First ProRes files from the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera released

[tpr]

My suggestion is to get your hands on both cameras in a risk-free manner and A/B compare them to the best of your ability. Many retailers have 14-day or longer return policies if you can put the sum on your credit card.

 

This is pretty unethical. If you return goods that you've tested, retailers can no longer sell them as new. Because of the lost profits that entails, retailers bump up their prices to compensate. And the more people do it, the worse it gets.

 

If you want to test a camera before you buy it, the ethical way is to rent it or to play around with an in-store demo model.

[peederj]

This is pretty unethical. If you return goods that you've tested, retailers can no longer sell them as new. Because of the lost profits that entails, retailers bump up their prices to compensate. And the more people do it, the worse it gets.

 

If you want to test a camera before you buy it, the ethical way is to rent it or to play around with an in-store demo model.

 

Most retailers who have the return policies want you to try the products risk-free. Jeff Bezos for instance is maniacal about getting people to try stuff from Amazon guilt-free because it's one advantage of brick-and-mortar stores he can't otherwise match. All of my dealers feel the same way. Some of my boutique dealers don't even ask me for a credit card at this point, they just let me go home with the merch, knowing it will come back in saleable shape.

 

If the dealers don't want to do that they can have a restocking fee or no return policy. Most such dealerships are now dead or dying at least in the USA.

 

What's unethical and bad for business is getting a customer stuck with something they are unhappy with. Businesses need customers far more than customers need businesses...and the money is always more valuable than the products sold at retail prices. The customer should make the best decisions they can and avail themselves of every facility offered to them by the dealers in good faith.

 

I did not recommend replacing a rental service with a return policy for a paid shoot. That is a bit unethical. I recommended getting the products in your hands risk-free and cost-free for an appraisal. I do that with all my purchases and trust me my dealers wouldn't have it any other way.

[tpr]

Most retailers who have the return policies want you to try the products risk-free. 

 

My point isn't about harm done to businesses. They have risk-free return policies (even in regions where they're not legally mandated) because they're attractive to customers. In the end, they profit by having them. But testing gear still has a cost, and if you don't pay it in the form of a rental, it gets offset onto everyone else by way of increased prices.

[Axel]

I'm still trying to decide between a GH3 or a BMPCC.  How would the GH3's dynamic range do in the same situation against the BMPCC?  Would I get a lot more blown out highlights, white skies, black shadows?  Or would I get just about the same results?  I would love to just point this camera in any direction without thinking of harsh lighting or shadows in respect to the sun because unfortunately I won't be directing the shots and the camera will be in the hands of someone who probably has never heard terms like "dynamic range".  As long as she can hold the camera steady, I'm hoping to salvage footage (when needed) that would otherwise be unusable.

 

What everybody does by grading the BMPCC footage for vimeo/youtube is reducing any 10-bit-DR to that of the 8-bit world most of us live in. Video is believing one's eyes, but it's hard to decide, whether the DR (visible then in highlights not blown out, 8-bit-monitors begin to show shadow details only way over 16 anyway) or the impression of better resolution wins. I postpone any judgment for myself before there are more reports from othesr. Until then, I believe my experience with the camera I own and know to be more important.

[JohnBarlow]

Yes please. E-sata and a SSD mag in a battery grip. I mean, this isn't hard or expensive stuff we're talking about here. Just a direct tap on the sensor's raw data in the memory already in the camera, out via a $5 chipset.

 Of course there is another side to the coin...

 

Canon could put a better card  controller into say the EOS-M2 giving 100MB/s, imagine RAW on that with the 3x crop mode (hello 16mm!)

 

Alternatively, BM could fix their FW to give crops for 16mm and 8mm cine lenses, instead of having us running around wondering and trying to figure out what lens works and so on.

[cantsin]

Alternatively, BM could fix their FW to give crops for 16mm and 8mm cine lenses, instead of having us running around wondering and trying to figure out what lens works and so on.

 

Why should they do it on a 1080p raw camera? People can crop in post themselves.

[JohnBarlow]

I mean record the 8mm and 16mm formats at 1080p via firmware crop

[cantsin]

I mean record the 8mm and 16mm formats at 1080p via firmware crop

 

This is not possible on the Blackmagic Pocket camera because its sensor has a native resolution 1080p. You can't crop from it without going below 1080p. (This is different from Canon  cameras.)

 

Besides, the point of a raw camera is that it makes firmware irrelevant for the recorded signal.

[peederj]

 Of course there is another side to the coin...

 

Canon could put a better card  controller into say the EOS-M2 giving 100MB/s, imagine RAW on that with the 3x crop mode (hello 16mm!)

 

Alternatively, BM could fix their FW to give crops for 16mm and 8mm cine lenses, instead of having us running around wondering and trying to figure out what lens works and so on.

 

I heard there are going to be more Super 16 and even Super 8 sensors coming out soon. This completely confounds me. When I shot and cut Super 8 as a kid it was because film was expensive enough as it was and it was simply ridiculous to spend more until you were really making movies. Nowadays everything is so cheap you can get a full frame 135 camera with essentially infinite film for less. Why would anyone want those dinky old lenses unless they were the most painful form of retro-hipster trying to gain cred by borrowing someone else's decade rather than contributing to their own?

 

Sensors should get bigger and we should celebrate them being bigger. Using a native res crop mode has awful false color artifacts and moire, not things you would find on 16mm film. The kit lenses on the Canon Rebels are better than anything we had for Super 8 and a lot of what's still around for Super 16. If the antiques are affordable it's because most people are smart. If you want to live in the past go all the way for heaven's sake and shoot and cut real film. Anything else is just hokey and hackneyed predictable instagram filters on your so-called "art."

[HurtinMinorKey]

Sensors should get bigger and we should celebrate them being bigger. Using a native res crop mode has awful false color artifacts and moire, not things you would find on 16mm film. The kit lenses on the Canon Rebels are better than anything we had for Super 8 and a lot of what's still around for Super 16. If the antiques are affordable it's because most people are smart. If you want to live in the past go all the way for heaven's sake and shoot and cut real film. Anything else is just hokey and hackneyed predictable instagram filters on your so-called "art."

 

OMG, i agree with peedrj for once. Somebody slap me. Sensors should be getting bigger, but with a couple of caveats.

 

Bigger sensors mean bigger glass, which is significantly more expensive. But we are pretty much already at the point where true cine glass (35mm) costs more than the camera bodies anyway. And with biggerglass that also means a bigger camera system. But i am surprised that no one has jumped the gun and gone for a 70mm market (aka going to 5 blades). That would be much more compelling (to me) than the RED Dragon specs.

 

There is some relatively affordable 16mm cine glass out there. So super-16 makes some sense to me. 8mm seems sort of silly unless i was going for a particular look.

[JohnBarlow]

This is not possible on the Blackmagic Pocket camera because its sensor has a native resolution 1080p. You can't crop from it without going below 1080p. (This is different from Canon  cameras.)

 

Besides, the point of a raw camera is that it makes firmware irrelevant for the recorded signal.

So that favours the possible EOS-M2, all bets are off for BMPCC as far as standard 16mm and 8mm lenses.

 

As it stands EOS-M with ML in crop mode records h264 for 16mm lenses and 720pRAW for 8mm lenses with the help of some pink dot removal from the raw files

[JohnBarlow]

I see an emotional response....

 

 

Consider facts for indoor normalish lighting

8mm sensor @F2 ISO 400

 

FF sensor @F2 ISO 400 has to go to F8 ISO 6400 or more to match Deep Focus of 8mm sensor

 

I guess you never wanted to shoot deep in low light?

 

 

I heard there are going to be more Super 16 and even Super 8 sensors coming out soon. This completely confounds me. When I shot and cut Super 8 as a kid it was because film was expensive enough as it was and it was simply ridiculous to spend more until you were really making movies. Nowadays everything is so cheap you can get a full frame 135 camera with essentially infinite film for less. Why would anyone want those dinky old lenses unless they were the most painful form of retro-hipster trying to gain cred by borrowing someone else's decade rather than contributing to their own?

 

Sensors should get bigger and we should celebrate them being bigger. Using a native res crop mode has awful false color artifacts and moire, not things you would find on 16mm film. The kit lenses on the Canon Rebels are better than anything we had for Super 8 and a lot of what's still around for Super 16. If the antiques are affordable it's because most people are smart. If you want to live in the past go all the way for heaven's sake and shoot and cut real film. Anything else is just hokey and hackneyed predictable instagram filters on your so-called "art."

[Bruno]

Sensors should get bigger and we should celebrate them being bigger.

I think we have plenty of out of focus short films already, shot on 5D full frame cameras.
IMO APS-C/Super 35 is the sweet spot, east to get shallow DOF shots and easy to keep things in focus.
Even though full frame cameras can be used with amazing results, most people abuse them, and it gets quite hard to shoot wide open with a full frame camera.

16mm sized sensor is great for documentary or one man shoots, as it's much easier to keep things in focus, and yet it can also look cinematic.
It's definitely a useful format that should be supported by modern cameras.
There's also loads of high quality 16mm glass available, calling it a hipster trend is shortsighted to say the least. :)

[peederj]

I see an emotional response....

 

Consider facts for indoor normalish lighting

8mm sensor @F2 ISO 400

 

FF sensor @F2 ISO 400 has to go to F8 ISO 6400 or more to match Deep Focus of 8mm sensor

 

I guess you never wanted to shoot deep in low light?

 

The performance of the 8mm sensor is likely to be equal if not worse at 400 than the 135 sensor of the same generation at 6400. You have in those larger photosites a lot more light harvesting ability and a lot more photons to count per site for a given shutter release, and you can also downsample them to increase DR and suppress bayer moire.

 

Super 35 is a fair compromise and I mostly shoot on it but I will happily mix in my 5D3 when I want that look. Medium format which there are murmurs Canon is entering (purchasing Phase One?) would be even nicer to have around. 8mm sensors? I use the GoPro Hero3 Black and it's fine in daylight for its purpose. But generally deep shots are also wide ones (think establishing/landscapes etc.) and so it's not too hard to go hyperfocal with them at reasonable apertures. Yes there is Citizen Kane as an example of the value of INT depth, but for that situation I have lots of KW of lighting as did Mr. Welles.

 

There are 100 Million EF mount lenses covering the Super 35 sensor size and a good number of them also do FF 135. Not terribly expensive. The "Cine" lenses are really only better for situations where you have a 1st AC pulling focus...if you are pulling your own focus just grab the lens or use one of those cheap rubber follow focus gear straps. Declicked iris again is a non-win to me other than on real cine lenses where you have a very long throw to the iris dial.

[JohnBarlow]

I think you speak about the bottomless-pocket camera.

 

Sometimes the budget is not there and is not yours to dictate or massage.

In today's world you have to work to a price and sometimes every shot is costed.

[peederj]

The Rebel is a super 35-like sensor size and doesn't require bottomless pockets. It doesn't have more moire than most of these cheap cameras being discussed. The lower end Nikons (7100/5200) are even better and they are also super 35mm. 

 

Face it, it's hipsterism, a cheesy anachrony that drives the interest in smaller sensor video. For people whose only story is irony and reference to something their parents thought was cool at that age. Not poverty. Poverty doesn't make movies.

[JohnBarlow]

Show me the 5x F1.8 zoom that fits on the Rebel and then tell me how much it weighs and how much per day to rent.

 

These can be picked up and owned for 8mm and  16mm for less than one days rent of such a thing above.

[peederj]

An equivalent would be the 24-105/4 L. Note you need to scale aperture with sensor size for apples-to-apples.

 

Where is the Sigma 18-35/1.8 equivalent for 16mm under $800? Because it's shipping now for S35.

[Bruno]

Not really, in termos of light coming in a 1.8 is a 1.8, you only "convert" the aperture when translating depth of field distances, not when measuring light.
A 16mm 1.2 zoom lens is a 1.2 zoom lens, regardless of sensor size.

[Nikkor]

Show me the 5x F1.8 zoom that fits on the Rebel and then tell me how much it weighs and how much per day to rent.

 

These can be picked up and owned for 8mm and  16mm for less than one days rent of such a thing above.

On the 600D you just zoom in on a 50 1.8 and you will have a 240mm 1.8, with ML raw hack you can do that on every camera. On a 5D mkiii you would have a 150mm 1.8

You can buy the 600d for 300$ used and the lens is 80$ used, less? I guess you can "rent" it from a friend for free...