Blackmagic Camera Update Feb 17

[andrgl]

@TomTheDP Yes. I remember the OG Fairchild sensor being fairly bad. I believe I shot RAW at all times with my ISO set to 200.

800 or 1600? Fugget About It!! Unless you shot to ProRes, you'd get FPN in a black t-shirt, even with middle gray @ 40 IRE or whatever the fuck it was.

I can personally attest to the following Blackmagic cameras having FPN, amongst a range of other issues:

• Cinema Camera
• Production Camera 4K (oh my god, what a steaming pile of ****)
• Pocket Cinema Camera
• Pocket Cinema 4K
• Micro Cinema Camera
• URSA Mini 4.6K
• URSA Mini Pro 4.6K

But then so does the Canon C200, Sony FS700, FS5 and FS7, when shooting RAW.

The closer your get to the sensor, the uglier it gets.

Not a big deal usually, just need to test the fuck out of your camera before shooting anything serious. Find out the sensor flaws, find a work around or just avoid that scenario.

[tupp]

10 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Aperture is controlled manually.  You can lose the aperture control in some cases and not get a readout of the aperture on the camera screen.

The most important thing is that one can control the aperture (and view a scope).  The aperture readout is not crucial.

 

 

10 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Why not use IS on the Cinema cameras?  Is it a rule?   Did I miss the no IS on Cinema cameras instruction in the manual.

Most cinema lenses are completely manual for good reasons.  There is too much riding on the line in larger budget projects to rely on decisions made by the camera or lens.  Furthermore, any IS glitch could bust a take and/or force a cut in post, which could prove to be expensive and detrimental to the piece's impact.

 

Additionally, it is likely that most cinematographers want lens manufacturers put their efforts into optical performance rather than into automatic electronic features.  Nobody buys a Master Prime to shoot handheld at Bar Mitzvahs.

 

 

11 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Shooting 105mm on non IS lens isn't advised.

It's not easy to handhold a narrow non-IS lens, but it can be done with success.  Back in the film days, there were no IS lenses, so one had to learn how to be smooth when handheld.  The non-IS results generally do not posses the same look/feel as handheld with a modern IS camera/lens, but I wouldn't say that handheld without IS is generally worse the with IS.

 

Of course, a tripod eliminates a lot of stability problems, and one really should disable IS when using a tripod.

 

 

11 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Having paid for the camera, I feel I can use it as I like. 🤣🤣🤣

Certainly.

 

 

11 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

As I don't yet own the P6K Pro or a Canon camera, I can't comment on your point there.  Only on my situation where I have had issues with 3 adaptors.  No doubt I shall see how they perform when I get the P6K Pro and then be able to clarify if the issue is with the adaptors or not.  Don't worry, I will consume humble pie if they are not found to be at fault.

If there is a nearby rental house, it might be wise to go there and test your EF-S lenses on a P6K or s P6K Pro prior to making a purchase.

 

Not sure how "consuming Humble Pie" is relevant, but getting a camera that works for you is more important.  By the way, I prefer the Small Faces.

 

 

11 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Maybe an adaptor would work well with the C70.  I'm not ruling out adaptors in the future if required.  However having had no issues with my MFT lenses and several issues with my EF lenses via the adaptors, I am biased towards non adaptors.  Maybe once I've enjoyed using a S35 camera for the first time in 10 years with my S35 lenses, I will look to something like the C70 and try again with adaptors. 

Again, it would be useful to actually see how your lenses work with any camera in consideration (if possible), prior to a purchase.  In the case of the C70, try it with an official Canon adapter.

 

 

11 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Yes I was aware MFT lenses can be used, though rarely seen as encouraged by others.  Again I'm keen to take a step away from adaptors for now.  And also to invest in fullframe lenses to compliment my S35 ones for future proof.

Full frame lenses are a wise investment if they have a deep mount, and especially if they are completely manual.

 

One of the great benefits of having FF deep-mount lenses is the ability to use them with speed boosters on shallow-mount Super35/APS-C cameras.  Such a combination gives an extra stop of exposure along with almost the complete full frame view and character, plus the image is usually sharper than using a full frame lens with a dummy adapter.

[tupp]

1 hour ago, andrgl said:

can personally attest to the following Blackmagic cameras having FPN, amongst a range of other issues:

• Cinema Camera
• Production Camera 4K (oh my god, what a steaming pile of ****)
• Pocket Cinema Camera
• Pocket Cinema 4K
• Micro Cinema Camera
• URSA Mini 4.6K
• URSA Mini Pro 4.6K

I didn't see any FPN with the BM cameras using Fairchild sensors.  The BM cameras with CMOSIS sensors (BMPC, OG Ursa, Ursa Min 4k) can exhibit FPN if one is not careful, but having a global shutter is a worthwhile trade-off.

[SteveV4D]

1 hour ago, tupp said:

The most important thing is that one can control the aperture (and view a scope).  The aperture readout is not crucial.

Most cinema lenses are completely manual for good reasons.  There is too much riding on the line in larger budget projects to rely on decisions made by the camera or lens.  Furthermore, any IS glitch could bust a take and/or force a cut in post, which could prove to be expensive and detrimental to the piece's impact.

Additionally, it is likely that most cinematographers want lens manufacturers put their efforts into optical performance rather than into automatic electronic features.  Nobody buys a Master Prime to shoot handheld at Bar Mitzvahs.

It's not easy to handhold a narrow non-IS lens, but it can be done with success.  Back in the film days, there were no IS lenses, so one had to learn how to be smooth when handheld.  The non-IS results generally do not posses the same look/feel as handheld with a modern IS camera/lens, but I wouldn't say that handheld without IS is generally worse the with IS.

Of course, a tripod eliminates a lot of stability problems, and one really should disable IS when using a tripod.

If there is a nearby rental house, it might be wise to go there and test your EF-S lenses on a P6K or s P6K Pro prior to making a purchase.

Not sure how "consuming Humble Pie" is relevant, but getting a camera that works for you is more important.  By the way, I prefer the Small Faces.

Again, it would be useful to actually see how your lenses work with any camera in consideration (if possible), prior to a purchase.  In the case of the C70, try it with an official Canon adapter.

Full frame lenses are a wise investment if they have a deep mount, and especially if they are completely manual.

One of the great benefits of having FF deep-mount lenses is the ability to use them with speed boosters on shallow-mount Super35/APS-C cameras.  Such a combination gives an extra stop of exposure along with almost the complete full frame view and character, plus the image is usually sharper than using a full frame lens with a dummy adapter.

I've already made the purchase.  Surely it makes no difference to my situation.  I'm not buying to fix an error, I'm buying because the Pocket 6K Pro has features I need.  I was planning to buy a Pocket 6K to compliment my Pocket 4K for my work.  I didn't do so to eliminate a serious problem.  I merely speculate that doing so will potentially resolve the occasional annoying issues I have with the adaptors.

I appreciate the lecture on the use of non IS Lenses.  I'm not buying expensive primes.  I'm buying standard EF-S lenses on Pockets for event filming, corporate Promos, the odd music video and some personal travel videos.  In such cases, the odd handheld use is needed and IS on 1 of my lenses is there to help such work when needed.  Mostly for my own personal travel videos as my actual work tends to rely on a Monopod and the odd use of a gimbal.

I'm not looking at a C70 purchase just yet.  Aside from the cost, the lack of any RAWlite bothers me after enjoying BRAW on my Pockets.  There is the extra cost of an adaptor for my EF lenses and frankly I prefer Blackmagic colour science to Canon.  Always have done.   I've spent several years wishing to own a Blackmagic when all my camera gear was Panasonic and only when the right camera at the right price came along, I seized it and have never looked back.  

For AF alone I may consider it in the future or something else Canon if the price is right and the specs suits my needs.  Or maybe Panasonic will fix their AF and release their own version of a C70; that is for the future; but right now, the Pocket 6K Pro meets my needs and I am excited to receive it and work with a S35 sensor again after so long.

[IronFilm]

On 2/20/2021 at 1:12 AM, Thpriest said:

A quick thought, will they make a 4K MFT version?

In my dreams!!
 

On 2/20/2021 at 1:15 AM, Anaconda_ said:

I would also imagine if that was planned, they would have unveiled them both at the same time.

The OG BMCC EF and BMCC MFT were announced at two different times.

[Anaconda_]

33 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

The OG BMCC EF and BMCC MFT were announced at two different times.

Which came first? 

[Mr. Freeze]

15 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

Which came first? 

The EF-Version if I remember correctly. I bought one used a couple of years ago and still use it from time to time. great image, solid files, but it needs a cage and a solid battery solution.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, Mr. Freeze said:

The EF-Version if I remember correctly. I bought one used a couple of years ago and still use it from time to time. great image, solid files, but it needs a cage and a solid battery solution.

And the crop factor is a KILLER if you're stuck with EF mount. 
But perfectible doable if you've got the MFT version.

[Mr. Freeze]

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

And the crop factor is a KILLER if you're stuck with EF mount. 
But perfectible doable if you've got the MFT version.

Sure, that can become problematic. But most of the time I was able to work around it and use my Rokinon 16mm. But yeah, the MFT-Version is much better here with a Focal Reducer.

[Mark Romero 2]

On 2/19/2021 at 1:02 PM, EphraimP said:

There are lots of interview situations that don't call for a chair, or where one isn't even possible. I, for instance, shoot mainly doc-style pieces for environmental nonprofits as a solo shooter, which means 70-85 percent of my works happens outdoors, in the field. Thus, standing interviews are a must almost all the time for me.

And even if you tell someone to stand on a mark and not move their body too much, most of them are going to move in some way or another as you get deep into the interview, especially if you get them comfortable with the camera and really into what they are talking about. And if possible, I'm running two cameras in these interviews, so I can cut between different angles to add interest to the piece and hide cuts that would be obvious I only had one camera angle.

Off Topic: I'm interested in what you are doing for audio for those types of interviews. I am guessing it would have to be a lav mic then???

[tupp]

17 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

I was planning to buy a Pocket 6K to compliment my Pocket 4K for my work.

Your P4K should closely match your P6K if you use a speedbooster with your EF lenses on your P4K.  As you are likely aware, a speedbooster (or focal reducer) is just an adapter with optics that condense the image circle and character of a lens to a smaller size.  Most M4/3 speedboosters will yield a Super35/APS-C frame and look, plus give an extra stop of exposure to boot.

 

Here is a video comparing a Metabones speedbooster with a recent Viltrox focal reducer on the P4K, cued to the section comparing autofocus speed in lower light.  To me, the Viltrox is good and the Metabones is better.  Neither seems to have any prohibitive problem with their electronics.

 

Was the AF performance of your adapters as good as these speedboosters?

 

 

[SteveV4D]

33 minutes ago, tupp said:

Your P4K should closely match your P6K if you use a speedbooster with your EF lenses on your P4K.  As you are likely aware, a speedbooster (or focal reducer) is just an adapter with optics that condense the image circle and character of a lens to a smaller size.  Most M4/3 speedboosters will yield a Super35/APS-C frame and look, plus give an extra stop of exposure to boot.

 

Here is a video comparing a Metabones speedbooster with a recent Viltrox focal reducer on the P4K, cued to the section comparing autofocus speed in lower light.  To me, the Viltrox is good and the Metabones is better.  Neither seems to have any prohibitive problem with their electronics.

 

Was the AF performance of your adapters as good as these speedboosters?

 

 

I have the metabones and Viltrox.  The latter is the most temperamental, particularly with the Pocket, though that is as much down to the camera.  With the viltrox, I can't get IS at all on my IS lens; despite updating the adaptor.  It also struggles the most losing aperture control. The metabones though is more reliable, though still prone to quirks, mostly in cold weather, so I am experiencing it more now.  I know I won't necessary see that much difference in area of view or even low light.  Still I'll be intrigued to compare anyway.  

For me it's quite simple, with EF lenses and a desire to have at least one non MFT camera after 10 years, the Pocket 6K was a better choice when I needed a 2nd Blackmagic camera to compliment my Pocket 4K.  That said, I took over a year to decide this and then having it on order, cancelled after last year's lockdown.  

Now the Pocket 6K Pro is the obvious choice as it gives me the 6K with better screen and ND filters.  My 2 adaptors can be used on my Pocket 4K and GH5s when needed.  Though I have plenty of MFT lenses as well.  Though I may look to sell some of them, and only keep a few for my GH5 and 2 GH4rs I still use when I need 5 or 6 cameras for event filming.

[Emanuel]

21 hours ago, andrgl said:

(...) I believe I shot RAW at all times with my ISO set to 200.

(...)

But then so does the Canon C200, Sony FS700, FS5 and FS7, when shooting RAW.

(...)

Not a big deal usually, just need to test the fuck out of your camera before shooting anything serious. Find out the sensor flaws, find a work around or just avoid that scenario.

I struggle to understand how any people can even think to ignore ISO as same old school way to properly choose ANY capture set up in fact to begin with (E :- )

[EphraimP]

4 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Off Topic: I'm interested in what you are doing for audio for those types of interviews. I am guessing it would have to be a lav mic then???

Belt and suspenders baby, belt and suspenders. I definitely use lavs. Whenever possible I use a shotgun as well.

If we're not too far from vehicles and doing a formal interview, I have boom a shotgun over talent from a c-stand or light stand. I've drafted people who are part of the group I'm interviewing but not being interviewed at the moment to hold the boom, under the camera's site line. It's almost guaranteed that they'll move the boom up into the frame of the wide angel at some point, but I typically shoot in 4K for a 1080 timeline. I've even held the boom myself once or twice, while running cameras and directing the interview; that's a pain in the ass.

If we're doing a moving interview or I'm filming people in their natural habitat, as it were, I'll run a lav on talent and an on camera shotgun. In these situations the lav is usually the best sound, but it never hurts to have multiple tracks to choose from.

The biggest problem I have with booms in the field isn't usually how to get it over/under talent, it's wind noise or other atmospheric noise like highway traffic or river noise.  This winter I finally got a Rycote blimp. It's supposedly for Rhode mics, but of course it fits my Deity S2 perfectly. 

[Mark Romero 2]

1 hour ago, EphraimP said:

Belt and suspenders baby, belt and suspenders. I definitely use lavs. Whenever possible I use a shotgun as well.

If we're not too far from vehicles and doing a formal interview, I have boom a shotgun over talent from a c-stand or light stand. I've drafted people who are part of the group I'm interviewing but not being interviewed at the moment to hold the boom, under the camera's site line. It's almost guaranteed that they'll move the boom up into the frame of the wide angel at some point, but I typically shoot in 4K for a 1080 timeline. I've even held the boom myself once or twice, while running cameras and directing the interview; that's a pain in the ass.

If we're doing a moving interview or I'm filming people in their natural habitat, as it were, I'll run a lav on talent and an on camera shotgun. In these situations the lav is usually the best sound, but it never hurts to have multiple tracks to choose from.

The biggest problem I have with booms in the field isn't usually how to get it over/under talent, it's wind noise or other atmospheric noise like highway traffic or river noise.  This winter I finally got a Rycote blimp. It's supposedly for Rhode mics, but of course it fits my Deity S2 perfectly. 

Thanks so much for the reply (and thanks everyone for letting me go off topic). Yeah, definitely redundancy. Thanks again.

[BenEricson]

On 2/20/2021 at 1:14 PM, tupp said:

Back in the film days, there were no IS lenses, so one had to learn how to be smooth when handheld.

The BMP4K weighs less than the mag on an SR3! A 105mm with no shoulder rig and multiple points of contact won’t end well. 

The balance, weight and ergonomics of the rig are huge factors to how smooth the shot looks.

[tupp]

40 minutes ago, BenEricson said:

The BMP4K weighs less than the mag on an SR3! A 105mm with no shoulder rig and multiple points of contact won’t end well. 

The balance, weight and ergonomics of the rig are huge factors to how smooth the shot looks.

Well, the 16S, the Bolex, the Krasnogorsk, etc. all had their eyepieces at the rear of the camera, so they weren't shoulder mounted.  There were a few tricks that one could practice to keep them stable.  There were also other brackets (such as belt pole rigs) that could help.  Of course,  weight could always be added for more stability.

 

I am with you on shoulder rigs.  A balanced shoulder rig is always fairly stable regardless of weight.

[BenEricson]

19 minutes ago, tupp said:

Well, the 16S, the Bolex, the Krasnogorsk, etc. all had their eyepieces at the rear of the camera, so they weren't shoulder mounted.  There were a few tricks that one could practice to keep them stable.  There were also other brackets (such as belt pole rigs) that could help.  Of course,  weight could always be added for more stability.

True. I own a Bolex Super 16 with the pistol grip. The weight and 3 point contact make for extremely nice handheld footage. A pistol grip / EVF / would probably work really well on this camera as well. The weight should be good as long as the lens is heavy enough. 

[Dunjoye]

BMPCC 6K PRO @£1879 is very decent. 

I have the pocket 4k, I was not interested in the 6K as an upgrade, but this 6Kpro addresss alot of issues (Screen Battery & Filters) and makes it a better run & gun alternative.  I think I might upgrade 

[JordanWright]

John Brawley just posted on Facebook with a video that he’s getting 72mins out of the included battery, that’s not bad at all. (Screen on 100%)