need advice!!! upgrade my cinematography tools...

[Arheo]

I am photographer for a almost 15 years...using canon mainly. Last few year work with canon 5DIV and few L lenses (35L, 85L, 200L, 24-70IS).

For a last 4-5 year I start to interest in videography...learn a lot...working mainly with panasonic gh5. Last summer I sold panasonic and continue to sporadicly work video with canon 5dIV.

I want to go step further in my cinematography production and thinking about upgrading equipment.

I have two option: 1) to buy Blackmagic pocket 6K and keep 5dIV  OR 2) to sell 5dIV and buy R5. (if i calculate correct i will spend same amount of money in both way).

I like color and look that produce Bmpcc 6k...but if pick it, i will have two camera to take with me. With Canon r5 whole set up will be lighter plus i will have ibis.

I need advice for experienced cinematographers.

 

Plan is to continue to work stock video and to realise some of my idea and make few movies (mainly documentary).

 

 

 

 

[zerocool22]

If your workflow is not limited with the R5's limitations, go with the R5. I hate dragging 2 camera's along.
Otherwise the pocket 6K has some major advantages over the R5 (codec, cfast, unlimited recording, no overheating...)

[fuzzynormal]

I shoot docs, mostly.

To me good cinematography is capturing great light in a great frame that helps tell your story. Whatever tool allows you to do that is appropriate...which these days is just about any camera.

I think the tech nuances of any recent (and even older) cameras are, more or less, similar to choosing a film stock —and that comes down to your personal aesthetic preferences.

For doc shooting I simply go with small equipment to stay flexible on site, not be a burden to my hosts, and be as unobtrusive as possible. As such, I gravitate to M43 cams, but being “small” on location is more of an attitude and a plan to keep things modest... rather than the size of an individual camera. 

[Andrew Reid]

R5 is gimped and won't get through a shoot, and the Pocket 6K is overrated - sure the image is quite nice - erm that's about it. It's a dog to use unless you intend to rig it up and then you will have to think about weight, accessories, reliability, lack of IBIS, lack of EVF, etc.

I would consider putting your Canon lenses on something else. How about Sony A7S III with Sigma MC-11 adapter?

[TomTheDP]

Rent an R5 if you can and test it out to see if it'll work for you. 

The Panasonic S1 or S5 might be a good option. Great video and stills. 

The Pocket 6k takes beautiful images. You can mount a little NPF battery sled on top of it and get pretty good battery life. You can do it without the cage as well for an even lighter setup. Pretty janky looking though.... 

[Arheo]

thanks all!!!

my choice on bmpcc 6k (and keeping canon 5dIV) or canon r5 (and selling 5dIV) are conditioned by budget and to have good photographic tool. My budget, what i plan to invest in equipment is about 2000eur. sony 7sIII is out of my budget if keep canon 5dIV.

I know that it isnt enough to buy only body of Bmpcc 6k, but battery, rig.... and another problem with bmpcc is gimbal, if i am understood corrrect, it is not easy to balance on gimbal!? 

Canon r5 can easy put on gimbal,have ibis and 4k 120fps are great. But i really hate big video files of canon.

On some way i more like colors and contrast of blackmagic cameras. I am not sure how to explain but after watch videos of both i think that canon are more contrasty and blackmagic more soft... 

 

[SteveV4D]

I prefer the Blackmagic image to Canon, but you do have to work more for it.  I don't mind most of the time.  No pain, no gain.  I find the Pockets make me consider my shot more , by virtual that its not so easy.  I never thought I'd miss IBIS after the GH5, but my shots without it after much better.  IBIS made me lazy, and lazy never worked for me.  If you're looking for a cinema image and don't mind working for it, the Pocket 6K delivers.

[TomTheDP]

18 minutes ago, Arheo said:

thanks all!!!

my choice on bmpcc 6k (and keeping canon 5dIV) or canon r5 (and selling 5dIV) are conditioned by budget and to have good photographic tool. My budget, what i plan to invest in equipment is about 2000eur. sony 7sIII is out of my budget if keep canon 5dIV.

I know that it isnt enough to buy only body of Bmpcc 6k, but battery, rig.... and another problem with bmpcc is gimbal, if i am understood corrrect, it is not easy to balance on gimbal!? 

Canon r5 can easy put on gimbal,have ibis and 4k 120fps are great. But i really hate big video files of canon.

On some way i more like colors and contrast of blackmagic cameras. I am not sure how to explain but after watch videos of both i think that canon are more contrasty and blackmagic more soft... 

 

Blackmagic's luts are less contrasty. An issue with the R5 currently is if you are shooting 10bit H265 you are limited to CLOG, which is a less flat rendition of LOG. It will look more contrasty as it doesn't hold shadows or highlights that well. Of course you can negate that by shooting in RAW. Though RAW on the R5 is limited to 8k and the files are huge. If you are ok with 10 bit H265 the files are going to be smaller than Blackmagic RAW or Prores. H265 is going to kill most editing systems, which means you'll have to convert the files to prores for editing. BRAW 6K isn't super easy on an editing system either. 

 

[Arheo]

and what about canon L lenses...how much its impact on contrasty look?

I see really nice cinematic footage made with bmpcc 6k and quality vintage lenses, like Leica or Contax zeiss.

[pixelpreaching]

I would 100% get the BMPCC6K, especially if you can keep your 5D. I'd take the BMPCC over the Canon R5 for anything (except photography, of course). One is a proper cinema camera with the haptics and UI that a cinema camera needs, plus phenomenal IQ and the amazing BRAW which makes 6K raw files a breeze to edit even on a several year old laptop. The R5 might have 8K, but you'll probably spend more on storage for it to make you really regret buying it over the Pocket and losing your 5D.

Like, look, hybrid cameras have their place. I use them all the time. There are some great ones - the best are the Panasonics (the S1H is the first camera I thought really truly captured what a true hybrid should be - the a7SIII is pretty good, but lacks a lot of features that it really should have). Most others feel like stills cameras with video as an afterthought/marketing tool - R5 included. And hey, I've shot tons of video work (narrative, commercial, etc.) on cameras like the Fuji X-T3, Panny G9, etc, but when it comes to having the goal of making a movie, most of the time none of these are substitutions for a proper cinema camera.

Some people on here (not naming names) complain about things like the BMPCC6K not having usable autofocus or not having IBIS and on and on - wanting that stuff is kind of divorced from the reality of what cinema cameras are. IBIS is not good for a cinema camera; no production uses autofocus. Sure, you may be a one man band and need great AF tracking, which is why cameras like the Canon C300 are very popular (and the 5D line). That's totally valid.

At any rate, it sounds like - for stock and documentary - the BMPCC6K is exactly the ticket for you. UNLESS you need good AF tracking for the documentary work - but even then, I wouldn't get the R5 because frankly it's terrible for video. I'd invest in a nice gimbal that allows you to pull focus while operating or get a different Canon or one of the Panasonics (S1 and S5 are fantastic for the price; AF tracking not nearly as cinematic as Canon's though).

But nothing else in this price range will offer raw 6K video that can be edited without phasing an average desktop computer. Nothing else will compete on ergonomics and UI - one of the most irritating things about using hybrids for shooting video work is all the unnecessary crap (buttons, dials, 90% of the menu options, etc). The Blackmagic has the best UI I've ever used on any video camera - and the buttons and dials are exactly what you need and where you need them. And the screen is better than anything else out there - full 5" 1080 touchscreen. Records to SD, CFast, and cheap external SSD via USB-C - none of the hybrids can do that.

The BMPCC6K also has the dual native ISO sensor, which is tuned specifically for video - ISO and dynamic range work very differently on a cinema camera vs. a stills camera and if you know the best settings to allocate the DR where you need it, it makes a world of difference. I think only the S1H operates like this as far as hybrids go.

Anyway, pretty obvious how I feel. But if I were in your shoes - and I've done a lot of the same kind of work as you - no question what I'd get. It would be a different story if you couldn't keep your 5D, because then you'd have no photography camera. But since you can... I would never in a million years trade a 5D4 and BMPCC6K for one Canon R5.

Also, if this matters to you because for some reason it does to many people - if you really need that "full frame" field of view instead of Super 35 which is full frame in cinema anyway - you can get a LucAdapters MagicBooster, which goes inside the the mount over the sensor. It also contains an UVIR filter, which is fantastic because the Pockets do have weak IR cut filters which gives the footage a slight magenta tint (and worse when using ND filters). You can also buy (for a lot less money) just a UVIR filter (there's two options, a standard and a 100%) to put in it. That's what I did - I have no care in the world for the magicbooster but the UVIR filter internally is a godsend for me (I might be making the issue seem worse than it is - it's not that big of a deal, but I'm very much a perfectionist where I can be).

https://www.lucadapterstore.com/shop

Whatever you end up getting, I hope you love it and I hope it serves you very well! Update us with what you get and again after you've used it.

Edit: also - you mentioned the IBIS of the R5, so like I mentioned, if you can invest in one of the Zhiyuni Cranes or DJI Ronins, that's far better than IBIS anyway. And most of them have controls specifically for the BMPCC6K (trigger recording, change settings, etc.) and if you get one with a follow focus you can pull focus while operating using controls on the gimbal. (if you use a non-cinema autofocus lens, you sometimes don't even need the follow focus - the gimbal can control the focus pull via its connection to the camera). Well worth the money, imo.

[pixelpreaching]

On 2/6/2021 at 3:07 PM, TomTheDP said:

H265 is going to kill most editing systems, which means you'll have to convert the files to prores for editing. BRAW 6K isn't super easy on an editing system either. 

 

I could not disagree more. And most people would too. BRAW is the easiest to edit of anything I've ever used. Whether it's BRAW 4K, 6K, or even the new 12K. My 2017 MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM can handle it just fine. My desktop doesn't even notice.

Not to mention that BRAW is, you know, RAW. There's no RAW format easier to edit that I've used to date.

[pixelpreaching]

4 hours ago, Arheo said:

and what about canon L lenses...how much its impact on contrasty look?

I see really nice cinematic footage made with bmpcc 6k and quality vintage lenses, like Leica or Contax zeiss.

Any modern, high-quality stills lenses will be very clinical, sharp, and often contrasty (particularly compared to vintage lenses).

I can attest to Leica R and Contax Zeiss lenses. I have a 6 lens set of cine-modded Contax Zeiss lenses. They're phenomenal. I have a couple Leica R's as well. I prefer the Contax Zeiss's, but that's one of those things where opinions are split pretty evenly. Both will serve you very well.

If you want newer proper cinema lenses with a more vintage look, the SLR Magic APO Microprimes are my favorite (they cover full frame). Meike makes a very nice 35 T2.1 EF mount cinema lens that covers Super 35 for $540.

There's also the option of using a Tiffen Promist filter or Schneider Hollywood Black Magic filter on a modern lens - these are often used to lower contrast, smooth out the ultra sharpness a bit, and give some nice blooming to the highlights. I use them frequently. Tiffen Glimmerglass is cool too.

 

Alternatively, on a budget, you can't beat Nikkor AI or AIS lenses. They'll easily adapt to Canon EF with a $30 adapter (very thin adapter). Since they're vintage lenses, they have a similar drawing style to the Leica and Contax lenses, though all three have their differences of course. Only issue with the NIkkors is that the focus ring rotates the opposite direction of all the other lenses, so that can confuse some people. Bonus: they're dirt cheap.

[IronFilm]

On 2/7/2021 at 8:42 AM, Arheo said:

my choice on bmpcc 6k (and keeping canon 5dIV) or canon r5 (and selling 5dIV) are conditioned by budget and to have good photographic tool. My budget, what i plan to invest in equipment is about 2000eur. sony 7sIII is out of my budget if keep canon 5dIV.

If you've got a tight budget then just pick up a BMD P4K instead! (or Z Cam E2-M4)

Do you NEED 6K??? No you don't, and the P4K is otherwise almost identical to the 6K. (except on some minor points, such as a mildly smaller sensor size, but if that is a big problem just get yourself an extra UWA lens, such as  Tokina 11-20 f2.8, or any of the many options from SLR Magic / Laowa / etc)
 

[pixelpreaching]

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

If you've got a tight budget then just pick up a BMD P4K instead! (or Z Cam E2-M4)

Do you NEED 6K??? No you don't, and the P4K is otherwise almost identical to the 6K. (except on some minor points, such as a mildly smaller sensor size, but if that is a big problem just get yourself an extra UWA lens, such as  Tokina 11-20 f2.8, or any of the many options from SLR Magic / Laowa / etc)
 

Personally if I had the $$ in his position, I'd get the 6K - it would be different if it was still at its original price of $2500. But the 4K is still $1300, so it's a $700 difference. And the 6K is more future proof, better for cropping/reframing, and has a bit more dynamic range on either end. A bit.

But, advantage to the 4K, which may be useful for him is the availability of super cheap (and optically excellent) M4/3 lenses. And the cheaper M4/3 cine lenses (like the SLR Magic Microprimes that are ~$500-600. The Super 35/FF Microprimes are $1200.

But, he may be planning to just use his Canon lenses. But then crop factor may be an issue and once you add a speedbooster, you might as well get the 6K.

Anyway, it's a good suggestion depending on his budget and needs.

[Arheo]

Yea like pixelpreaching notice, i plan to use my L lenses. if i buy 4k or have to buy metabones or new lenses. Eaven if left aside money for new lenses, dragging two complets od lenses 🙄 .

 I have some nice canon lenses like 35/1.4L mkI, 85/1.2L II, 200/2.8 L and one zoom 24-70/4 L with really good stabilisation. Also i have Leica summicron 50/2 with ef adapter ,  I sold my old 17-40L recently, and if take bmpcc 6k, i will only need one wide angle lens, and i am complet 😄

and offcourse, I really want to thanks all you people for helping me with advice... specialy @pixelpreaching for spending his time to write well elaborated post. 

For now i am closer to option buying Blackmagic 6k and keeping 5DIV. but still in big dilemma... (my head will explode... 🤯 )

[Mark Romero 2]

2 hours ago, Arheo said:

Yea like pixelpreaching notice, i plan to use my L lenses. if i buy 4k or have to buy metabones or new lenses. Eaven if left aside money for new lenses, dragging two complets od lenses 🙄 .

 I have some nice canon lenses like 35/1.4L mkI, 85/1.2L II, 200/2.8 L and one zoom 24-70/4 L with really good stabilisation. Also i have Leica summicron 50/2 with ef adapter ,  I sold my old 17-40L recently, and if take bmpcc 6k, i will only need one wide angle lens, and i am complet 😄

and offcourse, I really want to thanks all you people for helping me with advice... specialy @pixelpreaching for spending his time to write well elaborated post. 

For now i am closer to option buying Blackmagic 6k and keeping 5DIV. but still in big dilemma... (my head will explode... 🤯 )

 

Captain Buzzkill here, reporting for duty...

As a public service announcement, I guess I should mention that a good stills lens doesn't ALWAYS mean it will be a good video lens... and vice versa.

On the aps-c size sensor of the BMPCC 6K, you would multiply the focal length by 1.6 to get the equivalent at 35mm.

Also, for movie making, there is such a thing as a lens being "too sharp," a concept that is hard for us people who started out in photography to understand. Fortunately there are filters to help take care of that.

With zoom lenses, you are going to want something that is parfocal (or close to parfocal) if you plan on zooming. Likewise, you would want a lens that has minimal focus breathing if you plan on pulling focus (or just using AF).

And there will be times when you might want to pull focus manually, at which point you would probably appreciate a lens with a nice dampened focus ring.

By all means, I agree that using your Canon lenses on a BMPCC6K would give you a very good head start, but you might find at some point that you end up wanting something a little more dedicated toward shooting video.

[Arheo]

3 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

As a public service announcement, I guess I should mention that a good stills lens doesn't ALWAYS mean it will be a good video lens... and vice versa.

Also, for movie making, there is such a thing as a lens being "too sharp,"

 

that is exactly why i dont like footage made with canon r5 and like one made with Bmpcc. Later have much more charm...

 

[pixelpreaching]

8 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Captain Buzzkill here, reporting for duty...

As a public service announcement, I guess I should mention that a good stills lens doesn't ALWAYS mean it will be a good video lens... and vice versa.

On the aps-c size sensor of the BMPCC 6K, you would multiply the focal length by 1.6 to get the equivalent at 35mm.

Also, for movie making, there is such a thing as a lens being "too sharp," a concept that is hard for us people who started out in photography to understand. Fortunately there are filters to help take care of that.

With zoom lenses, you are going to want something that is parfocal (or close to parfocal) if you plan on zooming. Likewise, you would want a lens that has minimal focus breathing if you plan on pulling focus (or just using AF).

And there will be times when you might want to pull focus manually, at which point you would probably appreciate a lens with a nice dampened focus ring.

By all means, I agree that using your Canon lenses on a BMPCC6K would give you a very good head start, but you might find at some point that you end up wanting something a little more dedicated toward shooting video.

A lens can't be "too sharp" for video - Zeiss Supreme Primes and Master Primes are incredibly sharp from wide-open. The Leica Summicron-C's are also very very sharp. But they are made to have a bit gentler falloff and different coatings for flaring, among many other things. But they're still very sharp - compared to say, a Cooke lens. Not to mention, it's entirely in the eye of the beholder. The same lens on a BMPCC or Arri will look very different than on an R5 - the lack of an OLPF on the R5 would arguably be even more detrimental to the video in this regard.

Parfocal zooms are great. Lenses without focus breathing are great (many of the higher quality RF, Z, and Panasonic L lenses have no focus breathing or very very little - some of the zooms are even parfocal).

BUT, it ain't cheap to buy a parfocal zoom lens. Cheapest would be a DZOFilm Linglung (for the Pocket 6K) - that's $1600.

And even many cinema lenses aren't completely lacking focus breathing - the Rokinons have a pretty noticeable amount, and the Sigma 18-35 and 50-100 Cine lenses are not parfocal AND have noticeable focus breathing - for over $3000 each.

Arheo is clearly working on a limited budget.

IMO, he's best off using the lenses he has and adding a wide like he said, and maybe picking up some vintage primes (Nikkor AIS, Minolta Rokkor, Canon FD, Olympus OM, Pentax K, Contax Zeiss, Pentax Takumars - all great options for dirt cheap).

I shot an entire show using stills lenses for probably 80% of it. Know the limitations and what to avoid and you're fine.

As for sharpness... IF you find that it's an issue - which it's less likely to be on the BMPCC than on a camera like the R5 - there are effects in post that work well, or (my preference) you can get some filters - Tiffen (Warm/Black/Bronze/Regular) Pro Mists, Tiffen (Black/Regular) Glimmerglass, or Tiffen (Blac/Regulark) Pearlescent, Tiffen (Black/Regular) Satin, Tiffen Digital Diffusion/FX, or Tiffen (Black/Warm/Regular) Soft FX. I use the Warm, Black, and Regular Pro Mists, and regular Glimmerglass. Tons of different strengths from very weak effect to very strong. And they all have other effects/advantages aside from a bit of softening. The Glimmerglass gives a nice soft halation around point sources and mutes bold colors slightly - compare that to the Satin filters which softly reduce sharpness and contrast, but don't cause blooming or an increase in halation.

Shane Carruth shot UPSTREAM COLOR with some old non-cine Rokinons and some Olympus and Panasonic zoom lenses. Looks great to me no one's ever mentioned that there's focus breathing in a shot.

[IronFilm]

5 hours ago, pixelpreaching said:

Shane Carruth shot UPSTREAM COLOR with some old non-cine Rokinons and some Olympus and Panasonic zoom lenses. Looks great to me no one's ever mentioned that there's focus breathing in a shot.

Thought he used Nokton native MFT Mount lenses?

[pixelpreaching]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Thought he used Nokton native MFT Mount lenses?

yes he used the M4/3 Noktons for a lot, but I know he used the old Rokinon 85 at least for some and I read somewhere he used at least one Olympus or Panasonic zoom for a few shots.

Here you can see the Rokinon (if you zoom)

(and point was that plenty of major films have used non-cinema primes and zooms.... probably a lot more than Carruth did on this one TBH. Like TINY FURNITURE and LIKE CRAZY were shot on a Canon 7D for example - no idea what lenses they used, but you get the point that if someone is used a GH2 or 7D they probably aren't using parfocal zooms or cinema primes.