Full Frame BMCC

Hi guys, as all of you I am super exited to see the BMCC come out. I just saw this video test by Marco, that got me fired up:
I also saw the review by Philip Bloom here: http://philipbloom.net/2012/09/05/bmd/
But as Marco and Philip, I also would love to see a full frame option of this camera. It may sound crazy (ungrateful) of me asking version 2 before version 1 even comes out, but it was also crazy to think the BMCC would exist just last year, and yet, here it is.
Black Magic Team, please keep doing what you are doing. Congrats on your hard work that will pay off really well. But PLEASE do not stop there. Please take these things into consideration:
1-Full frame (NOT super 35!)
2-Crop options (super 35, 4/3, 16mm, 1/2 etc, in the same camera)
3-Hi-speeds, would be great, but we can wait for that as long as 1 and 2 are there
4-Still photos at 5k+ at any speed
5-Proress or better
BMCC Team, Please keep this in mind and you shall rule the world.

To every film maker out there who reads this. Please give your feed back. It is important that camera makers and customers are in the same page, because we are in the same boat ans it only makes sense that we pull in the same direction.

Thank you.



Thank you.

Hi Jonathon: Feel free to post your BMCC feature requests here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=265

FYI: Requests for "full frame" (S35 & 135) versions of the BMCC have been received by BMD since the first day the camera was announced at the NAB expo in April 2012. Cheers.

Hi guys, as all of you I am super exited to see the BMCC come out. I just saw this video test by Marco, that got me fired up:
I also saw the review by Philip Bloom here: http://philipbloom.net/2012/09/05/bmd/
But as Marco and Philip, I also would love to see a full frame option of this camera. It may sound crazy (ungrateful) of me asking version 2 before version 1 even comes out, but it was also crazy to think the BMCC would exist just last year, and yet, here it is.
Black Magic Team, please keep doing what you are doing. Congrats on your hard work that will pay off really well. But PLEASE do not stop there. Please take these things into consideration:
1-Full frame (NOT super 35!)
2-Crop options (super 35, 4/3, 16mm, 1/2 etc, in the same camera)
3-Hi-speeds, would be great, but we can wait for that as long as 1 and 2 are there
4-Still photos at 5k+ at any speed
5-Proress or better
BMCC Team, Please keep this in mind and you shall rule the world.

To every film maker out there who reads this. Please give your feed back. It is important that camera makers and customers are in the same page, because we are in the same boat ans it only makes sense that we pull in the same direction.

Thank you.



Thank you.

RED Epic

To the Blackmagic team:

Make a super 65mm cinema camera capable of saving 20mp raw files at 120fps to SD cards.

RED Epic

^ That.

The camera you've described has no resemblance to the BMCC at all.

To the Blackmagic team:

Make a super 65mm cinema camera capable of saving 20mp raw files at 120fps to SD cards.

Where do I preorder?

hahaha! Perfect guys. Thank for the reply. I still want a full frame camera and am hopeful Black Magic can extend its magic. I am honestly tired of trying to color grade H.264 in 11 stops of dynamic range from Canon cameras. Red is not affordable at this moment, but a second choice from BM could be the light at the end if the tunnel!

hahaha! Perfect guys. Thank for the reply. I still want a full frame camera and am hopeful Black Magic can extend its magic. I am honestly tired of trying to color grade H.264 in 11 stops of dynamic range from Canon cameras. Red is not affordable at this moment, but a second choice from BM could be the light at the end if the tunnel!

Yes, but in order to make the camera you're describing, it would cost even more than the Epic, due to FF sensor size rather than S35. The amount of tech it would take to make that run for any sort of time without spontaneously combusting would be intense. The Epic costs as much as it does because of the parts and technology inside of it. You can't expect a superior camera to the Epic to be cheaper than it...

RED Epic

RED EPIC is NOT a full frame camera.

The issue is that it's very very difficult to source a sensor, especially for full frame. Even if a sensor COULD be sourced, it's a very very expensive option.

At 135 size, there are very very few companies making sensors.

jb

Personally I think to much is being made of this crop factor and full frame sensor malarkey. The recent 5dmk3 and BMCC comparison video by One River Media answered the supposed problem with a free solution. Check out 6:11 - 6:52

For those of you who can't be bothered to watch it, slap on the same lens and take a few steps back.

I Agree Michale.

While there is a *certain* kind of look from wide & fast lenses, it's a bit of a one trick pony. Sure if you like riding that pony you should have one....

But the rest of the cinema industry doesn't....

Even the misunderstanding between FULL frame 135 and Super 35 still shows how much misunderstanding there is in this area.

The very fact that it's ONLY 8 bit dSLR's that shoot this 135 Full Frame sensor size, says a lot. No other high end "cinema camera" shoots 135 full frame. (the Phantom 65 being a special exception....sort of)

Alexa, RED, EPIC and MX, C300. They are all SMALLER than 135 full frame.

jb

I understand and agree with Michael's concept of just pulling back and getting the look you want with out paying extra for the camera that does not even exist. But here is the real issue for me:
1 Not always you can pull back, but if you have a FF sensor, you CAN control the exact DOF you want in camera. So you have control of what look you want. The one trick pony concept is false and it goes both ways.
2 FF cameras have not been made yet, because of how new this option is to the general public, like us. I assure you, once you go FF, you will not want to shoot anything else ever again.
If camera makers can make FF and with crop options, then this issue will be solved for ever, as everyone can choose the sensor crop you want depending on the job you have: Example. Dreamy look: FF, movies: S35, sports: 4/3, etc etc.
3 final is the option of being able to do proper stills and proper video in the same camera. No one really talks about how important that is. If we, "video people" can make our own still, then we will never depend on unreliable photographers ever again. Stills are a very important part of our work and work flow, so we need to have this in the same camera or we will be dependent and limited.
So hear me out, I am not saying this is easy to make (FF frame camera sensors), ALL I am saying, is, this is the time to get started. Option are better, limitations are only limitations. Be optimistic!

[quote="jonathanyonkers"] I assure you, once you go FF, you will not want to shoot anything else ever again.

3 final is the option of being able to do proper stills and proper video in the same camera. /quote]


Obviously having spent upwards of £200k for a sensor in a camera like this one mentioned - I doubt I would! Or could afford to!

How many great cinema directors out there also get mentioned for their stills shooting? Or vice versa... Buy th best tool for EACH job. Not a jack-of-all-trades machine for both..

Just my twopenneth..

sk

I personally don't like the look of full frame (or its misuse). Footage tends to make me feel short-sighted!

I guess blurring out backgrounds hides the fact that DSLRs have mushy H264 and blown out highlights. But on a BMCC I want to see the beauty!

Jules

RED Epic

RED EPIC is NOT a full frame camera.

The issue is that it's very very difficult to source a sensor, especially for full frame. Even if a sensor COULD be sourced, it's a very very expensive option.

At 135 size, there are very very few companies making sensors.

jb

i am aware of that....
i love when people are asking ridiculous for upgrades for a camera that is not even on the market yet....and best...for a lower price...

It does not matter what directors are known for stills. That is irrelevant. What matters is that black magic came up with an insane camera that will change everthing. Example: 2.5 k RAW in under $3k. From here on the issue is how to make this even better. Dont close your eyes to new options. Videos is phtos per second, it only makes sence to fuse the options if you need to. If others have lots of money to buy a camera for every job, well great for them!
Shooting full frame video and still on the 5d is a dream come true, but the compresion is absolute garbage and dynamic range are very poor at 11 stops. Here is where BM can use its comon sense and enable options to us.
To think 2.5k raw for this price was insane just last year, so why is it insane to think full frame at at 24p?

Jonathon..

The mere fact i'm here should tell you my penchant for technological advances... But I really can't identify with the desire for a stills camera and a video camera to share the same form factor. The finest held camera for me is a Canon D1. Weighty, balanced and sold construction. The other is a medium format look-down-from-above style viewfinder.

Neither of these are like the ideal video camera in either over-the-shoulder or run-and-gun style form factor.
So for ME... (and my ideal alone..) I prefer the dream of taking a fine quality lens off my stills camera and placing it on my cinema camera. Now that would be a.....wait a minute !!!

Perhaps its just the pragmatist in me that feels just because something CAN be done, it doesn't HAVE to be done...??

Don't get me wrong, I use stills from my video all the time to make the DVD covers for my wedding/corporates, but I know when i've shot a scene that there will be a still image I can use. So as someone has already said, I can just grab a RAW from the flow from the BMCC.

SK

Making it take good stills also jacks up the price; because good stills require a much higher resolution than HD. Hence why the 5D3 is £500 more expensive than the BMCC, despite being a much worse video camera.

Thanks for the reply Fred, this Sony options seems a little too good to be true. From my experience. If its Sony, it is in fact, too good to be true, but I will keep my eye open for it. Clean HDMI sounds very attractive on the Sony at full frame. But to be honest, my gut tells me that Black Magic is a much better company and I trust them more than Sony to come up with something better. Quality matters to me and everything Black Magic does has top quality, so I will stick to BM. Thank you!

The one big problem I see with still being shot at the same time is the shutter speed. Normaly at 1/48th shutter anything moving looks a bit blurry to me. Then again shooting your film at a much higher rate gives you a clipped shutter lock.

What matters is that black magic came up with an insane camera that will change everthing.

herein lies what I believe to be driving some of the madness on this forum and others.

Its just another camera, it will not "change everything"

And really, Sony is one of the most innovative companies of the last 100 years (you might be too young to remember when the Walkman was the Ipod of its generation), comparing Blackmagic to Sony (and calling BM superior) is very revealing.

herein lies what I believe to be driving some of the madness on this forum and others.

Its just another camera, it will not "change everything"

And really, Sony is one of the most innovative companies of the last 100 years (you might be too young to remember when the Walkman was the Ipod of its generation), comparing Blackmagic to Sony (and calling BM superior) is very revealing.

I agree with most of this statement as far as you aren't really changing everything when it's already been changed. RED shoots RAW, has more dynamic range and has a touchscreen. The only thing that BMCC has on it is the price point, BUT RED is available now and not in a production hold.

Now, looking at the form of the BMCC and history of BM you would be an idiot to think that this current offering of the BMCC is going to be the only camera from BM. This is just to get their name out in the RAW camera market and make it affordable to everyone before introducing a camera that only a certain sect can purchase. They aren't going to stay at the current sensor size, they'll go larger. They aren't going to stay at 30 fps, you'll see much higher. Besides; pro market is saturated with the RED right now and to try to pioneer a camera when they just changed is suicide, so they down res it, make it cheaper, offer it cheaper and market it to the non movie market professional.

There isn't a RED camera out right now that sees a usable 13 stops of DR without HDRX.

13+ non HDR is Alexa territory.

So, if it comes down to Blackmagic getting 13 usable stops, it will also have that over RED.

My tuppence worth.

The fashion for FF cameras is a little odd to me as I think that for most practical applications it just doesn't work. Shooting at T1.2 on a 5D is all very well and can look very nice if you're shooting an interview with a laid-back interviewee or nice pictures of boats but for most documentary and drama applications it's a nightmare. I just don't think it's very good if you're interested in keeping people in focus. The problem is that things move. People do quite a lot as do cameras and keeping people sharp on FF is a nightmare. I spent 6 years as a Focus Puller so I've got quite a bit of experience of trying to keep people sharp on film and digital and I've got a pretty good idea of what's possible. The simple reality is that FF can be very limiting. I've operated on quite a few promos and commercials where we've had to turn to the director and tell him that the shot he wants on his 5D (say a walk and talk on a 300mm) just isn't possible. Quite a bit of the time the director will say 'I don't mind if it goes out of focus'. I do.

The idea that you can just choose to shoot at T8 may work on Day Ext, but at night you're shooting wide open by necessity, for a lot of Day Int you're not far off. You're more or less turning a native 800 ASA camera into a native 100 ASA camera in order to give you that choice.

The amount of stuff that goes out soft on TV and over the web is getting bigger and bigger and personally I'm not a fan, it seems that people are more concerned with getting the background out of focus than keeping the foreground in focus. I've always been a bigger fan of the foreground.

I like the sensor size of the BMCC, I think it's great for docs and usable for drama, I also like a Super 35mm sensor for the same although opposite reasons. I guess that for those of us from a film background are always going to scratch our heads a bit at the FF thing, we always had VistaVision and 65mm cameras but very few chose to use them. It very much seems to be something that's come from stills, not from movies.

As an aside, a know a couple of the guys who pulled focus on Warhorse. Kaminski shot everything at 5.6/8 because Spielberg always tells him he doesn't want to see any soft rushes. Wish my DPs had been like that ...

The amount of stuff that goes out soft on TV and over the web is getting bigger and bigger and personally I'm not a fan, it seems that people are more concerned with getting the background out of focus than keeping the foreground in focus. I've always been a bigger fan of the foreground.

Ohh yes...the bokeh monsters. Unfortunately to some 5DMK2 + 50 1.4 = Filmmaker. Wide-open has its place, but it's generally in stills. Most people don't even know what FF is, let alone know why they want it.

Give us solutions, not problems.

Jason, if being able to record 2.5 RAW under $3k, is not "changing everything", I honestly dont know what is.
Red is doing some incredible stuff too, this are exiting times.
I think Black magic is not getting enough credit for this cool new stuff they are doing.

Martin, you dont like FF? Great, dont use it. I like full frame, so I ask for it. But more than just being able to have full frame, I am asking Black Magic to consider looking into developing a sensor that is FF, BUT also has sensor crop options in camera, so we all can choose the right crop factor for the right scene and not have to change cameras. Of course this is a lot of work, no one is expecting this kind of stuff right away, but if there is ever a time to start, that is now!

Same thing with being able to shoot proper stills. You dont like stills? Great, dont do stills! I like stills, so I ask for that option.

Having options is key. Options give you solutions. No options give you problems.

Hey Jonathan, sensor cropping I don't have an issue with as long as I can get the res. If that could work I'd be down with it and quite stoked with the ability to go FF if I needed to go wide. Someone is going to need to build a sensor that's reasonably priced, but that will happen eventually. At the moment it'd be a hell of a lot of extra cash for that option, but I totally get where you're coming from.

And I love stills, I just like taking them with my stills camera, which to me has a completely different set of requirements than a video camera. I'm not convinced that trying to fuse the two always ends up in the best solution for the user. If it's just a button on the cam that takes a high res still, then count me in.

Martin

But more than just being able to have full frame, I am asking Black Magic to consider looking into developing a sensor that is FF, BUT also has sensor crop options in camera, so we all can choose the right crop factor for the right scene and not have to change cameras.

Are there any cameras that currently do that? I've never heard of that before. It sounds like you'd just end up with hella resolution issues.

Not a the mo'. The RED cameras have always allowed sensor cropping at reduced resolution, but they are natively S35mm. The maths says that a FF sensor that could window down to 2.5K @ BMC size would need to be 5.6K at FF. Not beyond the realms of possibility (the F65 has an 8K sensor) but I'm not sure that a one size fits all camera would make total economic sense, kind of like someone buying an Epic now instead of a BMC when they're planning on shooting at 2K most of the time. On the other hand I'm sure it won't be that long before a 6K FF camera appears but I don't think it's the next logical step for Blackmagic although RED were talking about a FF Epic a long time ago. A Super35 4K EF mount camera sub $10k might be more realistic.

On the other hand I'm sure it won't be that long before a 6K FF camera appears

Name a 4k FF 135 camera that exists and you can use right now.

Name a FF 135 camera that isn't a dSLR.


jb

On the other hand I'm sure it won't be that long before a 6K FF camera appears

Name a 4k FF 135 camera that exists and you can use right now.

Name a FF 135 camera that isn't a dSLR.


jb

There isn't a 4k FF camera currently which is kind of my point, the Sony VG-900 is technically a FF HD video camera which will ship very soon although I don't think it's going to explode onto sets anytime soon. It's AVCHD etc, but it's obviously there in response to the market and others will follow. Whether Blackmagic think that's something exploring is a moot point. Like I said, I think the next logical step for them is a S35mm RAW camera at a price point that would scare Arri and Canon probably at 4k as it's where the market seems to be headed (I'm not actually the hugest fan of 4k either, but that's another story). When that would happen is anyone's guess.

As I've said I'm not a FF fan, but there are plenty that are. The 5D did many things, a big one of which was getting people excited about a FF sensor. Enough people are making a noise about it that someone will make it happen. Philip Bloom's bokeh army are screaming for one and those people buy a lot of cameras. It's the kind of thing I can see RED doing first. I don't think it's going to happen tomorrow at a price point that people here will get excited about but if my experience in this industry had told me one thing it's that you can never say never. I know enough people at very senior levels who said the RED One would never make it to market. I sneered a bit myself when the whole Scarlet 3k for 3k thing was announced and yet Blackmagic have pretty much done that. Time will tell ....

Just make a Super35 4K camera next year, it woud be perfect. (dreaming)

Hi,

Can someone explain to me what this full frame fanaticism is about?

I was at a film networking event the other day, and a director said... oh the BMCC has a tiny sensor, if it had FF sensor I'd get one.

Isn't the ideal sensor size super 35mm anyway? Doesn't FF sensor limit your options?

Due to my lack of knowledge, I might be wrong to say this... but if you need deep depth of field e.g. your actors are close and you still want detail from the background, wouldn't you have to stop down heavily on a FF camera and then lack of light suddenly becomes an issue?

Thanks for any advise,
Jules

Hi,

Can someone explain to me what this full frame fanaticism is about?

I was at a film networking event the other day, and a director said... oh the BMCC has a tiny sensor, if it had FF sensor I'd get one.

Isn't the ideal sensor size super 35mm anyway? Doesn't FF sensor limit your options?

Due to my lack of knowledge, I might be wrong to say this... but if you need deep depth of field e.g. your actors are close and you still want detail from the background, wouldn't you have to stop down heavily on a FF camera and then lack of light suddenly becomes an issue?

Thanks for any advise,
Jules

See:
http://herefortheweather.wordpress.com/ ... -consider/


-

Am I imagining things or do I remember at some point in the Scarlet's development they were going to put in a FF sensor?

Beyond a reasonable expectation (let's say Super 16mm), the sensor size really isn't that great a deal. There are so many more factors to successful motion picture shots than the shallowness of the depth of field. In fact, I personally prefer a moderately un-shallow depth of field. Let's say between 2.8 and 5.6 on a crop body.

Also, there's shots where you want everything to be in focus. Lots of shots.

I personally prefer dynamic range and sharpness over the ability to completely blow out the background. The requirement for shallow depth of field in motion pictures is a misconception.

You guys should just shoot on Super 35. The lab can spit out ProRes HD files of each reel and, just like that, you've got all the improbable wishlist items you could want!

Too bad even BM wouldn't be able to sell a digital version for less than $60K, so you might as well rent RED for the rest of your life. I welcome the BMCC and all it's wonderful limitations as there is no such thing as a perfect camera. Client wants slow-mo? Fine. Pay me to rent and operate a Phantomflex, plus the lighting package for the gargantuan amount of candlepower proper undercranking requires. (Twixtor is crap.) 5K stills? Get a proper DSLR. Quit asking niche manufacturer BM for insane things that will ultimately be out of your price range, anyway. Let them at least release the BMCC first! Sheesh!

I personally prefer dynamic range and sharpness over the ability to completely blow out the background. The requirement for shallow depth of field in motion pictures is a misconception.

+1

I generally prefer about a T5.6, myself.

You guys should just shoot on Super 35. The lab can spit out ProRes HD files of each reel and, just like that, you've got all the improbable wishlist items you could want!

Too bad even BM wouldn't be able to sell a digital version for less than $60K, so you might as well rent RED for the rest of your life. I welcome the BMCC and all it's wonderful limitations as there is no such thing as a perfect camera. Client wants slow-mo? Fine. Pay me to rent and operate a Phantomflex, plus the lighting package for the gargantuan amount of candlepower proper undercranking requires. (Twixtor is crap.) 5K stills? Get a proper DSLR. Quit asking niche manufacturer BM for insane things that will ultimately be out of your price range, anyway. Let them at least release the BMCC first! Sheesh!

This man tells it like it is.

I bought a 5D Mark III not for shooting video, but for making my portrait work higher quality (by way of its differences to the 60D). I bought a Fujilfilm X10 so I could just carry around a smaller but still nice camera. I ordered the BMCC to shoot gorgeous, sharp video up to 30fps on. If I want to shoot slow motion, I would rent an FS700 (my mate owns one now too).

Each do their own thing well and do other things poorly. If you want what basically a RED or ARRI camera will give you, then it makes sense to go and use those cameras.

You guys should just shoot on Super 35. The lab can spit out ProRes HD files of each reel and, just like that, you've got all the improbable wishlist items you could want!

Too bad even BM wouldn't be able to sell a digital version for less than $60K, so you might as well rent RED for the rest of your life. I welcome the BMCC and all it's wonderful limitations as there is no such thing as a perfect camera. Client wants slow-mo? Fine. Pay me to rent and operate a Phantomflex, plus the lighting package for the gargantuan amount of candlepower proper undercranking requires. (Twixtor is crap.) 5K stills? Get a proper DSLR. Quit asking niche manufacturer BM for insane things that will ultimately be out of your price range, anyway. Let them at least release the BMCC first! Sheesh!

This man tells it like it is.

I bought a 5D Mark III not for shooting video, but for making my portrait work higher quality (by way of its differences to the 60D). I bought a Fujilfilm X10 so I could just carry around a smaller but still nice camera. I ordered the BMCC to shoot gorgeous, sharp video up to 30fps on. If I want to shoot slow motion, I would rent an FS700 (my mate owns one now too).

Each do their own thing well and do other things poorly. If you want what basically a RED or ARRI camera will give you, then it makes sense to go and use those cameras.

Thank you for reiterating the "up to 30fps"!!

Thank you for reiterating the "up to 30fps"!!

If BMD added some level of slow motion framerates, then I'll be a happy camper, but I'm buying the BMCC for what it does now!

Hi,
See:
http://herefortheweather.wordpress.com/ ... -consider/
-

Cheers Peter,
I'll bookmark your article on my mobile for when I meet the next FF fanatic.

Jules

Its funny how everybody now "loves" small sensors because they keep the shot in focus. I will call it how it is: Its called bs!
You can never blame the camera for having shots in focus or out of focus. There is only one person you can blame for that and that is you. Not the camera.
We all know that small sensors do not compete, but many will say they do because that is what they can afford.
When BM DOES release a super 35mm sensor, a lot of folks will eat their words. Starting by the ones who patronize everyone else with the focus-out of focus theory. Simply weak. Just becasue Spilberg wants perfect focus in his movies, it does not mean he will shoot with a small sensor. Obviously!
BMCC camera rocks this world beyond its time. Now. But aside from giving you the ability to multiply your telephoto lens, it simply do not compete beyonds its sensor league, where of course, its got no competition or even close.
Unless all you care about is keeping your shot in focus. BMCC is your camera. Great. I will wait and cheer BM in the mean time, because their effort is worth honoring, respecting and being exited about.

I hope you're not trolling Jonathan,

To get that Hollywood cinematic look, you only need reasonable depth of field.

If you want to match DOF on BMCC as a super 35mm sensor, you'd can open up the lens say 1.5 stops (haven't done the maths). The sensor sizes aren't that different.

I know that on BMCC MFT, there are very fast lenses available so you could even get that soft Vimeo styled really shallow depth of field look, which I'm personally not into.


Dynamic range of 13 stops and RAW at 2.5K... wow, that's the game changer, the footage gonna look fantastic!


Cheers,
Jules

We all know that small sensors do not compete, but many will say they do because that is what they can afford.

ouch