BMCC Killer?

The place for questions about shooting with Blackmagic Cameras.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Scott Pultz

  • Posts: 556
  • Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:36 am
  • Location: Seattle

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 5:52 am

On one of the videos I was noticing what looked like vertical banding in the image. It appeared to be at a fixed pixel interval. Could just be my player though. Nobody else has seemed to say anything.

The downer is that when recording at higher resolutions in 1:1 mode, you must be in the 5X zoom mode on the camera. This means that you won't be able to judge your framing very well.

If the ML team can get as far as they have, then the Canon team could have implemented this if they wanted, I suspect!
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2549
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 5:54 am

Scott Pultz wrote:If the ML team can get as far as they have, then the Canon team could have implemented this if they wanted, I suspect!


Implementing this might undermine sales of their more expensive cameras, so my guess is that Canon would prefer that their dSLRs not be able to record decent video. :)
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline

Taikonaut

  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:36 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 6:08 am

I don't care if it is RAW or not as long as it is good enough to make the cut. It looks promising. For the budget guy who already own a 5DMkII/III ML hack could affect BMCC sales.
Offline
User avatar

Rudy Satria

  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:01 pm
  • Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 7:03 am

I hope BMD could see this and make a fast breakthrough if BMCC still wants their position in the DSLR market regarding BMCC appear as an advanced cinema camera in a range of DSLR budget. Do you guys think that BMD has already made an improvement regarding this issue?
Rudy Iskandar
Offline
User avatar

Rudy Satria

  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:01 pm
  • Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 7:20 am

Taikonaut wrote:I don't care if it is RAW or not as long as it is good enough to make the cut. It looks promising. For the budget guy who already own a 5DMkII/III ML hack could affect BMCC sales.


I think i agree with you. They don't really care if its true raw or not. What they get is a good and promising image result from 5D mk III with ML and in my opinion BMCC will be failed to get their position "IF" BMCC not ready to improve their features regarding to this issue.
Rudy Iskandar
Offline
User avatar

Jace Ross

  • Posts: 426
  • Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:16 am
  • Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 1:09 pm

rudysatria wrote:I hope BMD could see this and make a fast breakthrough if BMCC still wants their position in the DSLR market regarding BMCC appear as an advanced cinema camera in a range of DSLR budget. Do you guys think that BMD has already made an improvement regarding this issue?


What improvement needs to be made? It shoots at more framerates on a stable firmware to a proper RAW format using SSDs on the same lens mount. Not really sure how you could think the 5DMIII is doing better. It's just cementing it's place as a good value DSLR for video.
BMPCC, FD Canon 28mm f2.8, Tokina 80-200mm F4, Tamron 70-300mm f4 C Canon J6x12 MFT SLR Magic 17mm T1.6, Sigma 19mm f2.8, Samyang 7.5mm f3.5
Rode VideoMic, Viewfactor Cage/Handle/Grip/Perspex backing
Offline

Charles Appleboot

  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 12:49 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 1:24 pm

Andrew Raid says:

"Quick correction on the 5D Mark III blog, the recording format is RGGB raw not YUV 422"
Offline
User avatar

João Gomes

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:48 pm
  • Location: Lisboa, PORTUGAL

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 1:29 pm

If this gets out soon and stable enough i will seriously consider cancelling with BlackMagic.
Full frame, low light sensitivity and this kind of latitude, plus the fact that i can walk in any store and buy it, are becoming more and more attractive.
Cameraman/Editor
Offline

javierdpvelez

  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 2:02 pm

João Gomes wrote:If this gets out soon and stable enough i will seriously consider cancelling with BlackMagic.
Full frame, low light sensitivity and this kind of latitude, plus the fact that i can walk in any store and buy it, are becoming more and more attractive.


I'm kinda thinking the same thing. Been waiting for the MFT BMCC since December (long wait but not as long as some of you guys) and kinda thinking that the extra cash for a 5D MK3 isn't too big of a difference at this point. Maybe it's the wait and the non-updates working together to make me want pull the trigger on the Canon.

What does concern me at this point is that there is no moving footage or low light footage. I'd like to see some of that. As well as footage at higher resolutions (the BMCC is 2.5k raw).

If things continue to move they way they are moving though, it looks like I might need to start selling my MFT glass.
Offline
User avatar

Rudy Satria

  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:01 pm
  • Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 6:33 pm

Jace Ross wrote:
rudysatria wrote:I hope BMD could see this and make a fast breakthrough if BMCC still wants their position in the DSLR market regarding BMCC appear as an advanced cinema camera in a range of DSLR budget. Do you guys think that BMD has already made an improvement regarding this issue?


What improvement needs to be made? It shoots at more framerates on a stable firmware to a proper RAW format using SSDs on the same lens mount. Not really sure how you could think the 5DMIII is doing better. It's just cementing it's place as a good value DSLR for video.


i'm happy with your response, hoping that im not going to regret pulling the trigger on bmcc.
Rudy Iskandar
Offline
User avatar

Trevor Zuck

  • Posts: 230
  • Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 8:37 pm
  • Location: the 515

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 8:06 pm

You guys are aware at how not cost effective shooting 14-bit RAW video on the 5D would be right? CF cards are crazy expensive in comparison to SSDs, and the most space you'll get on a CF is what 128GB? it's like $500, or $130 for a fast enough 64GB SD card. or $480GB SSD for $330 or a 120GB SSD for $90.
- TZ

Visual FX and Post Production Artist
Screenscape Studios
Offline
User avatar

Clark Fable

  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:13 pm
  • Location: Cambridge, MA, USA

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 8:28 pm

Everyone needs to take a deep breath.

I've seen some very crisp shots with the hack so far, but I've yet to see anything that puts it on par with the BMCC. But it's early, if this thing can really compete we'll know in due course.

And for the people smack talking J. Brawley on this thread, let's try and not scare away one of the more talented pros on this site.
Offline

bhook

  • Posts: 1024
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:19 pm

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 8:35 pm

Clark Fable wrote:And for the people smack talking J. Brawley on this thread, let's try and not scare away one of the more talented pros on this site.


If I were JB, I would be insulted by this...You make him sound like some sort of mouse or something. :?
Offline

Iver Heen Ask

  • Posts: 105
  • Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 7:58 pm

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 9:38 pm

TZuck wrote:You guys are aware at how not cost effective shooting 14-bit RAW video on the 5D would be right? CF cards are crazy expensive in comparison to SSDs, and the most space you'll get on a CF is what 128GB? it's like $500, or $130 for a fast enough 64GB SD card. or $480GB SSD for $330 or a 120GB SSD for $90.


The same I was thinking, you would probably have to get the fastest cards, and they'll fill up quickly too.

But very interesting news!
I think I'll be more happy shooting on BMCC for now, but maybe in a year or two the technology and possibilites are good enough to go shoot some amazing stuff with the 5d. Maybe even larger films for the cinemas.

There is no reason rushing out all your BMCC equipment, even though you have a 5d. This breakthrough is still in an early development, and it could take some time to get reliable DSLR's shooting raw.
A good thing is that if you do switch to Canon, you'll probably still have many lenses for it.

I will go safe as always and just wait till it's ready to go.
Offline
User avatar

Peter J. DeCrescenzo

  • Posts: 2246
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:53 am
  • Location: Portland, Oregon USA

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 10:03 pm

Kholi just posted the following in the 5DM3 hack thread on BMCuser.com, and he said it was OK to repost elsewhere. I think what Kholi says is right on, so here's his post:

==========================

... feel free to quote and repost anywhere or at a later date, as it’s just me projecting:

1. COST - There were people complaining about the costs of RED in the beginning, to not only store but capture, there are people currently complaining about the cost to shoot CinemaDNG on BV1. Suddenly, though, costs are not an issue?

Doesn’t work that way. The same people complaining about the inability to afford shooting RAW will still be incapable of handling the RAW workflow. As well, I’m betting that the cost to acquire will be twice as much in comparison to BV1 and likely B4K. Maybe the cheap cards will work, and maybe you won’t lose an entire 15 minutes worth of footage to some strange communication fault. Just like the GH2 Hacks, anyone that went to try and do serious work with the “best” hacks were using the most expensive Sandisk SDXC cards. This won’t be any different.

ML enables 1920 x 1080 RAW recording on T3i, which one of those owners can actually afford to utilize RAW?

2. WORKFLOW - I don’t know the answer, but has anyone asked how long it takes to convert to DNG from the .exe program that’s running? It’s probably not TOO bad, but it’s a factor. Furthermore, we’re talking a primary userbase of people who’ve never experienced a RAW workflow. There are far more Canon DSLR owners out there that want the best, want to pay nothing for it, and quite literally have no idea what they’re getting into.

Sound familiar? That’s because there were discussions about this when BV1 was announced, right until it was shipping. It isn’t camera specific, the same applies here. The griefs of RAW are brand agnostic.

3. NOISE AND DETAIL - Oh this is a big one. Again, maybe I’m way off, but I’m actually looking forward to the major epiphany that should occur the second people begin to shoot lowlight raw with the MKIII. If I’m not totally off, here’s how it would play out:

“WHY IS THIS SO NOISEY!? THE H.264 IS CLEANER!?”

Welcome to RAW, friends. The MK3, in my opinion, was NEVER good in lowlight. Detail is horrid and color suffers drastically. So when people no longer have the benefit of in-camera noise reduction we FINALLY get to see the picture. And it’s going to be noisey, jagged, and ragged.

The Detail will be there, and it’ll probably be lost in a lot of artifacts that the internal processing gets rid of.

But that’s the best part, and why I am glad that ML did this. All of a sudden, everyone who couldn’t see the difference between MK3 detail and RED, or MK3 and BV1, will “magically” have their glasses cleared of the biased goo stuck to them. Your own camera is more detailed than what the manufacturer handed to you, now you get it, now you have it, and now you don’t want to go back to H.264.

Ever.

This is what happens to everyone that shoots RAW or even a very solid ProRes or MPEG4 (C300 right?). You see the detail, you see how much better it is than anything coming off of a DSLR, and you never want to suffer that again. Now we’re going to have an entire species of DSLR shooters that get a taste of it and either:

- Can’t afford to shoot RAW
- It isn’t stable enough to truly rely on (I’m not saying that it is not, I’m throwing out reasons that may crop up)
- It’s too noisey and they don’t want to denoise, which is part of the RAW chain to begin with.

That’s going to light an entirely different fire, one that will push some people right into a C100, C300, FS700, BV1 if they can afford it, and others into a frenzy about what the next camera had better be or we’ll burn your building down.

That last point there is why I don’t think BMD or anyone else is in a tough spot. And I’m saying this based on having experienced the growth of prosumer HD until now, first hand, and pretty much on the bleeding edge of it on every major camera release.

This is JUST me projecting, so feel free to take it with a grain of salt, and please whoever responds do it tactfully. I'm brand agnostic, I like solid imagery. If this is reliable I would use it for car mount footage, interior vehicle, etc. Tight rooms, that sort of thing intercut with BV1 footage. It's another tool, not a major artery. ...

==========================
Offline

paulkosmala

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:50 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 10:45 pm

So CF cards are too slow (and expensive)
HDMI standard Bandwidth: 2.23 Gbps.
Raw 1920x1080 video: 398,13 Mbps (~0.4 Gbps)
External recorder, (if it can buffer the writing on the recorder instead of internally on the 5d)

Am I missing something obvious here?
Offline
User avatar

Clark Fable

  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:13 pm
  • Location: Cambridge, MA, USA

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 11:15 pm

mhood wrote:
Clark Fable wrote:And for the people smack talking J. Brawley on this thread, let's try and not scare away one of the more talented pros on this site.


If I were JB, I would be insulted by this...You make him sound like some sort of mouse or something. :?


Yes, because reasonable people always get insulted when people are trying to defend them. :lol:

Of course he's not literally scared....
Offline

paulkosmala

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:50 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostMon May 13, 2013 11:48 pm

Peter J. DeCrescenzo wrote:Kholi just posted the following in the 5DM3 hack thread on BMCuser.com, and he said it was OK to repost elsewhere. I think what Kholi says is right on, so here's his post:

==========================

... feel free to quote and repost anywhere or at a later date, as it’s just me projecting:

1. COST - There were people complaining about the costs of RED in the beginning, to not only store but capture, there are people currently complaining about the cost to shoot CinemaDNG on BV1. Suddenly, though, costs are not an issue?

Doesn’t work that way. The same people complaining about the inability to afford shooting RAW will still be incapable of handling the RAW workflow. As well, I’m betting that the cost to acquire will be twice as much in comparison to BV1 and likely B4K. Maybe the cheap cards will work, and maybe you won’t lose an entire 15 minutes worth of footage to some strange communication fault. Just like the GH2 Hacks, anyone that went to try and do serious work with the “best” hacks were using the most expensive Sandisk SDXC cards. This won’t be any different.

ML enables 1920 x 1080 RAW recording on T3i, which one of those owners can actually afford to utilize RAW?

2. WORKFLOW - I don’t know the answer, but has anyone asked how long it takes to convert to DNG from the .exe program that’s running? It’s probably not TOO bad, but it’s a factor. Furthermore, we’re talking a primary userbase of people who’ve never experienced a RAW workflow. There are far more Canon DSLR owners out there that want the best, want to pay nothing for it, and quite literally have no idea what they’re getting into.

Sound familiar? That’s because there were discussions about this when BV1 was announced, right until it was shipping. It isn’t camera specific, the same applies here. The griefs of RAW are brand agnostic.

3. NOISE AND DETAIL - Oh this is a big one. Again, maybe I’m way off, but I’m actually looking forward to the major epiphany that should occur the second people begin to shoot lowlight raw with the MKIII. If I’m not totally off, here’s how it would play out:

“WHY IS THIS SO NOISEY!? THE H.264 IS CLEANER!?”

Welcome to RAW, friends. The MK3, in my opinion, was NEVER good in lowlight. Detail is horrid and color suffers drastically. So when people no longer have the benefit of in-camera noise reduction we FINALLY get to see the picture. And it’s going to be noisey, jagged, and ragged.

The Detail will be there, and it’ll probably be lost in a lot of artifacts that the internal processing gets rid of.

But that’s the best part, and why I am glad that ML did this. All of a sudden, everyone who couldn’t see the difference between MK3 detail and RED, or MK3 and BV1, will “magically” have their glasses cleared of the biased goo stuck to them. Your own camera is more detailed than what the manufacturer handed to you, now you get it, now you have it, and now you don’t want to go back to H.264.

Ever.

This is what happens to everyone that shoots RAW or even a very solid ProRes or MPEG4 (C300 right?). You see the detail, you see how much better it is than anything coming off of a DSLR, and you never want to suffer that again. Now we’re going to have an entire species of DSLR shooters that get a taste of it and either:

- Can’t afford to shoot RAW
- It isn’t stable enough to truly rely on (I’m not saying that it is not, I’m throwing out reasons that may crop up)
- It’s too noisey and they don’t want to denoise, which is part of the RAW chain to begin with.

That’s going to light an entirely different fire, one that will push some people right into a C100, C300, FS700, BV1 if they can afford it, and others into a frenzy about what the next camera had better be or we’ll burn your building down.

That last point there is why I don’t think BMD or anyone else is in a tough spot. And I’m saying this based on having experienced the growth of prosumer HD until now, first hand, and pretty much on the bleeding edge of it on every major camera release.

This is JUST me projecting, so feel free to take it with a grain of salt, and please whoever responds do it tactfully. I'm brand agnostic, I like solid imagery. If this is reliable I would use it for car mount footage, interior vehicle, etc. Tight rooms, that sort of thing intercut with BV1 footage. It's another tool, not a major artery. ...

==========================



So I was looking at BV1 for a long time, wondering what other camera came out.
Took me longer than I'd like to admit to figure out that it was referencing the BMCC V1.
Offline

Andrew Deme

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:52 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 12:41 am

paulkosmala wrote:So CF cards are too slow (and expensive)
HDMI standard Bandwidth: 2.23 Gbps.
Raw 1920x1080 video: 398,13 Mbps (~0.4 Gbps)
External recorder, (if it can buffer the writing on the recorder instead of internally on the 5d)

Am I missing something obvious here?


Maybe, here is my 10 cents....

1. A small group of people are demonstrating outstanding talent and ingenuity
2. A large group of Canon owners and prospective Canon owners are paying close attention
3. The world of 'affordable' high quality video cameras has just got slightly larger
4. Magic Lantern are getting a massive amount of attention
5. Technology development is a rough place to play and extremely difficult to lead for any length of time
6. SDK's would make everyone's life a whole lot easier !
Offline

paulkosmala

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:50 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 1:03 am

Andrew Deme wrote:
paulkosmala wrote:So CF cards are too slow (and expensive)
HDMI standard Bandwidth: 2.23 Gbps.
Raw 1920x1080 video: 398,13 Mbps (~0.4 Gbps)
External recorder, (if it can buffer the writing on the recorder instead of internally on the 5d)

Am I missing something obvious here?


Maybe, here is my 10 cents....

1. A small group of people are demonstrating outstanding talent and ingenuity
2. A large group of Canon owners and prospective Canon owners are paying close attention
3. The world of 'affordable' high quality video cameras has just got slightly larger
4. Magic Lantern are getting a massive amount of attention
5. Technology development is a rough place to play and extremely difficult to lead for any length of time
6. SDK's would make everyone's life a whole lot easier !


I agree with number 6.
I'm just saying using an external recorder via hdmi seems like the most likely avenue to bypass internal buffering, and thus enable actual (line skipped) 'RAW' recording for any reasonable length of time.

I'm just wondering if anyone had a technical reason this isn't the most likely end solution. (of the end results that consist of RAW video mode unlocked) :)
Offline

Andrew Deme

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:52 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 1:57 am

paulkosmala wrote:
Andrew Deme wrote:
paulkosmala wrote:So CF cards are too slow (and expensive)
HDMI standard Bandwidth: 2.23 Gbps.
Raw 1920x1080 video: 398,13 Mbps (~0.4 Gbps)
External recorder, (if it can buffer the writing on the recorder instead of internally on the 5d)

Am I missing something obvious here?


Maybe, here is my 10 cents....

1. A small group of people are demonstrating outstanding talent and ingenuity
2. A large group of Canon owners and prospective Canon owners are paying close attention
3. The world of 'affordable' high quality video cameras has just got slightly larger
4. Magic Lantern are getting a massive amount of attention
5. Technology development is a rough place to play and extremely difficult to lead for any length of time
6. SDK's would make everyone's life a whole lot easier !


I agree with number 6.
I'm just saying using an external recorder via hdmi seems like the most likely avenue to bypass internal buffering, and thus enable actual (line skipped) 'RAW' recording for any reasonable length of time.

I'm just wondering if anyone had a technical reason this isn't the most likely end solution. (of the end results that consist of RAW video mode unlocked) :)


I have been following the trail of developments on Magic Lantern and from memory the type of hack actually pulls the data before getting processed so they can't ship it out the HDMI....hence why an SDK would make everyone's life a whole lot easier.

Maybe is a good idea for a kickstarter project....but as we have seen with BMD, not for the faint hearted.
Offline

Taikonaut

  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:36 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 5:54 am

iverha wrote:
TZuck wrote:You guys are aware at how not cost effective shooting 14-bit RAW video on the 5D would be right? CF cards are crazy expensive in comparison to SSDs, and the most space you'll get on a CF is what 128GB? it's like $500, or $130 for a fast enough 64GB SD card. or $480GB SSD for $330 or a 120GB SSD for $90.


The same I was thinking, you would probably have to get the fastest cards, and they'll fill up quickly too.

But very interesting news!
I think I'll be more happy shooting on BMCC for now, but maybe in a year or two the technology and possibilites are good enough to go shoot some amazing stuff with the 5d. Maybe even larger films for the cinemas.

There is no reason rushing out all your BMCC equipment, even though you have a 5d. This breakthrough is still in an early development, and it could take some time to get reliable DSLR's shooting raw.
A good thing is that if you do switch to Canon, you'll probably still have many lenses for it.

I will go safe as always and just wait till it's ready to go.


I would expect a fast terabytes hdd in the form of a battery grip connected to the CF card slot to be out within 3 months after the official release of the latest ML hack.
Offline

spike

  • Posts: 68
  • Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:57 pm

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 8:04 am

Peter posted something from Kholi a page back. I'm not saying he's wrong (which on some points he actually is) but I will say that people should be objective, which he is not. He has been the biggest BMCC fanboy since day one even contributing massively to bmcuser... I may be wrong but it seems like it is actually HIS site?

I am no BMD fanboy but I do appreciate a good camera and to call the MKIII a BAD camera is ridiculous. If you look at imdb you will see MANY films that used the MKII & III is some capacity. The Avengers, for example.

It's a reliable, solid, great piece of kit and to simply brush it off in as little as one post is not doing it justice. How many high budget films or TV shows have used the BMCC? Apart from that other fanboys AUS shows... none! The camera is not reliable enough in the field to warrant the use of a camera like the BMCC on a high budget show.

I am pretty sure the MKII and MKIII are the go to camera's for action and stunt work in Hollywood at the moment. For example to back up my claims (as I do that not like some others here) http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_can ... 48055b504#.

My point is this; fanboys get scared when their precious is about to be competed with. I and many others welcome competition. It just means more choice for the customer!

Thanks
BMD products: -
ATEM 1 M/E
Teranex 2D
GPI/Tally
SDI distribution
HDMI to SDI converter
Sync Gen
Smartview HD
Smartview Duo
Ultrastudio Mini Recorder
Offline

paulkosmala

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:50 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 8:18 am

Andrew Deme wrote:
paulkosmala wrote:
I agree with number 6.
I'm just saying using an external recorder via hdmi seems like the most likely avenue to bypass internal buffering, and thus enable actual (line skipped) 'RAW' recording for any reasonable length of time.

I'm just wondering if anyone had a technical reason this isn't the most likely end solution. (of the end results that consist of RAW video mode unlocked) :)


I have been following the trail of developments on Magic Lantern and from memory the type of hack actually pulls the data before getting processed so they can't ship it out the HDMI....hence why an SDK would make everyone's life a whole lot easier.

Maybe is a good idea for a kickstarter project....but as we have seen with BMD, not for the faint hearted.


Right. This is where my knowledge gets fuzzy.
My understanding is: if it's being written to the card, and the card is fast enough, The internal buffer is the slow point.
3. work around's for this.

1. a physical hardware replacement of some components.
2. Bypass the internal buffer entirely and write straight to the card/external recorder. (though I think there might be problems with this method involving data integrity?)
3. Software hack to use the CF card as the buffer and output to a HDMI recorder.

Again, at the fuzzy side of my knowledge,
Please let me know if I'm way off base here.
Offline
User avatar

Aaron Scheiner

  • Posts: 341
  • Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:57 pm
  • Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 8:21 am

A hacked camera is definitely a "reliable, solid, great piece of kit" compared to a purpose-built camera. That peliter unit, after all, is just there for fun.

A device reads off data from the sensor into a video buffer/VRAM. ML has managed to use a DMA controller (direct memory access) to directly read data from the VRAM and write it directly to the card controller. Traditionally the CPU has to manually read and write all that data, but with DMA the CPU only has to give the command and the transfer occurs without the CPU's intervention. This is how they've been able to achieve such high data rates. The CPU in a DSLR is very low-powered... similar to an ARM chip on a Raspberry Pi. The CPU relies on external processors (DSPs/ASICs) to perform all the hard tasks, like h.264 encoding, sensor reading, etc.

The reason (I'd imagine) HDMI can't be used is because translation (different bit depths) would have to occur between the VRAM contents and the HDMI output and that translation implies the use of the CPU... but the CPU can't handle that much data.
Offline

Margus Voll

  • Posts: 1088
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:31 am
  • Location: Tallinn, Estonia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 9:28 am

I also would say that reliability is the thing.

I was in a shoot last week with bmc. No heating no hangups no nothing.

We shot 4 spots in one day and reliability is key then.

I remember our first spots with canon it was common that the camera would over heat now and then and force
you to stop filming. Not very nice with tight production schedule.

With hacked camera in production is like with hacintosh in client session when colour correcting.
Scary as hell.
Margus Voll, C.S.I.

http://www.iconstudios.eu
margus@iconstudios.eu
Insta / Twitter @margusvoll

Resolve 15 W10 (i9-7940x 14c OC @4.4 Ghz, 2x Titan Pascal, 128 gb ram)
Resolve 12.5.4 OSX
BMC 2,5 K
Pocket camera
Offline
User avatar

Aaron Scheiner

  • Posts: 341
  • Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:57 pm
  • Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 9:41 am

"With hacked camera in production is like with hacintosh in client session when colour correcting."
haha :P

I shot an hour long interview recently in raw. There were no issues :) . I have to do something similar tomorrow and feel confident that my BMCCs will perform.

I love being able to *hack*/modify the behaviour of a camera, or any electronic device for that matter... my pool pump, my home and office's lighting, my geyser, my home and office alarm system are all controlled by machines running code I have written... but the BMCC is a video/film production camera. I love ML and have been using ML since it first became available and I appreciate what they're doing now, but I prefer to use it for niche stuff... like timelapses.
Last edited by Aaron Scheiner on Tue May 14, 2013 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Margus Voll

  • Posts: 1088
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:31 am
  • Location: Tallinn, Estonia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 9:45 am

You see :)

But it really depends what one is after.

I like stability in my production flow and results.

For now i see no reason to use any scarlet or red one except super soft slomos (soft as blurry images)

BMC gives out so much better images and needs just a tiny bit of correction in resolve.

And skin tones :D ahhhhh :D
Margus Voll, C.S.I.

http://www.iconstudios.eu
margus@iconstudios.eu
Insta / Twitter @margusvoll

Resolve 15 W10 (i9-7940x 14c OC @4.4 Ghz, 2x Titan Pascal, 128 gb ram)
Resolve 12.5.4 OSX
BMC 2,5 K
Pocket camera
Offline

Pete Proniewicz-Brooks

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 6:06 pm

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 9:46 am

spike wrote:Peter posted something from Kholi a page back. I'm not saying he's wrong (which on some points he actually is) but I will say that people should be objective, which he is not. He has been the biggest BMCC fanboy since day one even contributing massively to bmcuser... I may be wrong but it seems like it is actually HIS site?
Peter has plenty of complaints about the BMCC, and he's very vocal on people not buying accessories for BMDs cameras until they have one in their hands. BMC user is owned By Jarraed Land, the founder of RED, this is very well known.


spike wrote:I am no BMD fanboy but I do appreciate a good camera and to call the MKIII a BAD camera is ridiculous. If you look at imdb you will see MANY films that used the MKII & III is some capacity. The Avengers, for example.


The 5d MkIII (and MkII) are great stills cameras, and reasonable video cameras. Their cheapness, size and weight relative to cinema cameras makes them good stunt and action cams. This tends to be the role they are used in, cheap and disposable.


spike wrote:It's a reliable, solid, great piece of kit and to simply brush it off in as little as one post is not doing it justice. How many high budget films or TV shows have used the BMCC? Apart from that other fanboys AUS shows... none! The camera is not reliable enough in the field to warrant the use of a camera like the BMCC on a high budget show.
How many films and TV series have been released so far that entered production after the release of the BMCC? The lack of BMCCs using productions has at least as much to do with the low level of supply, and the issue that it's not shooting for the action cam role the 5D seems to have found in high end production. We are also talking magic laterns latest development here, trying to pass that off as used in productions or reliable is a bit much. I've not seen any real reliability complaints about the BMCC (and even un-hacked 5ds have heat issues on set), the BMCC has plenty of issues, not least the flange issue, but thats not a reliability thing thats jsut a genaeral flaw, it's not going to change on you mid shoot.


spike wrote:I am pretty sure the MKII and MKIII are the go to camera's for action and stunt work in Hollywood at the moment. For example to back up my claims (as I do that not like some others here) http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_can ... 48055b504#.
A reasonable number use Epics. The 5D is used as a compromise, it's a cheap camera that provides adequate footage and importantly can be rigged to operate in a way similar to a cinema camera. It's the holder of the niche it's found in Hollywood, and therefore something has to be much better than it to shift it from that niche. And at that niche the BMCC may well not be. When the massive extra quality the epic provides isn't needed then you might as well save money and use 5ds.

spike wrote:My point is this; fanboys get scared when their precious is about to be competed with. I and many others welcome competition. It just means more choice for the customer!


You point is rubbish. The BMCC is a flawed camera, no-one denies this, but no-ones 'scared' of competition, if anything they relish it as it means the BMD may add more improvements to their camera. I will point out that I'm a Scarlet owner not a BMCC owner. The 5D has been great for the industry as it's increased the number of people who have been able to take their first steps, and can be used as a B cam or action cam most of the way up the ladder. But it is not the Golden bullet that it is often hailed as, and as a pure video camera it's flaws are larger than the BMCCs in most ways.

I must admit that if someone asked me which to buy now, living in the UK I'd say go with a 5d or a C100, as they actually are readily available. If BMD can get their supply issues out of the way for most people who are looking for a video/movie camera I'd switch that straight to the BMCC.


If this release proves reliable and some worries like how it deals with rolling shutter etc are delt with then this will improve how far towards the motion end it can get with people.

Given that lens and rigging costs with the EF mount BMCC are fairly consistent with a 5D, and the two are in the same price ball park, the major costs may well be workflow and data. And usable SSDs are likely to work out as much cheaper than smaller media.

So the 5d is a great camera for the price even as a video camera, but that doesn't stop the BMCC from being better. And if you only ever shot video and wanted better than h264 (which after all is what this discussion is about, the RAW ML update), could you honestly say that if both were in the shop before you you would take the 5Ds RAW over the BMCCs RAW, ProRes and DNxHD?
Offline

Andrew Deme

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:52 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 9:56 am

Margus Voll wrote:I also would say that reliability is the thing.

I was in a shoot last week with bmc. No heating no hangups no nothing.

We shot 4 spots in one day and reliability is key then.

I remember our first spots with canon it was common that the camera would over heat now and then and force
you to stop filming. Not very nice with tight production schedule.

With hacked camera in production is like with hacintosh in client session when colour correcting.
Scary as hell.


Wow, is really interesting to see the different perspectives.....when I was a boy I realised technology had a super short lifespan....therefore everything I bought deserved an attempt to be hacked as it would be useless in a few years anyway. First serious hack were easy by today's standards, the Phase Lock Loop on a CB radio to get extra channels outside of the band and the printer port on a TRS-80 to control a relay to control a light. Home automation (;->>

Geez....we should be cheering Magic Lantern for their outstanding efforts !

One day BMD might see the light and release an SDK....till then my Garmin Watch is entertaining me.
Offline

Margus Voll

  • Posts: 1088
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:31 am
  • Location: Tallinn, Estonia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 9:58 am

As colorist myself i find all that h264 stuff rubbish.

This is what cancels canon out most of the times + soft images until ML new stuff.

Filming is nice if you get nice images but post ecosystem is also important.
One would need to process the results, and fast in production.
Hobby shooter does not care about the time. They got all the time and it is free.

I find Resolve BMC combo just fantastic. At least for me as i have all the
players in the chain and can use them.

Separate file conversions with some command line exe stuff is not as nice.
Even AE or Ligthroom conversions seem clumsy to me.

But it will go down what anyone expects to happen in production and how.
I like my stuff to be simple, fast and nice.
Margus Voll, C.S.I.

http://www.iconstudios.eu
margus@iconstudios.eu
Insta / Twitter @margusvoll

Resolve 15 W10 (i9-7940x 14c OC @4.4 Ghz, 2x Titan Pascal, 128 gb ram)
Resolve 12.5.4 OSX
BMC 2,5 K
Pocket camera
Offline

Soeren Mueller

  • Posts: 595
  • Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:21 pm
  • Location: Düsseldorf, Germany

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:08 am

Normally I try to refrain from posting on totally over the top (and imho totally oversimplifying) speculations like this. But seriously... sorry.. are so many folks in the forums etc. in the serious need to get glasses or their eyes checked?

Yes.. nice.. now by putting really really really much effort into it you can skip the bad h264 Encoder on the 5Ds.. but what do you get.. still the same ugly line skipping down scaling as always inherent with the original 5D. Or the softness of it's successor the Mark III.
I especially find the Mark II comparison pictures so weird... h264 vs new ML "raw".. it was a wide shot with lots of detail - both looked ugly, just a different kind of ugly!
Don't get me wrong, I love my 5D.. for what it is.. and not for what I wish (!) it was. For that I have the BMC or I could always rent or get from friends one of the different RED "flavours"...

Especially since I used the 5D for such a long time for low/no budget projects... I just can't wrap my mind around why someone would seriously compare it with the BMC (purely speaking about picture quality now like effective resolution/color science etc).
Only perhaps people who somewhere sit in a basement and have never ever looked at nice R3D or BMC DNG recordings (which you don't even need to make yourself but can download)... only then I could understand how you perhaps would be tempted to think that this in any way could be comparable...

And at the price points all of this is happening right now.. it doesn't even make sense to put so much effort into it (yeah ok I know, besides the shipping/availability "nightmare")... man... all this time could be spent with your loved ones or "significant others"!
Offline

Taikonaut

  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:36 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:09 am

="Pete Proniewicz-BrooksSo the 5d is a great camera for the price even as a video camera, but that doesn't stop the BMCC from being better. And if you only ever shot video and wanted better than h264 (which after all is what this discussion is about, the RAW ML update), could you honestly say that if both were in the shop before you you would take the 5Ds RAW over the BMCCs RAW, ProRes and DNxHD?


Let say the 5D and BMCC produce equal quality video and both equally gradeable I would choose the 5D. The FF sensor make more sense.
Offline

Soeren Mueller

  • Posts: 595
  • Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:21 pm
  • Location: Düsseldorf, Germany

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:13 am

Taikonaut wrote:Let say the 5D and BMCC produce equal quality video and both equally gradeable I would choose the 5D. The FF sensor make more sense.


Agreed, but that's pure theory. Reality is sooo far from it "sadly". Still love my 5D - but once you've used a BMC you won't look back anymore, I can promise you that!

It's kinda sad.. I think if the "availability issue" wouldn't still plague the BMC this topic would be sort of a non-issue anyways...
Offline

Taikonaut

  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:36 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:16 am

Soeren Mueller wrote:
Taikonaut wrote:Let say the 5D and BMCC produce equal quality video and both equally gradeable I would choose the 5D. The FF sensor make more sense.


Agreed, but that's pure theory. Reality is sooo far from it "sadly". Still love my 5D - but once you've used a BMC you won't look back anymore, I can promise you that!

It's kinda sad.. I think if the "availability issue" wouldn't still plague the BMC this topic would be sort of a non-issue anyways...


I was replying to another theory.
You answered with a theory because basically you havent used the latest ML hack for the Canon 5DMkIII. Until you do then you can make an informed opinion based on fact.
There is nothing sad about it. This is interesting time not a time to mourn about anything.
EOSHD seems pretty excited and think it is more than a match for BMCC and he uses both.
We now have a camera or cameras capable of shooting 14bits in RAW or something close to it at dSLR FF including anamorphic. No more investing in new lens to work around a small sensor.
Offline

Andrew Deme

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:52 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:35 am

Soeren Mueller wrote:Normally I try to refrain from posting on totally over the top (and imho totally oversimplifying) speculations like this. But seriously... sorry.. are so many folks in the forums etc. in the serious need to get glasses or their eyes checked?

Yes.. nice.. now by putting really really really much effort into it you can skip the bad h264 Encoder on the 5Ds.. but what do you get.. still the same ugly line skipping down scaling as always inherent with the original 5D. Or the softness of it's successor the Mark III.
I especially find the Mark II comparison pictures so weird... h264 vs new ML "raw".. it was a wide shot with lots of detail - both looked ugly, just a different kind of ugly!
Don't get me wrong, I love my 5D.. for what it is.. and not for what I wish (!) it was. For that I have the BMC or I could always rent or get from friends one of the different RED "flavours"...

Especially since I used the 5D for such a long time for low/no budget projects... I just can't wrap my mind around why someone would seriously compare it with the BMC (purely speaking about picture quality now like effective resolution/color science etc).
Only perhaps people who somewhere sit in a basement and have never ever looked at nice R3D or BMC DNG recordings (which you don't even need to make yourself but can download)... only then I could understand how you perhaps would be tempted to think that this in any way could be comparable...

And at the price points all of this is happening right now.. it doesn't even make sense to put so much effort into it (yeah ok I know, besides the shipping/availability "nightmare")... man... all this time could be spent with your loved ones or "significant others"!


Well my eyes must be totally crap then....

The BMC images are incredibly good, especially when I see people's faces...just love it.

The ML hack for the 5D III is not without it bugs....am keen to see how far they get....but the images I am seeing are good and possibly good enough for the great majority.
Offline

Andrew Deme

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:52 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:39 am

Soeren Mueller wrote:
Taikonaut wrote:Let say the 5D and BMCC produce equal quality video and both equally gradeable I would choose the 5D. The FF sensor make more sense.


Agreed, but that's pure theory. Reality is sooo far from it "sadly". Still love my 5D - but once you've used a BMC you won't look back anymore, I can promise you that!

It's kinda sad.. I think if the "availability issue" wouldn't still plague the BMC this topic would be sort of a non-issue anyways...


When you have customers begging repetatively for an update week after week and being completely ignored, it isn't at all surprising the interest ML are getting.

I for one hate to see customers resort to begging.....although would make and excellent topic for an MBA class.
Offline

Margus Voll

  • Posts: 1088
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:31 am
  • Location: Tallinn, Estonia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:42 am

In stock in us so i see no problem.

EU distro somehow is hanging now.
Margus Voll, C.S.I.

http://www.iconstudios.eu
margus@iconstudios.eu
Insta / Twitter @margusvoll

Resolve 15 W10 (i9-7940x 14c OC @4.4 Ghz, 2x Titan Pascal, 128 gb ram)
Resolve 12.5.4 OSX
BMC 2,5 K
Pocket camera
Offline

Taikonaut

  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:36 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:59 am

Andrew Deme wrote:
Soeren Mueller wrote:
Taikonaut wrote:Let say the 5D and BMCC produce equal quality video and both equally gradeable I would choose the 5D. The FF sensor make more sense.


Agreed, but that's pure theory. Reality is sooo far from it "sadly". Still love my 5D - but once you've used a BMC you won't look back anymore, I can promise you that!

It's kinda sad.. I think if the "availability issue" wouldn't still plague the BMC this topic would be sort of a non-issue anyways...


When you have customers begging repetatively for an update week after week and being completely ignored, it isn't at all surprising the interest ML are getting.

I for one hate to see customers resort to begging.....although would make and excellent topic for an MBA class.


Do you know after all the "begging" for an update and the no reply almost (percieved) aristocratic snobbishness the community has been getting on here, I feel this latest ML hack has given back some measure of empowerment to the customers and the undecided.
BMD is living in interesting time.
Offline

Tom Sefton

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:02 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 10:59 am

After only dipping my toe into the Resolve Lite waters a year or so ago, I now cannot live without the full version, or Ultrascope.

The ability to go into a shoot with a macbook pro and thunderbolt, use ultrascope to check green/blue balance, capture via thunderbolt whilst the card captures RAW, edit an XML, colour balance and key in resolve and then show to client is beyond brilliant. The fact that I have RAW files to work on back at the studio is even better.

Regardless of whatever Canon and ML delivers with the 5D, the next thing that we want to purchase will be a camera that has the ability to deliver proper RAW video at around 2k resolution with frame rates up to 120fps. If this is RED, fine. I dearly hope that in the next year Blackmagic develops a camera with higher frame rates.

I can't fault the camera we have bought.
Tom Sefton
Owner
Pollen Studio
www.pollenstudio.co.uk
Offline

josechu

  • Posts: 50
  • Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:21 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 11:41 am

spike wrote:BMD are killing the BMCC all by themselves!

Best coment on this forum.

AND

''Let say the 5D and BMCC produce equal quality video and both equally gradeable I would choose the 5D. The FF sensor make more sense.''

Plus the ergonomics..... battery compartiment ...etc.. and i dont even get into all the funtions that are missing in the menues or information display. You cant argue with thatone really.
And I think the 5d is reallly poor for video production.
Offline

Soeren Mueller

  • Posts: 595
  • Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:21 pm
  • Location: Düsseldorf, Germany

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 12:21 pm

Taikonaut wrote:I was replying to another theory.
You answered with a theory because basically you havent used the latest ML hack for the Canon 5DMkIII. Until you do then you can make an informed opinion based on fact.
There is nothing sad about it. This is interesting time not a time to mourn about anything.
EOSHD seems pretty excited and think it is more than a match for BMCC and he uses both.
We now have a camera or cameras capable of shooting 14bits in RAW or something close to it at dSLR FF including anamorphic. No more investing in new lens to work around a small sensor.


Taiko, I am not mourning the fact that all these improvements are happening, I have payed/supported ML and I'm a happy ML user, I mourn all this uninformed sensationalist/hectic "blog nonsense".. you can't really call it "journalism" in the slightest imho. While I get that Andrew/EOSHD is a nice guy I just can't stand his constantly hyped sensationalist ramblings. Most of the time it's funny at best...

Well I guess in the end most of these sort of "clashes" between opinions comes more or less from the sort of user you are or what kind of work you are doing. I have been "burned" by ML crashing/failing on a 5D on a commercial shoot twice already (a few months ago with a normally very stable version!) ... thankfully it was just a B or more C camera. For a more "hobbyist" use or where the budget is really really tight or it totally doesn't matter if you have to spent more time on repeating a shot (if it's possible at all) - totally fine, I get that you're a happy camper embracing these new developments.

But this is really a totally different "level" compared to the BMC. Even if you don't like it's ergonomics etc. it's just a tool specifically designed for video work which you can't really say about any of the current DSLRs. After over 4 years of working with the 5D, over 5 years renting/using REDs and 2 months with the BMC all I can say is.. I'm very very happy the latter exists!
And yeah personally it's totally beyond me how anyone working professionally with these tools could ever consider a 5D Mk3 with the latest ML as an alternative to a BMC... but I guess whatever suits you suits you...
Offline
User avatar

João Gomes

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:48 pm
  • Location: Lisboa, PORTUGAL

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:34 pm

Soeren Mueller wrote:
Taikonaut wrote: And yeah personally it's totally beyond me how anyone working professionally with these tools could ever consider a 5D Mk3 with the latest ML as an alternative to a BMC... but I guess whatever suits you suits you...


That´s the point many are making.

If i had a BMCC i wouldn´t consider a hacked 5D MKIII but since i´ve been working with my 7D and have been waiting for a BMCC, the 5D is looking better.
You work with what you have and right now i have a 5D not a BMCC.
Cameraman/Editor
Offline

Margus Voll

  • Posts: 1088
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:31 am
  • Location: Tallinn, Estonia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:38 pm

Margus Voll, C.S.I.

http://www.iconstudios.eu
margus@iconstudios.eu
Insta / Twitter @margusvoll

Resolve 15 W10 (i9-7940x 14c OC @4.4 Ghz, 2x Titan Pascal, 128 gb ram)
Resolve 12.5.4 OSX
BMC 2,5 K
Pocket camera
Offline
User avatar

João Gomes

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:48 pm
  • Location: Lisboa, PORTUGAL

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:41 pm

Margus Voll wrote:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855879-REG/Blackmagic_Design_BMD_CINECAM26KEF_Cinema_Camera.html

In stock!


Not in Europe.
Cameraman/Editor
Offline
User avatar

Clark Fable

  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:13 pm
  • Location: Cambridge, MA, USA

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:41 pm

Taikonaut wrote:EOSHD seems pretty excited and think it is more than a match for BMCC and he uses both.
We now have a camera or cameras capable of shooting 14bits in RAW or something close to it at dSLR FF including anamorphic. No more investing in new lens to work around a small sensor.


Remember, EOSHD was real excited when he first took the AA filter off the 5D3 too, then he wasn't...
Offline

Tom Sefton

  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:02 am

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:43 pm

João Gomes wrote:
Margus Voll wrote:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855879-REG/Blackmagic_Design_BMD_CINECAM26KEF_Cinema_Camera.html

In stock!


Not in Europe.


Ring planetDV in Bradford, UK.
Tom Sefton
Owner
Pollen Studio
www.pollenstudio.co.uk
Offline

Margus Voll

  • Posts: 1088
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:31 am
  • Location: Tallinn, Estonia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:43 pm

so what, with taxes you get the same price ?

so it is doable if one would like to handle it.
Margus Voll, C.S.I.

http://www.iconstudios.eu
margus@iconstudios.eu
Insta / Twitter @margusvoll

Resolve 15 W10 (i9-7940x 14c OC @4.4 Ghz, 2x Titan Pascal, 128 gb ram)
Resolve 12.5.4 OSX
BMC 2,5 K
Pocket camera
Offline
User avatar

Rudy Satria

  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:01 pm
  • Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:46 pm

I wish somebody make head to head raw footage test of 5D and BMCC. Mr. John Brawley maybe? ;)
Rudy Iskandar
Offline
User avatar

João Gomes

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:48 pm
  • Location: Lisboa, PORTUGAL

Re: BMCC Killer?

PostTue May 14, 2013 2:49 pm

Margus Voll wrote:so what, with taxes you get the same price ?

so it is doable if one would like to handle it.


No i don´t get the same price because if buy locally trough my company i will get my VAT returned in the end of the year. If i buy from outside the EU i´ll pay more import taxes and the return won´t be as high.

Trust me i did the math...
I´m also waiting for the mythical MFT mount so i can use faster wides or Speed Booster to counteract the smaller sensor.
Cameraman/Editor
PreviousNext

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ph2003 and 21 guests