, I may order a personal P4K soon-ish (I have a project in September/October that I would like to strictly use my own equipment) and I want to do it right; also, when/if the GH6 is out next year, and if I want it, do I have to spend another 750-800€ for another adapter?

[Anaconda_]

Let the speculation begin:

[Cinegain]

BMPCC4K Summer Sale? €475,- again? ?

[Shell64]

If what you say is true than I have a black market a7siii with 8k 60p raw and 4K 60p 10 bit quad Bayer. I also have a canon eos r II with 12 bit 4K raw. Also the c200 is $1500 and magic lantern hacked the c100 to shoot 4K raw.

[leslie]

3 hours ago, Cinegain said:

BMPCC4K Summer Sale? €475,- again? ?

if its a mark two  p4k with a flippy screen and internal variable nd i'm going to scream ...

[majoraxis]

5 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Let the speculation begin:

I speculate:

1. New 4k Micro Cinema Camera based on the Fairchild MST4323. https://www.fairchildimaging.com/products/scmos-sensors/mst4323 with 4k @ 120 and 1080p @ 240, great low light and excellent dynamic range, dual micro XLR inputs with phantom power and SDI 1080p output via brake out cable shipping by the end of October, priced at $1295 with Resolve Studio.

2. BRAW codac update with improved my gradation and true 12 bit performance

3. Pocket 4k and USRA Mini Pro G2 offers Cinema DNG recording options for $99 license fee.

4. Resolve 16 is out of beta.

[MeanRevert]

The 4K Micro would have better specs and same pricing than the Pocket 4K?

[The ghost of squig]

Blackmagic has developed a blue sky rendering filter to Resolve the blue sky macroblocking issue.

[thebrothersthre3]

They aren't going to usurp the Pocket 4k. Anything they release will be something below it in specs and price(unlikely) or something better than it for a higher cost. 

[kye]

11 hours ago, drm said:

@Kisaha The difference in sensor stack size between the P4K and other M4/3 cameras should be most visible with native lenses at very wide apertures. I did some quick testing a few days back with my Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 lens.

It's probably worth mentioning that there are three magic ingredients here..  "wide aperture", "MFT", and "sharpness".  Our problem is that if we're testing the adapter for how sharp it is, then we're in trouble with most/all of the fast MFT lenses, because they are absolutely not sharp when wide open!

I have the 17.5mm f0.95 Voigtlander and the last two stops are quite soft, and compared to the difference that the adapter is likely to be making they are probably useless.

What we need is for someone to test it with a lens that actually is razor sharp when wide open, and for that I think we have to adapt something else.  Just look at the lens test that @BTM_Pix posted in the Lenses thread - how much sharper the master prime was than the Rokinon or Dog Schidt lenses when wide open, and then look at the size / cost comparison!

I'd be surprised if any of us with our mere mortal lens collections would be able to tell any difference at all.

[The ghost of squig]

Good to hear 4:3 anamorphic, 1.33x and 2x de-squeeze, and 2.39:1 modes coming in the 6.6 update in a month or two. Sux there isn't a 1.5x de-squeeze though.

[Turboguard]

Looked around the website and read specs, so if I’m correct, the weight and size/design between 4K and 6K units are the exact same? Can’t find any comparison options so am I correct to assume this?

[Kisaha]

15 minutes ago, Turboguard said:

Looked around the website and read specs, so if I’m correct, the weight and size/design between 4K and 6K units are the exact same? Can’t find any comparison options so am I correct to assume this?

I do not know for sure, but there are obvious differences around the much bigger EF mount.

At least one dimension is bigger (width), and I would guess the bigger sensor and larger body surface increases the weight too.

I am only guessing of course.

[nathlas]

39 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

I do not know for sure, but there are obvious differences around the much bigger EF mount.

At least one dimension is bigger (width), and I would guess the bigger sensor and larger body surface increases the weight too.

I am only guessing of course.

Tottaly right.

 

Increased width and weight are only physical differences.

[Kisaha]

3 minutes ago, nathlas said:

Tottaly right.

Increased width and weight are only physical differences.

As I already own the Ronin S, I am wondering if those differences can create any balancing issues.

[nathlas]

I have seen a naked RED epic balanced on a Ronin S. I believe you will be ok

[drm]

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

I do not know for sure, but there are obvious differences around the much bigger EF mount.

At least one dimension is bigger (width), and I would guess the bigger sensor and larger body surface increases the weight too.

I am only guessing of course.

It does seem a bit odd to me, but the Blackmagic site lists the dimensions for *both* cameras to be the exact same:

7" wide x 4" deep x 3.8" tall

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicpocketcinemacamera/techspecs/W-CIN-15

The weights are:

P6K: 1.98 lbs

P4K: 1.59 lbs

[Emanuel]

Bodies are almost identical as Andrew wrote or not 100% identical as I've inferred from there.

[Anaconda_]

It’s probably a stupid question, and I’m missing something, but what's the advantage of an in camera crop to s16 over using the whole sensor and cropping in post? 

Couldn't they just add s16 frame lines to help you get your shot and then you can adjust it later. That way it's the same advantage as shooting 6k for 4k delivery... right?

Or even better, allow the s16 frame to fill the camera monitor, but the actual file has the full 4k image, vignette and all.

[BTM_Pix]

If you are shooting with s16 lenses then it speeds the whole process to have the files as you will be using them and not having to do a crop on every take.

Reduced file size would offer lower compression rates on slower media or longer record times at same compression rate.

Its much easier to implement a crop for BM than changing things in the display as well to do scaling etc.

I haven't checked the details but does the crop offer higher frame rates too?