The next Black Magic Cinema Camera

I applaude Black Magic for releasing this camera for this price. But the truth is that we've already been down the road of cameras with good quality but no 35mm sensor. The last 10 years have been a battle to get that DOF option that only expensive cameras achieve.

The reason why DSLR's got so popular with filmmaking is because of that 35mm sensor. There is no other reason, the compression and workflow was not really good compared to pure video camera options.
And there are problems with the BMCC that needs to be adressed for the next version (which I assume will happen in the future).

First of, the workflow is awful. Any serious filmmaker knows why it is like this. An internal battery? A glossy screen making it unworkable outside? Audio capabilities? Timecode lock? There are so many things that needs to be adressed for this to be a serious option for the mass of low budget filmmakers. This camera is a perfect example of why image resolution and quality isn't all there is to serious filmmakers.

Second, sensor. This is 2013, sensor size is 35mm by standard in most cameras, even low budget cameras. There are options on the market to aquire a sensor at the size of super35 without getting much higher in price.

Third. Red sold out their old Red One MX cameras for around 4500 USD. That's the same camera which they shot "Social network" on. Just look at those specs and think about it. A 4K camera, with 120 fps at 2K, Redcode RAW, compatible with almost every hardware choice for Digital Cinema there is.
If they sold out this, Red will probably come around with something in that price range in the near future and then the BMCC will probably be more or less dead in camparison.

I urge Blackmagic to really look at the market of today. When BM announced this camera the market was different from what it is now and I suggest getting hold of professional assistant photographers, focus pullers and high end professional cinematographers (and even directors) to really iron out what type of camera that would revolutionize the market as Red did a couple of years ago. I can see the potential with this camera, but as of now I really seen it almost DOA.

And there are problems with the BMCC that needs to be adressed for the next version (which I assume will happen in the future).

I have yet to see a camera, where this statement is not true...

First of, the workflow is awful. Any serious filmmaker knows why it is like this. An internal battery?

I see this as a positive design decision, actually... it's nice to have an automatic short time power bridging solution when swapping bricks...

A glossy screen making it unworkable outside? Audio capabilities? Timecode lock? There are so many things that needs to be adressed for this to be a serious option for the mass of low budget filmmakers.

Sales numbers seem to prove you wrong (or everybody else is just too stupid to see how crappy this camera is, I guess, me included).

Second, sensor. This is 2013, sensor size is 35mm by standard in most cameras, even low budget cameras.

The DOF race and the "my sensor is bigger than yours" frenzy has no base in film making. It's a boy's game with no real merrit...

I can see the potential with this camera, but as of now I really seen it almost DOA.

Your point being? Telling us to NOT get one? Trying to convince yourself not to get one? Just generalized philosophical rambling?

Now don't get me wrong, there are definitely some design decisions BMD did, that I don't like and I would have liked a bigger sensor, higher FPS, ... but I also want the camera to be "cheap". This is contradictory, so I'd rather have cheap than perfect...

I see this impassioned post for what it is, and while you state your points I'd like to contest a few of them. You CAN get shallow depth of field. Whoever raised the hooha that this camera will fail to get shallow DOF hasn't lived in 16mm. It's doable, you just work with your tools, and to second that point, no one got the Metabones Speed booster memo? Even-more shallow depth of field is an artistic choice. For SOME reason shallow DOF has been almost universally linked with the "film look" and is appearing everywhere, almost as if its necessary to get a properly composed shot. Yes, there are many situations that call for shallow DOF, however there are many that DO NOT.

The battery IMO is definitely a weakness to this camera, but is a relatively easy and integrated workaround for this anyways. Any cinema rig will have a battery solution for a monitor/evf anyways.

I agree regarding the screen, but we have to also consider that given the form factor of the device, the touchscreen appears to be the most viable solution. We have to accept to a degree that the form factor revolves around what this camera is marketed to do (2.5k raw) and thus ergonomics will come secondary to this goal.

The upsides are awesome, and the downsides can be overcome. Sounds like any other camera to me.

Until you ACTUALLY spend some time shooting the BMCC in raw and run the shots through Resolve, you will never appreciate what a fantastic tool set this "system" provides.

Is it everyone's favorite for every type project - of course not. No tool ever is.

But can it put out just beautiful images that can be pushed into just about any look you want. Oooh Yah!!!

Shallow depth of field is entirely achievable. Anyone coming from 1/3 chips knows how to achieve that type of shot when needed - control your light - get the aperture open - use the long end of the lens. And if you have ever watched a film where EVERY shot is shallow depth of field - man is that dull, dull, dull.

It is a fantastic tool.

I have yet to see a camera, where this statement is not true...

Are you talking about professional cameras like Red, Alexa, F65 etc. or DSLRs?

I see this as a positive design decision, actually... it's nice to have an automatic short time power bridging solution when swapping bricks...

Is there a battery-brick solution? Is there any good design to account for having brick batteries?

Sales numbers seem to prove you wrong (or everybody else is just too stupid to see how crappy this camera is, I guess, me included).

youtubers might fall in love with this camera, but it doesn't know which leg to stand on. It's too professional for many with for example it's 2.5K RAW format, but on the other hand it's not a workable solution to filmmakers at the high end (I'm talking production here).

The DOF race and the "my sensor is bigger than yours" frenzy has no base in film making. It's a boy's game with no real merrit...

This is bull, DOF is a tool, some like the look of it and some don't. I do agree that a great film doesn't have to have shallow DOF, but to make it into a "my is bigger then yours"-argument has even lesser base in filmmaking. Many examples that people relate to when talking about this has to do with films like Zodiac which had a super16 sized sensor... but people forget about what lenses they used. Shallow DOF is also a great tool for independent filmmakers when you shoot at a location where there's a lot of people not involved in the production. You have a choice to frame off unwanted details on the Z-axis, which you can't with a super16 sensor size, especially when your lenses aren't nearly as wide as cine-lenses.
So, it's not a "boy's game" as you put it, that type of argument has no base when talking real filmmaking tools.

Your point being? Telling us to NOT get one? Trying to convince yourself not to get one? Just generalized philosophical rambling?

Now don't get me wrong, there are definitely some design decisions BMD did, that I don't like and I would have liked a bigger sensor, higher FPS, ... but I also want the camera to be "cheap". This is contradictory, so I'd rather have cheap than perfect...

My point should be obvious. There's a seed for something great with this camera, but there are so many design-choices that seem so odd and so off from how it really is on location. It's like BM haven't talked to filmmakers and cinematographers about what they need. Even Red didn't do this, but they still made a camera that was working production-wise. I cannot see how this camera can work on a 11 hour per day, 30-day production. Because if it's only for shorter stuff, then renting an Epic/Scarlet with cine-lenses is a much better quality for buck deal.
So my point is, telling BM to really go back to the drawing board and look at what filmmakers need, look at this camera and really figure out how to improve it for the next version. BM has the ability to really revolutionize the industry if they make some important decisions with redesigning it.

In my "philosophical" point of view, I really don't understand wasted potential. There are so many odd design-choices for this camera that if they were right, would have made a huge difference.
Design choices that I really don't think would have affected the final price very much.

You CAN get shallow depth of field. Whoever raised the hooha that this camera will fail to get shallow DOF hasn't lived in 16mm. It's doable, you just work with your tools, and to second that point, no one got the Metabones Speed booster memo? Even-more shallow depth of field is an artistic choice. For SOME reason shallow DOF has been almost universally linked with the "film look" and is appearing everywhere, almost as if its necessary to get a properly composed shot. Yes, there are many situations that call for shallow DOF, however there are many that DO NOT.

Read what I wrote above, but to add, I'd like to say that if you look at examples in high end film productions, the lenses are often the "tool" that give you shallow DOF on 16mm and those lenses aren't really cheap.

I agree regarding the screen, but we have to also consider that given the form factor of the device, the touchscreen appears to be the most viable solution. We have to accept to a degree that the form factor revolves around what this camera is marketed to do (2.5k raw) and thus ergonomics will come secondary to this goal.

Don't understand how the screen couldn't have had a matte coating and being able to dislocate from the body like on some DSLR's?

Until you ACTUALLY spend some time shooting the BMCC in raw and run the shots through Resolve, you will never appreciate what a fantastic tool set this "system" provides.

I've worked with almost every camera on the market the last 7 years and I've graded footage from almost every one of those. Yes, the image is good, but that's not all there is to a camera, you need to be able to work with it 12 hours a day with a production team in any condition (both the team and location)

Shallow depth of field is entirely achievable. Anyone coming from 1/3 chips knows how to achieve that type of shot when needed - control your light - get the aperture open - use the long end of the lens. And if you have ever watched a film where EVERY shot is shallow depth of field - man is that dull, dull, dull.

This is not workable for high end productions. My point is that this camera has the ability to, compression-wise compete with cameras like the Alexa, but those "strategies" are not working during real productions. Squeeze in a production team in an apartment and then try doing the "long lens"-shot. What if you want a wider shot but hide details on the z-axis?

There are places where this camera will work perfectly, but as a production camera for let's say a feature film, it's unworkable, period. Ask any film crew who's been involved in feature films.

Why does this camera have to be a production camera for feature films?

It's $3,000 for chrissakes...with a $1,000 copy of Davinci Resolve thrown in!

I think any camera can create lousy or great images.

As with any tool, it's the person behind the lens that makes great imagery.

To me it's not just shallow depth of field that creates nice looking 'filmic' images - it's also the ability to capture a wide latitude and accurate tonal range.

Personally, I think this camera makes a great replacement for many people who have been shooting on DSLRs.

Even without a RAW workflow.

Having 10-bit ProRes422HQ recording on board is a huge leap in capture quality from the usual highly compressed h264 of a large sensor DSLR.

I think the popularity of DSLR cameras has to do with the sweet spot of image quality AND affordability.

Probably not as many people rushing out to buy the new Canon 1D-C at $12,000, even with it's larger sensor.

Yes - the BMCC is not perfect. and there is room for some improvements. Looking forward to .v2

And, actually, Blackmagic did consult with a real working cinematographer in creating this camera.

Look up John Brawley.

Greg

Ah, the old "BMCC killer features" are actually "limitations" canard!

Hey, anonymous ConstantProduction, please read this:
http://herefortheweather.wordpress.com/ ... tions-not/

The BMCC's alleged limitations (e.g.: killer features) are not a barrier to your success. And BMD has a well-established track record of improving their products over time, including (already) the BMCC.

Cheers.

Nicely said, Peter.

Man ever since this camera was announced with the word "RAW" everyone went up in a huge hissyfit. It's unbelievable.

If the adage of "you get what you pay for" is true, and it very much so is in this industry, then all you have to do is look at the price tag. It's $3000. It's a prosumer camera with cool potential. I'm not gonna sit here and defend their launch strategy, which everyone pretty much agrees is in shambles, but it's downright ridiculous to be so demanding and critical of a product that delivers this much at this price range.

I can confidently say, if that this BMCC came out as the "FULL HD 422 Prores HQ 10bit camera", and not the 2.5kraw cinema camera, you would likely have NOT made this post and it would have still had quite a bit of hype.

Again, its a $3000 camera, comparing its functionality to 50-120k machines is just plain silly.

It's flaws can be worked around and it still remains a beacon of home for DSLR indie filmmakers wanting an upgrade at a linear price path.

12 angry men was shot on terrible equipment. Battlefield Los Angeles was shot on magnificent equipment. Guess which one is the better film. Content is king, and anyone whining about the potential negative impact of a modern cinema camera on their film, hasn't figured this out yet.

All this talk about what constitutes film quality is a red herring.

People have actually shot features on the lowly 5D.

28 Days Later was shot on standard definition XL1s (with it's crappy immense depth of field)!!

No one complained about the quality of the filmmaking.

Get out there and write great, compelling scripts, get good actors, create amazing lighting.

The tools aren't stopping you.

Get on with it!!

Why does this camera have to be a production camera for feature films?

For what do you need 2.5K RAW? What is your end delivery?

To me it's not just shallow depth of field that creates nice looking 'filmic' images - it's also the ability to capture a wide latitude and accurate tonal range.

Completely agree, but then there's the design issues.

I think the popularity of DSLR cameras has to do with the sweet spot of image quality AND affordability.

You get better image quality with videocameras (at the time they released the DSLR's. It was all about the 35mm and ease of use with lenses.

Yes - the BMCC is not perfect. and there is room for some improvements. Looking forward to .v2

Exactly, and that is exactly the point of this thread. It might sound harsh, but trust me when I say there is a lot of truth in my points about design. I've worked as a DIT, an assistant photographer, a focus puller, cinematographer and director (in high end productions) and all I've worked with including my own experiences are a basis for this criticism and it's all for the sake of making a better camera in it's second iteration.

And, actually, Blackmagic did consult with a real working cinematographer in creating this camera.

I would assume consulting about the digital image quality. I've never heard any professionals around me say anything good about the cameras design and workflow.

he BMCC's alleged limitations (e.g.: killer features) are not a barrier to your success. And BMD has a well-established track record of improving their products over time, including (already) the BMCC.

I'm quite successful working with Red and Alexa, I just want a camera that is cheaper but gives similar quality. BMCC is an "almost". And I don't really see the point about that article, it's still a lousy camera for practical feature film work.

but it's downright ridiculous to be so demanding and critical of a product that delivers this much at this price range.

The criticism of the canon cameras made Canon go into production of real cinema cameras. It was the "we can't do this" with the DSLR's that made them go into that business. So yeah, I find being critical as a professional to improve the industry. I see no point in celibrating just because it's 2.5K raw for a low price.
As I said erlier you recently could buy a Red One MX for around 4500 USD, compare that to the BMCC.

if that this BMCC came out as the "FULL HD 422 Prores HQ 10bit camera", and not the 2.5kraw cinema camera, you would likely have NOT made this post and it would have still had quite a bit of hype.

Of course I would have made the same post, what do you mean? It's still a lousy design. It's not all about the compression... that is... uh, really the point of my post.

Again, its a $3000 camera, comparing its functionality to 50-120k machines is just plain silly.

Have you really checked the prices for those "machines"? As earlier mentioned, Red sold out their Red One MX's for around 4500 USD. Their Scarlet full production package is around 16 000 USD, don't see how those end up in your "50-120K" range.

It's flaws can be worked around and it still remains a beacon of home for DSLR indie filmmakers wanting an upgrade at a linear price path.

Completely agree, but I'm not a DSLR filmmaker and I'm trying to point out that it IS possible to make a better competitor to the Red's and Alexas if the design is better, 35mm isn't the greatest issue here, it's the design or rather the functinality in design for productions. You don't have to spend thousands of dollars to create a better design more in line of what professionals need. This camera IS a professional camera, it's meant for professionals to use and I know many professionals who wouldn't use this because it has a bad design, not because of image quality.

12 angry men was shot on terrible equipment. Battlefield Los Angeles was shot on magnificent equipment. Guess which one is the better film. Content is king, and anyone whining about the potential negative impact of a modern cinema camera on their film, hasn't figured this out yet.

Your point being? We are speaking about a tool, as cinematographers/directors, content does not have to do with this discussion. That argument is just reaching for straws to bash back. The tool, tis camera, is still lousy in it's production functinality. So I want the version 2 to be better, that is my point. Back to drawing board, I don't want a new camera with the same lousy design but with more resolution etc. I rather have the same internal processing but all the features we need as professionals on set.

All this talk about what constitutes film quality is a red herring.

I'm talking about production, has nothing to do with "film-like" quality. As for 35mm DOF, it's a tool that many cinematographers like to use... and I'm not speaking of amateur filmmakers.

28 Days Later was shot on standard definition XL1s (with it's crappy immense depth of field)!!

Once again, what is the point of these arguments? What does they have to do with this camera and it's design? This discussion doesn't have anything to do with content. But for the record, the XL1 is a better designed camera for that type of production... it even got a viewfinder!

No one complained about the quality of the filmmaking.
Get out there and write great, compelling scripts, get good actors, create amazing lighting.The tools aren't stopping you.
Get on with it!!

What are you talking about? I'm a professional working with this stuff, I'd like to be able to give clients quality. If you are an independent filmmaker and you are happy with this camera, great!
But this thread was started because this camera doesn't work well in the professional world where Red's and Alexa's dominate. This is what I want, I want to be able to bring such quality to clients, I want it to compete with Red and Alexa and if it had better design, if it had a 35mm sensor, it would. If you are happy... good, but I'm not, I see much to be improved and that is what I'm trying to say.

I agree! While I like this camera a lot and would love to buy it right now, I can't until BlackMagic make the necessary upgrades.

1. Full Frame 36x24mm CMOS.
2. "Better Audio Capabilities" to capture audio (yes we use our field recorders but for those quick captures it will nice to have good camera audio also).
3. Internal Battery (big mistake) we filmmakers need more than 90 minutes of battery life, therefore we need to be able to insert another battery after one goes dead.
4. Please add a firmware update for shooting beyond 30fps, we love slow motion.

Right now I love my DSLRs but I really like this BlackMagic Cinema Camera also and I can't wait for BlackMagic to add these upgrades to this camera.

You're welcome to add your BMCC feature requests to the list here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=265

BMD has already implemented several features requested by users & potential customers, features not described in the original BMCC product announcement or spec sheet. BMD does listen, and they do improve their products over time.

Meanwhile, in general, the sooner you place a pre-order for a BMCC, the sooner you'll get one.

My advice is to concentrate most of your efforts on what a camera can do, and what you can achieve with it, and far less what you perceive as a camera's "limitations".

The BMCC, as-is, has extraordinary capabilities (including industry-leading software!) for an incredibly low price. These should keep you too busy to have much time to complain about what it can't do.

The BMCC's only real practical limitation is that it's currently in such short supply, either to purchase or rent. Given the continuing strong demand for the camera and its capabilities, it'll likely be some time before supply catches up with that demand. If you want one, get your BMCC pre-order in now, or rent one if you can. If not, don't. It's not complicated.

Meanwhile, I suspect BMD and other successful companies are working on future products, same as always.

I can't imagine anyone that's working in the same industry that I am (narrative, commercial/advert) complaining about a camera not having an interchangeable internal battery.

That's a pretty no-budget-rarely-work-on-anything-serious way of thinking.

Name one cinema camera that actually has an internal battery to begin with.

Now name one that most people buy a Bebob plate for so that the camera never goes down.

I'll give you a google headstart and three day lead to collect your data. =P

The Trolling continues.

I held back from posting because I didn't have anything constructive to say, but now that Kholi has said what was on my mind...

I guess it's easy for me to talk because my camera has arrived, but man, what's the deal with the endless complaints? I have so much gratitude for what BMD has delivered at such a low price... at any price!

For what a lot of what is being asked for here, you could expect to add at least another zero to the price, and then some. I think it's an amazing design; so I need an external battery, like any other pro camera. Big freaking deal! I just can't respect the opinions of people who make such insubstantial arguments.

Happy now? You got a reaction. Now get off your ass, and try to accomplish something worthwhile like the folks at BMD have. Not that there's a chance of that actually happening.

BMD wanted to build an awesome camera for a price.

They had 3k as their target price point.

They wanted to do

1. Uncompressed
2. RAW
3. High DR.

For that price point this was what they could do. You're pre-supposing BMD didn't understand the other "features" you want, but they actually do. They just couldn't fit them into this price point when They addressed the three very admiral features above.

The fact is, there isn't a larger sensor that can do all of this for the price ( you didn't specify but I assume you mean super 35 and not 135)

As to it's suitability for day in day out production....there's another thread here where users are talking about shooting hours of material daily.

I myself am onto my third national episodic TV drama series. I've been using the BMCC mostly every single day as a B roll camera amongst Epic and Alexa. I've also often even used it to shoot whole scenes where it's the only camera used. I've gotten shots that I could have only gotten because of the BMCC.

I have directors that now suggest using it during blocking when they think it would be the best camera to use. Even though we have four x EPICs sitting there as our main cameras.

It's also worth noting your RED prices were for so called battle tested bodies. In red speak that means second hand. And you can no longer get them. They aren't making them. They also don't have internal batteries.

Red also has their quirks. How about the 2 min start up time on the red one ? The re-start required if you flick between HDRx ? Or that plugging or unplugging a HDMI connection while rolling can cause dropouts that arent even reported by the camera ? thefan that you constantly battle to keep from turning on during a long take or even when reherasing is so loud actors ask you if somethigns wrong with the camera. Right now none of my epic bodies can do better than 2 frames of TC sync between each other. REd have been working on trying to fix this for me for months. Meanwhile a TC clock into an audio connector on my BMCC means that I can do perfect TC sync right now with the BMCC.

All cameras have issues. If you like the upsides enough you find a way to work with them. Mostly I'm camera agnostic. I use them all for what they're good for and The BMCC certainly has a place on my set.

JB
( currently with 36 broadcast hours of TV drama shot using the BMCC )

FINALLY something I can use from this ....

JB - Meanwhile a TC clock into an audio connector on my BMCC means that I can do perfect TC sync right now with the BMCC.

Can you give some more detail on this method of timecode synch'ing the BMCC please if you have time.

FINALLY something I can use from this ....

JB - Meanwhile a TC clock into an audio connector on my BMCC means that I can do perfect TC sync right now with the BMCC.

Can you give some more detail on this method of timecode synch'ing the BMCC please if you have time.

2013-01-23 13.12.14 by John Brawley, on Flickr

Basically what I do is stick an Aaton GMT clock onto one of the audio channels of the camera and record SMPTE code. You can use an Ambient or deneke clock if you wish.

The clever dudes in the Resolve team just recently added (at my request) a TC sync function where you can substitute the capture TC for the TC on the audio track.

Avid also allow for this as AUX timecode sync.

jb

Don't like the camera?
Don't buy the camera.

Don't think the camera is worth the price?
Don't buy the camera.

Think the RED ONE is better?
Buy the RED ONE.

Angry that Blackmagic have had shipping problems?
Cancel your preorder and buy another camera.

Don't think the Blackmagic Cinema Camera will suit your workflow?
Don't buy the camera.

I do not even understand why we are discussing this.

Im only waiting for one firmware update that will make this conplete for me
Audio issues & audio metering.

Otherwise others arr quirks i dont mind having

No shallow depth of field?
I'm going to laugh at you when I get my M43 BMCC and put Voigtlander 17mm, 25mm, and 42mm super shallow DOF lenses on it and shoot away all day....

A RED MX is somehow cheaper?
That is crazy pants. By the time you added on all the RED necessities that ANY of their camera's really need for shooting you have easily doubled the price. Lets not even get into REDCODE and proprietary compression schemes.

The sensor size isn't 35mm.
I could write a dissertation on this, but I really don't feel like it. It's the 21'st century and sensor sizes don't mean squat. The only scenario I feel is relevant to sensor size is the size of photosites, which take in a lot more light the bigger they are. However, being in the 21st century I don't imagine this to be a problem much longer. In summary, if you cant shoot what you need based on the current sensor size, then I'd have to question your creative limitations before I asserted that the problem is a sensor size limitation.

ConstantProduction
I cannot see how this camera can work on a 11 hour per day, 30-day production. Because if it's only for shorter stuff

What makes you say this? This assumption is based on what experience you've had with this camera?

What we can point to in the very short history of this camera is John Brawley's use of the camera in his various productions. For what I can see from having my BMCC is it's very solid build and there is nothing about this camera that would give me pause to use it on any project. Are you basing your opinions of this camera from comments by folks that might not have actually used the camera?

My suggestion is to wait..

Wait until the camera has been used for a feature length film (I have no doubt that it will) and see what the filmmaker has to say about their experience with using the camera.

Wait until the findings of a very real cinema camera test are published pitting the BMCC against Arri, RED, Sony, Canon, 35mm film.. etc by a Shane Hurlbut, asc and his crew in the camera selection process for an upcoming film. http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2013/02/the-black-magic-cinema-camera/

If you are still dead set that you simply need a camera with a super35 sensor.. there are plenty of cameras to choose from.. you'll just be paying a lot more for them.
Good luck on your future endeavors and happy filmmaking!

wow, just read this whole thread and it sounds like ConstantProduction has his mind made up. If he waits they will build it................... but it could be a long wait. I'd rather be in constant production.

It seems strange that the BMCC must fit every criteria that the OP has outlined. How can one criticize an item that they have no extensive experience with?

If you can't get shallow DOF with a roughly micro four thirds sized senor you've got problems...

Blackmagic saw a void in the market left by the unreleased original Red Scarlet and jumped on it. I'm happy they did so. Is their first camera perfect? No. But for the price who can argue?

You're welcome to find a used Red One if you're so obsessed with all the features you wish the BMCC had. I think you'll find it'll be far more expensive to make it operational, and it has its own quirks that are annoying to deal with.

These are just tools people, come on!

ConstantProduction
I cannot see how this camera can work on a 11 hour per day, 30-day production. Because if it's only for shorter stuff

What makes you say this? This assumption is based on what experience you've had with this camera?

What we can point to in the very short history of this camera is John Brawley's use of the camera in his various productions. For what I can see from having my BMCC is it's very solid build and there is nothing about this camera that would give me pause to use it on any project. Are you basing your opinions of this camera from comments by folks that might not have actually used the camera?

My suggestion is to wait..

Wait until the camera has been used for a feature length film (I have no doubt that it will) and see what the filmmaker has to say about their experience with using the camera.

Wait until the findings of a very real cinema camera test are published pitting the BMCC against Arri, RED, Sony, Canon, 35mm film.. etc by a Shane Hurlbut, asc and his crew in the camera selection process for an upcoming film. http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2013/02/the-black-magic-cinema-camera/

If you are still dead set that you simply need a camera with a super35 sensor.. there are plenty of cameras to choose from.. you'll just be paying a lot more for them.
Good luck on your future endeavors and happy filmmaking!

We just finished shooting a 13 day documentary shoot on the BMCC EF in Berlin, every day at least 12 hours. By accepting the limits of this little box and rigging it properly in a cage, have the right rods and clamps (which you would also need with an Epic / Scarlet etc. ) we can say that concerning handling and durability - even under rough shooting conditions - it stands up (surprisingly) good in comparison to cameras like RED Epic etc.. We had never to deal with issues that made us want to have e.g. an Epic instead. You just have to take the camera as what it is: a quite good sensor paired with a recorder. Everything else you need you have to add. Its just not a ENG camera, which has all implemented. So a good rigging was the key for us to make it work. That starts with the right viewfinder and its fixture to the cage and ends with a appropriate battery system. But that means also it is really versatile: if you e.g. need a small setup for shooting inside a car - just remove everything around and still you have about one hour of battery. All in all we never regretted having chosen this camera, knowing also cameras like Alexa and Epic etc.

I'm going to laugh at you when I get my M43 BMCC and put Voigtlander 17mm, 25mm, and 42mm super shallow DOF lenses on it and shoot away all day....

So, is it sharp, without chromatics and vingette?

That is crazy pants. By the time you added on all the RED necessities that ANY of their camera's really need for shooting you have easily doubled the price. Lets not even get into REDCODE and proprietary compression schemes.

Yeah and then you get 4K and 2K 120fps, s35 sensor, 14 stops, the list goes on. What you get for a little higher price is much much more then "just another camera".
As for REDCODE, I've worked with Red cameras since built 15 and I've never had any problems with workflow for any of the projects. It all depends on how much you are willing to get "into it". If you want quality, you always need to work and build knowledge... there is no "point and shoot" to get quality, ever.

I could write a dissertation on this, but I really don't feel like it. It's the 21'st century and sensor sizes don't mean squat. The only scenario I feel is relevant to sensor size is the size of photosites, which take in a lot more light the bigger they are. However, being in the 21st century I don't imagine this to be a problem much longer. In summary, if you cant shoot what you need based on the current sensor size, then I'd have to question your creative limitations before I asserted that the problem is a sensor size limitation.

So in generall, you question my creative limitations because I have a professional and personal liking of shallow DOF? If you really look at it straight forward, you question me for criticising a limitation and then criticise me for being limited in my creativity (without knowing anything about me)? You do realise that you practise the same behavior as you are criticising?
As for sensor sizes. As you say, you get a better "reading of light" with a larger sensor. I actually prefer 65mm to tell the truth. But my opinion is that s35 is the middle ground enabling shallow DOF and deeper DOF by choice rather then by hardware. You try to defend hardware limitations by questioning limitations in creativity... in my opinion a strange way to discuss a camera technology.

I do not even understand why we are discussing this.

It's about the next camera... that's the title, "The next black magic cinema camera". So I don't know what you refer to by saying that you don't know why we are discussing this.... I don't know what you are discussing?

What makes you say this? This assumption is based on what experience you've had with this camera?

Based on my experience as an assistant photographer, focus puller, DIT, cinematographer, director, editor and colorist which I've professionally worked as since the dawn of digital cinema. And I've played around with it as well and I stand by my opinion that it needs a serious rework and improvement for most of the design. s35 versus s16 is a brawl many in here like to focus on, but my main issues are with the design really.

My suggestion is to wait..

That I will. As for anyone making a feature film. Of course it will be used by some to make feature films, it's not impossible, nothing is impossible. But is it a sustainable good choice for productions? No.
And I really think that for any serious filmmaker it will be more of a limitation then a blessing to work with this camera on a feature film. The time and energy it takes to manage such a production, you want a camera that can hold up against that and the issues I have with this first version of the camera makes it a bad choice in my view. That's why I want version 2 of this camera to really be designed for real heavy work.

wow, just read this whole thread and it sounds like ConstantProduction has his mind made up. If he waits they will build it................... but it could be a long wait. I'd rather be in constant production.

Made my mind up about what? That I want a redesign of the second iteration of the BMCC? Yes.
Other then that, yeah, I AM in constant production.

How can one criticize an item that they have no extensive experience with?

Based on pretty extensive experience with every camera on tha market during both independent feature films, large feature films, small projects, no budgets, high budgets etc. I know what is needed on set and what I've seen and what I've tried, points to this version of the BMCC to not being optimal for many types of productions.

You're welcome to find a used Red One if you're so obsessed with all the features you wish the BMCC had. I think you'll find it'll be far more expensive to make it operational, and it has its own quirks that are annoying to deal with.

Thing is that I'm already working with Red Epics, Alexas, Phantom and so on. What I'm pointing out here is that while I do understand the "void filled" by the BMCC, there are design issues that could have been fixed to make the camera more ready for extensive production work. BlackMagic could take over the market if they really make the second version of this camera more suited for real production.

All in all we never regretted having chosen this camera, knowing also cameras like Alexa and Epic etc.

Happy for you, good to hear. Though, I still want things improved on it for the work I do and I need it to be as reliable as other cameras, which it ain't yet. So, waiting for version 2.

All in all we never regretted having chosen this camera, knowing also cameras like Alexa and Epic etc.

Happy for you, good to hear. Though, I still want things improved on it for the work I do and I need it to be as reliable as other cameras, which it ain't yet. So, waiting for version 2.[/quote]

I understand your point. And again: this camera ("version 1") is for sure not a "all in one wonder". But concerning its reliability it is on par with the big boys. We were working as well in the cold, snow and rain as also in a quite warm tungsten lit set (about 30`celsius). And (not like the RED ONE e.g. in its early days...) we never had to deal with any dropped frames, software hang up etc.
When we got the camera we were also a little concerned to take it as a A camera on a good payed gig but it is not like the RED ONE which had a lot of firmware related problems when it came out.
For us a camera is just a tool - we choose it to fit the needs of a project (this sometimes includes also some thoughts about budget...) and try not to decide on a emotional basis. In this case I was even happy to have a camera with a little more depth of field (without having to stop down to a f:5.6 or f: 8)
And yes, there are many things to be improved with this camera (or the next model to come up) but we never expected it to work out so reliable. And yes, I still love to work with the ALEXA because its "all in one box". But when it came to shoot inside the car the ALEXA would have been just too big. Thats where we learned to love the BMCC

It seems strange that the BMCC must fit every criteria that the OP has outlined. How can one criticize an item that they have no extensive experience with?

And how is it that one can glorify something they have no extensive experience with? The "armchair quarterback" philosophy appears to work both ways, now doesnt it?

Way to stay civil and hold your own constantproduction, its nausiating sometimes the level of fan boyism that goes on if somebody dare say something that threatens some folks view of this camera around here.

I thought your post and questions were valid and constructive. Hopefully BM will have some news for the future of things at the upcoming NAB show.

Ladies, Gentlemen, I suggest you just go here: ucp.php?i=zebra&mode=foes

Add "ConstantProduction" to your foes list, and you will never have to see his posts again. Maybe the RED forum is the right place for him.

Constant, there's a camera for every job and a job for every camera. I prepaid, in full, and am still waiting. And I'll use this camera to film everything. Commercials, features, TV. I see the solutions that this camera provides and workarounds for everything you've listed. In fact, I'm ready to buy another one and haven't even shot a single frame.

Best of luck in your search.

Constant, there's a camera for every job and a job for every camera. I prepaid, in full, and am still waiting.

Happy for you, I do not condescend people's choice or uses with this camera, I'm just pointing out what I think is lacking in this camera, based on my experience as a filmmaker.

Add "ConstantProduction" to your foes list, and you will never have to see his posts again.

Actually the only threatening and hostile person in here right now is you, a perfect example of fanboyism hatred when someone criticise something. If you are happy with the camera, then good for you, but the question is what your problem with criticism is? I won't take away your precious camera, right?

And how is it that one can glorify something they have no extensive experience with? The "armchair quarterback" philosophy appears to work both ways, now doesnt it?

Spot on

Way to stay civil and hold your own constantproduction, its nausiating sometimes the level of fan boyism that goes on if somebody dare say something that threatens some folks view of this camera around here.
I thought your post and questions were valid and constructive. Hopefully BM will have some news for the future of things at the upcoming NAB show.

Thank you, very nice to see someone who understands the concerns and problems I brought up.
And my purpose is exactly that, to have BM look over the camera once again and not only add new internal features but also look at the camera as a whole. Good first step, looking forward to the second version.

For us a camera is just a tool - we choose it to fit the needs of a project

Exactly and while this camera has it's places, I'm really trying to make a point of it becoming a better and more cheap competitor to cameras like the Alexa. I really love working with that camera, but it's truly overpriced for it's quality and this goes for Canon's as well. Red's cameras are more in line of a "normal" price-range and 16000 USD for a production ready Scarlet is really cheap for what you get with it. But I still believe that some of the big features of the Scarlet could be put into a camera for a much lower price and the BMCC has all the potential to be that camera in it's second version, if BM really looks into those possibilites.

But when it came to shoot inside the car the ALEXA would have been just too big.

Have you tried shooting with an Epic/Scarlet inside a car? The camera body can be stripped down to a smaller size then the BMCC. Also, you could use the pancake lenses on those bodies to really get it small. It also holds up better to the Alexa material.

In this case I was even happy to have a camera with a little more depth of field (without having to stop down to a f:5.6 or f: 8)

I agree on this though, it's good to have that choice. But you could also calculate noise and ISO together with stopping down. A larger sensor gives more flexibility in terms of noise floor and you could get the same result. Also, with a larger sensor you get wider images with faster lenses. A 50mm could be brought to F1.0 while wider lenses hardly get that low. So if you need speed in low light but don't want a tele lens "feel" then it's easier with a larger sensor. You could use the faster 16mm lenses, but the quality of them might not be the same.

Jeez... I can never really grasp how people like to spend so much of their precious (at least I would think so) lifetime to discuss if a fork is better than a knife, or a spoon wouldn't be even better... *sigh*

Hi ConstantProduction: Did you add your BMCC feature suggestions yet to the thread which hundreds before you have already used?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=265

Like many of us, you want the BMCC to be better. Good. I get that. So, please post your specific suggestions in the established thread. Having all of the suggestions in one place probably helps BMD.

In addition, I look forward to reading your future posts in which you share hard-won practical knowledge about film & video production.

That's why I enjoy posts by John Brawley and others: They primarily focus on how to get things done with what's currently available -- and why it matters. They spend relatively little time posting about what might or could be (although I enjoy those posts, too).

Cheers.

lifetime to discuss if a fork is better than a knife

At least that isn't what I do, I want to discuss how the fork gets pointier and the knife gets sharper

So, please post your specific suggestions in the established thread

I think I wanted more of a discussion about issues/pros/cons the current and the next, comparing to other cameras among users and people in here rather then just a feature request, but I will add to that part of the forum with my suggestions.

They primarily focus on how to get things done with what's currently available

Understand that, but this thread wasn't about that. I'm not against, for example, making feature films with this camera, it's quite possible. But I think a discussion on why this camera is probably a bad choice for feature films is also needed.

Have you tried shooting with an Epic/Scarlet inside a car? The camera body can be stripped down to a smaller size then the BMCC. Also, you could use the pancake lenses on those bodies to really get it small. It also holds up better to the Alexa material.

That's not my experience. The EPIC is heavier and larger. Theres's no way you could safely rig it to a windscreen like I have here for example, especially the one over the steering wheel. The camera's weight makes it much harder to do safely and the raking of the windscreen means it will be too tall. I shoot a Series right no using EPIC and the main reason we shoot BMCC is cars....


2012-12-19 16.27.47 by John Brawley, on Flickr

And even if you take the Vlock off the back, it's still bigger than the BMCC.


2012-10-04 17.21.13 by John Brawley, on Flickr

It seems strange that the BMCC must fit every criteria that the OP has outlined. How can one criticize an item that they have no extensive experience with?

And how is it that one can glorify something they have no extensive experience with? The "armchair quarterback" philosophy appears to work both ways, now doesnt it?

Thanks for taking me out of context. Appreciate it. I never glorified it, rather appealed to the OP to actually use it before passing judgement.

Good day.

And even if you take the Vlock off the back, it's still bigger than the BMCC.

Just slightly on the depth, but it's thinner top and bottom and use it with a wide pancake-lens and you get it smaller (there are no pancakes for s16's yet). In the car example you got quite large lenses on.
It's possible to size the epic down more then that, but yes, it's almost a draw between them. Although you get much more out of the Epic and in a car scene you don't need to change aparture with so many stops of DR as the Epic gives you. That's another bright side of shooting with it if the light changes during the drive. But if it works better for you, then there's nothing to say
But the Epic doesn't weight that much more, like 1lb or something, use a pancake-lens and it will weight even less then those BM's on the windshield.

Thanks for taking me out of context. Appreciate it. I never glorified it, rather appealed to the OP to actually use it before passing judgement.

The same goes the other way...

I think a large portion of disagreements you are getting here ConstantProduction is the fact that you have dismissed the BMCC's as a usable camera because you don't feel that it can hold up to a rigorous production schedule (even thought you've never used the camera) while the folks that are currently using the camera in the very production schedule you are describing are telling you that you are wrong. the camera is just as durable and usable as RED and ARRI and works well in a full production schedule. It might not fit your specific production needs, but to dismiss the camera across the board because YOU don't feel it's capable is absurd and frankly, arrogant.. This camera is proving itself each day as people are putting it to use and even now turning the head's of many seasoned professionals that might not have considered it until they've seen it's amazing results

If I did not like camera x.. I would not waste the time going to camera x web forum and comment about how much I did not like camera x. But this is what you are doing.. but even worse!

You are making these sweeping assumptions about a camera you have never used! How ridiculous! How can anyone take your comments seriously? Anyone that has any real experience in this business knows better than making such uninformed statements on an open forum without actually having used the camera. That sort of stuff is reserved for the YouTube trolls..

Another thing that is going against you that prevents anyone taking you seriously is the fact that you are not following the forum rules and providing your real name.

Just slightly on the depth, but it's thinner top and bottom and use it with a wide pancake-lens and you get it smaller (there are no pancakes for s16's yet). In the car example you got quite large lenses on.

Well depth is what matters. So for starters the EPIC isn't really smaller is it ? Because on the rake of a window on the dashboard that's what's important. Lenses are the same for each in the given circumstances, and is a less critical dimension. Both cameras can do EF or PL with a slight difference in crop factor.

Although you get much more out of the Epic and in a car scene you don't need to change aparture with so many stops of DR as the Epic gives you.

I'll have to disagree with you on the DR differences. It's not my experience, nor is it the experience of others.
http://www.ryanewalters.com/Blog/blog.p ... 0Elemental

But the Epic doesn't weight that much more, like 1lb or something, use a pancake-lens and it will weight even less then those BM's on the windshield.

Which magic pancake lenses are you talking about ? There's ONE lens that you use when shooting car interiors ? Are you talking about shooting all your interiors on a 40mm lens ? The same lens I can put on the BMCC ? Aren't you stretching a bit of a long bow to compensate for the weight of the camera by forcing all your car shooting onto a single lens because it's thin ? Most EF lenses weigh nothing in the scheme of things. I have a 28mm CP in one of those images and a 15-85 EFs Zoom. It's the only EF lens I have. It could have easily been a prime, that's very nearly the same size as your beloved pancake.

The fact is, the EPIC weighs more when setup like for like. The extra weight is enough to mean that I can't use suction mounts safely and have to go to hard mount rigging and putting mount points into the cars to take the weight. So while I COULD do that, it takes a whole lot longer to do it, and the fact remains, the EPIC won't fit behind the steering wheel on the car's I'm shooting in, no matter what lens you use.

So instead, I use the camera that has to me is faster, smaller, has better DR and actually has nicer colour science.

Clearly you've made up your mind and that's fine. I shoot EPIC for all the things it's good at, and will do so till something better comes along. I'm camera agnostic and happily use whatever I need to get the scene done and best serves the production. There's plenty of stuff that isn't right with the BMCC, but it doesn't prevent me from using it and getting shots I couldn't get with another camera. You suck up the downsides and use it for it's upsides.

jb