Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 6K

[odie]

2 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

It still seems like you haven't fully understood. The Netflix 4K requirement is for productions made by Netflix. I can use whatever I want and if it's good enough they will accept.

To this day almost half of all the movies at the Oscars etc are shot on film or HD. And they all go on Netflix.

Netflix even still pick up TV shows shot on s16.

This has been talked about to death on this forum in the past. So let's get back to the real subject.

+1

 

...and I hope they pick up my film which is being shot on a super 16 Arr sr 2

[Kisaha]

Reading a little bit more into the P4K vs the P6K dilemma, I tend to believe that the EF mount could be possible a disadvantage.

I would prefer

1) m43 mount with variable S35 sensor a la JVC LS300

2) EF-M mount! Yes, I am for real. I am asking for an XC type of camera with EF-M mount for years and years. Perfectly adapted to EF also (same electronics I believe).

I have a full set of FD lenses since my AE-1 days, does that mean that the EF mount is not a good option for me?

[maxmizer]

also for me, EF mount is not usable...?‍♂️

[nathlas]

 

[Skip77]

7 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

It still seems like you haven't fully understood. The Netflix 4K requirement is for productions made by Netflix. I can use whatever I want and if it's good enough they will accept.

To this day almost half of all the movies at the Oscars etc are shot on film or HD. And they all go on Netflix.

Netflix even still pick up TV shows shot on s16.

This has been talked about to death on this forum in the past. So let's get back to the real subject.

I said the EXACT same thing.  Please don't say what I said and say I didn't understand.  

I said Netflix ORIGINAL content that they produce is required to be 4K.  Maybe you don't understand.  Netflix hires you to produce a full season tv show. They will require you to film and deliver it in 4K.  End of story. 

And I'm not talking about content or tv shows already filmed that they option and buy.  

4 hours ago, odie said:

+1

 

...and I hope they pick up my film which is being shot on a super 16 Arr sr 2

They difference is you filmed it first and want Netflix to but it. So the demand to film and deliver in 4K doesn't apply. 

+2

12 hours ago, leslie said:

i'm going to play devils advocate momentarily, they may demand 4k but what do they deliver ? I live a long way from any broadband connection so my viewpoint is extremely biased, however you try pushing 4k down through the internet to everyone, that sucker is simply going to melt. i notice tv stations are falling over themselves to present us with hd content let alone 4k, where i am 38 channels of  576i compared to ( lets be optimistic and ) say 4 channels of hd  hmm thats like an excellent ratio dont you think ? 

Australia at least, is a long way behind the eight ball where hd and 4k are concerned. How other countries have it sorted i have no idea. It maybe true you can easily buy a 4k tv but getting or steaming content to play on that beastie is another issue all together i feel. Unless you live in a city 500 meters from a broadband hub, lucky you. What sort of data plan would you require for 4k or 6k anyway ? HD can chew through the gigabytes, 4k or 6k will be epic and next level, and require superconductors and still probably melt both polar icecaps, but they were melting already so its no big deal. 

There is 29,614 people on this forum, 6 billion on this planet and counting. Where video is concerned, i think that makes us a bunch of elitists. Notice i include myself in this description as well. If you can afford 4k, 6k, 8k cameras and everything that equipment entails i say awesome. If you can send receive or stream all that then your doubly awesome and must be living in utopia. Planetary wide, i'd say hd is probably a drop of water in the bucket. Personally i love my tech when i can afford it and playing with it. If you get paid to play with video and can claim it on your tax thats also awesome. But if i think on it really deeply then there is a bunch of people out there that would say my 4k pictures taste like shit and a can of baked beans would taste better and they would be right.

 

Ultra HD and 4K is already streaming on Netflix. 

I said over and over 4K demand from Netflix and other providers are for the future.  

 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

Good point, Jordan. Thank God Skip will inform us of this in his next post. 

And because you'll ride the fence until you get blisters I see.  You keep doing your life and I'll do mine. 

And next time don't add in comments that I never made. Got it.

[Skip77]

7 hours ago, JordanWright said:

I thought Netflix just go around to festivals buying a lot of the content regardless of what its shot with for there 'Netflix Original's'

That could be but why does it matter how they get content?  You already know what they prefer when they buy a original series to be shot and delivered.

13 hours ago, User said:

This is how one says very little about nothing. Congrats.

How you get that script in from of Netflix is different then Hollywood but what they look for hasn't changed.  Good story wins. 

48 minutes ago, nathlas said:

 

Great looking footage.

I like how some say "great wedding video for a fake wedding".  It's nice to wake up to nice negative / positive comments about the 6k camera.  That fence feels nice.

For the price this camera looks amazing.  I will get one.  The EF mount was great choice and go look at the P4K comment page / section and see how much effort they have to do to get the right adaptor with the right lens. That's insane. You get "better' with the 6k with no effort at all. 

[Kubrickian]

Does anyone know if it will work with EF-S lenses? 

[Anaconda_]

12 minutes ago, Kubrickian said:

Does anyone know if it will work with EF-S lenses? 

There's no reason it won't. EFs are made for APSC sensors, which this is. The only reason they don't work on speed boosters is because the glass in the booster stops the lens from clicking into onto the mount. On the P6k, there's no glass between the mount and the sensor, so nothing to get in the way.

[Jonesy Jones]

1 hour ago, nathlas said:

 

Even though the video looks gorgeous here, YouTube seems to add a “Suck” filter to everything uploaded. The Vimeo version, that I can only find on their site here, looks so much better. Almost 2 different videos.

[Anaconda_]

Interesting sensor comparison. The 6k is slightly smaller that s36, but the 4k is large (wider but shorter) than mft.

[Kisaha]

"The sensor is a 6K S35 23.10mm x 12.99 with 6144 x 3456 resolution. When shooting in 6K using the full size of the sensor the crop factor is 1.558x...

..now, as far as the sensor crop is concerned when shooting in various resolutions and frame rates, in 6K it is 1.558x, in 6K 2.4:1 it is 1.650x, in 5.7K it is 1.692x. The crop factor when shooting 2.8K and HD at 120fps in 3.388x."

From the Newsshooter article. Sorry if posted before.

As of the size "issue", I read that dimensions are the same, but I believe the P6K mount can be seen from the profile pictures and scetches that protrudes the hand grip (if I am using the right words).

[Patrick B.]

Anyone in B’more / DC area?  

[kye]

3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

in 6K it is 1.558x, in 6K 2.4:1 it is 1.650x

I know you were quoting numbers from elsewhere, but does this make sense to you?  I would have thought that 6K 16:9 and 6K 2.4:1 would be the same number of pixels across and therefore the same overall amount of zoom, which I thought crop factor was equivalent to.

Another question - do we talk about crop factor being less when an anamorphic lens is used?  In that sense, after the de-squeeze the sensor is effectively wider than it is physically, giving a crop factor of 0.75 or less!

[Kisaha]

3 hours ago, kye said:

I know you were quoting numbers from elsewhere, but does this make sense to you?  I would have thought that 6K 16:9 and 6K 2.4:1 would be the same number of pixels across and therefore the same overall amount of zoom, which I thought crop factor was equivalent to.

Another question - do we talk about crop factor being less when an anamorphic lens is used?  In that sense, after the de-squeeze the sensor is effectively wider than it is physically, giving a crop factor of 0.75 or less!

Have no clue, just copied the BM nunbers.

There are proper tables and all in this article.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2019/08/09/blackmagic-design-releases-pocket-cinema-camera-6k-with-ef-mount/#disqus_thread

All these crop factors do not make our life easy, for sure. Also no 4K in Braw, and the full sensor is only for 6K.

The P6K seems less and less appealing by the day..

[kye]

58 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Have no clue, just copied the BM nunbers.

There are proper tables and all in this article.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2019/08/09/blackmagic-design-releases-pocket-cinema-camera-6k-with-ef-mount/#disqus_thread

All these crop factors do not make our life easy, for sure. Also no 4K in Braw, and the full sensor is only for 6K.

The P6K seems less and less appealing by the day..

Yeah, that's why I tend to quote FF equivalents so that when someone says 28mm I know it's a standard wide and not a medium or super-wide.  

I'm guessing that with things missing like no 4K Braw it will be a bit patchy with the features it offers lining up with what some people want and not at all with others.  It's not tempting to me at all as what it offers and what I want don't really overlap that much.

[Jonesy Jones]

4 hours ago, kye said:

I know you were quoting numbers from elsewhere, but does this make sense to you?  I would have thought that 6K 16:9 and 6K 2.4:1 would be the same number of pixels across and therefore the same overall amount of zoom, which I thought crop factor was equivalent to.

Another question - do we talk about crop factor being less when an anamorphic lens is used?  In that sense, after the de-squeeze the sensor is effectively wider than it is physically, giving a crop factor of 0.75 or less!

When we talk crop factor, what we are all really wanting to know is FOV. What is X lens going to “see” on Y camera/sensor.

One complicator is that there is both a horizontal and vertical FOV. So in the case of the full 6K 16:9 vs the 6K 2.4:1, the horizontal fov remains the same but the vertical fov is less in 2.4:1.

The reason why the crop factor is considered smaller is because they use the diagonal measurement from corner to corner, which is slightly more in 16:9 than 2.4:1, even though the horizontal fov remains identical.

Now, anamorphic adds another complicator altogether. It stretches the horizontal fov but leaves the vertical the same. The math for this is relatively simple, but since I don’t do it all the time it melts my aging brain. 

Now again, the root of all this crop factor talk is, fov... what will this lens/camera combo deliver. The reason we use crop factor is because it is always good to have a standard, a canon if you will, to compare apples to apples. 

In our case we use FF 35mm as the standard, and derive a crop factor from there. Even though I’m all for this since I’ve been doing it for years, it is odd since the standard for cinematographers for decades was s35, not FF 35mm or vista vision or whatevs. But clearly we are moving in the direction of FF so I guess it worked out.

BOTTOMLINE

I would only pay attention to the horizontal fov numbers/crop since this is what everyone is intuitively looking at anyway. (And then just assume the vertical fov will be relative to the aspect ratio.)

Here’s the simple math for a few popular cams: (btw, the width of FF is 36mm)

P6K width is 23.10. So 36/23.1 = 1.558 (can we call it 1.56?)

P4K width is 18.96 so 36/18.96 = 1.89

URSA Mini Pro width is 25.34, so 36/25.34 = 1.42

Alexa Mini width is 23.8, so 36/23.8 = 1.51

XT3 - 23.5, 36/23.5 = 1.53

GH5 17.3, 36/17.3 = 2.08

 

For anamorphic I would first calculate the width based on the pixels. So P6K uses 3728 res for anamorphic. This is about 60.68% of the sensor so we’ll call it 14.02mm. Then you have to multiply by the anamorphic ratio you’re using - 2.0 or 1.3 for this cam. So 28.04 and 18.23 respectively. Therefore 

P6K anamorphic horizontal fov crop factors are

In 2.0, 36/28.04 = 1.28

In 1.3, 36/18.23 = 1.97

[Kisaha]

At 00:35 clearly shows that P6K is deeper because of the mount. Pretty obvious, but BM didn't clear things out completely at the beginning.

[A_Urquhart]

3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Have no clue, just copied the BM nunbers.

There are proper tables and all in this article.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2019/08/09/blackmagic-design-releases-pocket-cinema-camera-6k-with-ef-mount/#disqus_thread

All these crop factors do not make our life easy, for sure. Also no 4K in Braw, and the full sensor is only for 6K.

The P6K seems less and less appealing by the day..

Not only is there no 4K option in BRAW, but there is no 6K in ProRes. 

My clients prefer ProRes over BRAW. BRAW is in its early days still. I love BRAW for small personal projects but post houses don't really want it. So unless you are going to shoot 6K BRAW exlusively, you are paying double for a camera which is less flexible when it comes to lensing....?

 

BTW, Alexa Mini LF is 4k and has only just been released. 4K is going to be widely accepted for a long time yet.... 

Good on BMD for pushing the envelope but personally I think this sensor is kinda waisted in this body and with this mount.

[Jonesy Jones]

13 minutes ago, A_Urquhart said:

Good on BMD for pushing the envelope but personally I think this sensor is kinda waisted in this body and with this mount.

For your needs..... at this time.... maybe.

However for most it may be perfect.

6K braw is awesome for many, especially for those who shoot and edit their own projects.

For many others, delivering 4K prores is standard. The 6K prores files would be enormous. (Though you could in fact shoot 6K braw and convert to 6K prores if you really need 6K prores.)

However, for the few who would want 6K prores straight out of camera (though I can't imagine why) the good news is that BM initially did not offer 4.6K prores for the ursa mini. It was added later. They may in fact add 6K prores later for this camera too. But again, the 6K prores files are huge. I would say most post production folks would prefer the 4K prores anywho. braw, or other compressed raw files or codecs, are the way to go for these larger resolutions.

For comparison, Q5 braw in 6K averages at about 95 MB/s. Prores HQ in 4K is 118 MB/s. 

[hijodeibn]

21 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

There's no reason it won't. EFs are made for APSC sensors, which this is. The only reason they don't work on speed boosters is because the glass in the booster stops the lens from clicking into onto the mount. On the P6k, there's no glass between the mount and the sensor, so nothing to get in the way.

I am not fan of BM cameras, but this new P6K with EF mount looks unbelievable attractive.....I can see myself getting one of this next year.