The downfall of the big guys just began - BlackMagic 2.5K Cinema Camera with 12bit RAW for $3000

[allupons]

To everyone worried about how soft the samples are, realize they are 720p, that vimeo is upscaling. I imagine a few direct from camera files will hit the web sooner than later, and at that point we will know if it has the canon DSLR signature lack of detail, or if it actually pushes the envelope. I am mostly curious to learn about the sensor in general, as although I like Black Magic's products, sensor technology is a very expensive thing to have great R&D in. If the sensor is lousy, all the well thought out surrounding features will count for very little. But I am very excited to see some prores files straight out of the camera.

[RickToxik]

Wow this looks awesome.  My opinions:

h.264 from Canon DSLR (well from my 7D) can't be graded, because of the banding & compression artifacts.
So if you fight hard to produce a movie with little means, 12 bit RAW is more important than a larger sensor captured compressed.  As stated before, Black Swan and Slumdog Millionaire were shot on 16mm and both won oscars!

For any post work, comping with CG or some people also said green screen keying, the 12 bit higher dynamic range will be a blessing.  And the 2,[u]5K[/u] resolution opens a lot of flexibility in post.  Like the guy with the drones said, you can stabilize, then crop and still keep your 1080p screen full res!  And if you just resize your 2,5K frame to HD, I think you will get some extra crisp.  Some people complain on the softness of the test shots, but I reallllly prefer to sharpen in post, Resolve produce breathtaking results on sharpening I think.

I like a lot the philosophy of BMD about this camera.  As stated in one of the NAB videos, they see it as an [i]acquiring device[/i] rather than a digital camera.  This means that you can bring this to post to the "big screen" I'm starting to think.  Many movie theaters project at 1080p, and film projections have been comparable to that "resolution" for a long time I believe.

My biggest fears and disapointments:
1. please.  No big jello effect from the rolling shutter!!  I'm still young, I wanna run with my camera!!  ;D  This can kinda ruin a shooting day.
2. what is the crop factor on this camera?  Like the 7D is 1,6X (so a 35mm lens on a 7D equals a 59.6mm lens on a full-frame sensor).
3. Oh!!  Almost forgot!!  How do you get your focus right on that screen??  Is there a way to zzzoom&focus! like on the canons?  I hope so because the lack of focus tools could be a serious obstacle to picture quality.

I definitly think this camera will kick some serious asian butts!  It's now that we see that maybe the DSLR big brands have been slowing down the market for indie film-making.  Alllright!!!  -sorry for the long post

[shijan]

i find some original stills here http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2012/04/17/blackmagic-cinema-camera-lets-take-it-from-the-top/ and they are look a little better then vimeo samples

[mtnzlondon]

The 15-85 will look less sharp than even that. I own one. Its exceptional at stills though.
The videos are 'soft'. He's a very naturalistic DOP. I bet you could be more aggressive with even these images in terms of contrast and sharpness.
I'm certain 'better' video will come. But I also think they went for the look of S16, and they pretty much nailed it.

[jcs]

The reason the video is soft is 2432 Bayer photosites means about 2432/2 = 1216 de-Bayered pixels vs 1920 from 3840 Bayer photosites (C300 et al). When companies advertise 4k, and the sensor is a Bayer array, you're only going to get around 1/2 the resolution (might be slightly higher with software interpolation tricks (e.g. for luma), but fundamentally it's about 1/2 resolution). If binning is being used to increase dynamic range and low light performance, resolution will be even lower.

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/the-truth-about-2k-4k-the-future-of-pixels

Thus, if you want a true 1920x1080p camera, you need at least 3840x2160 Bayer photosites (as with the C300). This camera[s]might[/s] will have more dynamic range vs. a 5D3 (due to 12-bit RAW and 10-bit ProRes/DNxHD support), but it won't be any sharper (looks softer from the example footage so far; makes sense given the sensor resolution).

"Downfall of the big guys"- not yet. This will happen when folks start making modular camera systems: lens mount, sensor, processor, and storage, as separate components. That's when things will get interesting, just like  when the IBM PC came out and the clone wars started. Who's going to make the best camera OS? Companies like NVIDIA and AMD will start adding GPUs to cameras, etc. This can be done somewhat today with a laptop and an industrial camera sensor over USB3 (and later Thunderbolt). Some early work in progress: http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/camera-2.0/

[popalock]

sorry, don't have time to read through all the posts.  You can pre-order already you know.

Just got mine in the UK done for £1925 ex VAT!!

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=popalock link=topic=596.msg4114#msg4114 date=1334650883]
sorry, don't have time to read through all the posts.  You can pre-order already you know.

Just got mine in the UK done for £1925 ex VAT!!
[/quote]

SSHHH!!

By the way here is a 1080p frame grab http://johnbrawley.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/untitled_1-23-2.jpg

Detailed, not soft. 2.5K raw will comfortably beat the FS700 and C300 for resolution.

[RickToxik]

Is the 12 bit RAW 4:4:4 or 4:2:2 or something else?

I am almost sure to grab mine too, I know the guy from our local dealer teeeheeee.  I am really worried about the rolling shutter jello effect, I would like to see some tests about that and I am not alone.  It's very difficult to think in terms of "action footage" with a heavy rolling shutter constraint.  I mean, what kind of action movie does not have a fast pan??

[MatthewP]

[quote author=garypayton link=topic=596.msg4101#msg4101 date=1334626065][quote]
Perhaps some post work is needed but those test videos are extremely soft.
[/quote]

so i'm not the only one that notices...
[/quote]

I don't think you have much experience with RAW stuff ;) RAW is naturally soft, because no sharpening has been applied AT ALL.

No sharpening = softer image, no matter how good the sensor. It does NOT mean that it's not detailed, however, and the actual resolution (the important part) is very good.

Every camera you've used that spits out processed encoded files (movs or mts, for example), will have had sharpness applied somewhere along the processing run. Because the processing is in post with a RAW camera, sharpening is obviously one of the steps that must be taken.

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=Sara link=topic=596.msg4067#msg4067 date=1334617681]
Average vidoes yes, but remember that Vimo is streaming these at a compressed 720p.
[/quote]

For those looking at John's stuff, disable scaling in full screen mode. No wonder it looks soft... Believe me it isn't.

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=jcs link=topic=596.msg4113#msg4113 date=1334647170]
The reason the video is soft is 2432 Bayer photosites means about 2432/2 = 1216 de-Bayered pixels vs 1920 from 3840 Bayer photosites (C300 et al).
[/quote]

This is not the reason some people think John's footage looks soft. Once again just to be absolutely clear... Vimeo streaming at 7Mbit 720p is the reason.

[cameraboy]

after debayering RED  4K IS about 2.4k so we can expect 1.6K from BMD camera (not bad at all)
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/more_red_res_testing_the_mysteryium_resolved/
and all raw files look soft even RED EPIC (u need to add little sharpness)
and it looks like that they use Fairchild sCMOS Sensor(its only sensor that fits BMD camera size) ...wow its rated at 88db of dynamic range ...thats more than ALEXA...
http://www.scmos.com/

[RickToxik]

I think BlackMagic Design created a camera that is really oriented towards post-production rather than a one button solution.  A sharpened image at capture may contaminate the whole post-production chain and may introduce artifacts (or let's say coloration) at the beginning of the process.  Also, CG animations are rendered soft too and sharpened after, thus reducing moire and aliasing.
The ungraded RED and ARRI sequences I have seen were totally unappealing too. Because they are meant to be treated in post.  I don't know if they are more sharpened than the Blackmagic cinema camera though when captured, I never shot with those cameras myself.

[garypayton]

But the sensor size DOES help in LOW LIGHT situations and that's where the game is played and that's where this camera must succeed.

Am I the only one waiting to see how it works in low light before saying this is the messiah?

[cameraboy]

senor size is not important for low light ... its a pixel size what makes difference ....
and BMD sensor has similar pixel as 5d3 ....
and let me correct myself...
sensor size does make difference ...
for the same DOF u will need 4x more light for FF than BMD camera ...

[garypayton]

[quote author=cameraboy link=topic=596.msg4124#msg4124 date=1334657283]
senor size is not important for low light ... its a pixel size what makes difference ....
and BMD sensor has similar pixel as 5d3 ....
and let me correct myself...
sensor size does make difference ...
for the same DOF u will need 4x more light for FF than BMD camera ...



[/quote]

Yes sensor size makes difference for low light

ah ok, you corrected yourself LOL

the sensor size is smaller than a gh2 sensor, but some people still say that sensor size doesn't make any difference...NOT TRUE, this is a small sensor and we'll see it in low light performances.
If low light performances suck this camera, despite been a great idea and a pioneer, is not worth 3000 bucks

[cameraboy]

hahaaha..
dude u really don't have a clue...
smaller sensor mostly use smaller  pixel ...
but this is small sensor with huge pixel ...
and my correction was that big sensors are not better in low light they are WORSE ...
for the same DOF u need to stop down lens ...
example if u want to match 2.8f  of DMB u need to stop down 5D2 at 5.6f and lose 4 times more light...
i'm glad i could help u...
:)

[garypayton]

A larger sensor can accumulate more light, giving better low light performance. the details the picture holds and the amount of noise (grain) in the picture in high ISO (low light) situations are simply better.

Don't worry. They will show some 3200 iso footage from this camera and it will be amazing (even if you see plenty of posts on the net of people already noticing that the 800 iso try doesn't look that good),

maybe you don't get me, I HOPE you are right, but words and specs will mean something when some REAL test will come out.

Peace!

oh and let me add that the grain of the short tests seems organic and I like it but STILL 800 iso is too low to make a statement.

[cameraboy]

we are not in war here ..
just friendly talk ...
peace

[garypayton]

ehhehe sure! who's talking about war!

We are on the same team I hope just like you do that this camera will totally blow our minds