Camera Body Evolution

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

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Sep 30, 2021 2:41 am

I don't know why I've been thinking about this so much lately. Maybe it's because of the constant requests on Facebook and Social Media. Maybe it's my desires. But here we go.

I loved the OG URSA concept. I loved the URSA Mini. I loved the move to the URSA Mini Pro. I really like the Pocket design. But where does it all lead?

Ultimately we come back to standards. There was the film standard. These days internal ND is key because we no longer use stocks of film that have speeds. Meaning instead of using 50 ASA Film for one scene and 500 ASA film for another, we need a single ISO Digital Sensor that can be adapted. Blackmagic came up with a Dual ISO Camera Sensor. But, the main flagship design still uses one ISO.

So, with internal ND we can utilize a certain speed digital sensor. Then we could theoretically have a second ISO for lower light situations. I like this concept. But, is it pivotal? Eh, not so much. But it does help with digital noise issues. So, let's go with it.

Global Shutter is a way to simulate the exposure of film regarding motion. But digital sensors have traditionally been rolling shutter for the most dynamic range. We're moving in the direction of Global Sensors capturing more dynamic range.

All of this is sensor based. I know. But bare with me on it...

So, ultimately we want multiple camera bodies with a single sensor. That makes sense.

So we come to Major, Mini, and Micro. But we also have a different class. That's where the DSLR Revolution from a decade ago came in. Small, and easy to use, cameras for everyday use.

So, let's say that what is desired is a Main Camera for the entire build. Then a smaller form factor. Then an even smaller form factor for gimbals. The problem: people hate to buy multiple units to achieve different purposes.

The Solution: Definitive Purpose Bodies. People understand they all have the same sensor, but each body does a unique task.

The all around sensor body should be the Mini. But the Micro is for gimbals and the Major is for high end work that requires higher frame rates and more features.

I've done this whole post without given specifics. How about that? Well, what do you say? Should Blackmagic develop 4 Camera Body Types. One Major for High End; One Mini for All Purpose; One Micro for Gimbal/Light-work; One All Purpose Low Budget.

Have fun. What do you want in each model?
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline
User avatar

Jamie LeJeune

  • Posts: 1550
  • Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:33 am
  • Location: San Francisco

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Sep 30, 2021 2:53 am

timbutt2 wrote: The Solution: Definitive Purpose Bodies. People understand they all have the same sensor, but each body does a unique task.
This is the model that ARRI has followed since the original Alexa. Even the larger sensor ARRI models are simply multiples of the same sensor stitched together.
www.cinedocs.com
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4601572/
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Sep 30, 2021 5:28 am

Jamie LeJeune wrote:
timbutt2 wrote: The Solution: Definitive Purpose Bodies. People understand they all have the same sensor, but each body does a unique task.
This is the model that ARRI has followed since the original Alexa. Even the larger sensor ARRI models are simply multiples of the same sensor stitched together.

And, (I think,) a strong model to live by.

I do have to say that I have had additional thoughts tonight because a Facebook Memory showed me with a Stereoscopic 3D Beamsplitter Rig, and I would love to see future S3D Capable Cameras in a Mini Design.

The Technological Evolution is crazy. The 12K Sensor opens a lot of doors. I see 16K VistaVision and 34K IMAX... But above all else lenses are a huge aspect to increased Sensor Size.

I'm most excited for 12K Super 35mm... or 12K x 10K Anamorphic at 120 FPS. Even that is an impressive feature. Recording Media is a part of that. And, I think Internal Media is pivotal, but Blackmagic is always looking at the SSD Recorder Option. If a larger SSD Type Drive could get Higher Frame Rates at Larger Capacities, then the Add-On makes sense for a SSD Recorder.

But the body deserves updating. And, a uniform structure makes sense. I love Electronic Internal ND. I like the idea of controlling all camera settings via on camera control. But, I see smaller units needing different control. But the Major & Mini could have Built-In LCD Control. The Micro would be the only that needs External Control.

And, I think the Micro is where Internal Recording Limits are most pivotal. Building out External Recorders belongs to the Mini or Major Design.

Uniformity is what I'm looking towards.
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline

Ellory Yu

  • Posts: 2614
  • Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:25 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Sep 30, 2021 5:30 am

I think most people would prefer the box form factor that will provide versatility in configuration whether it is for sticks, handheld, or gimbal. One body that can warp for all needs.

See this post … it’s being requested here and also many times on other BM forum post. Unfortunately BM doesn’t listen.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=147876
Blackmagic Design URSA Mini Pro 4.6K G2, Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 6K
PC Workstation Core I7 64Gb, 2 x AMD R9 390X 8Gb, Blackmagic Design DeckLink 4K Mini Monitor, Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, Blackmagic Design DaVinci Resolve 17.1.4
Offline

Saint_xix

  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 7:34 am
  • Location: Ukraine
  • Real Name: Bogdan Yatsenko

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Sep 30, 2021 7:25 am

It feels like they have sort of gentleman's agreement with other manufacturers, anyways it would be nice to hear the reply from the BM team :)
Amd ryzen 2700
32gb ram 3000hz
RTX 2060 super 8gb
@bohdan.film - instagram
Offline
User avatar

Nathan_H

  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 8:12 am
  • Real Name: Nathan Henneton

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Sep 30, 2021 5:34 pm

A boxier (shorter / larger) URSA MINI PRO body would be great.

A mix between an Arri Mini and and a V-Raptor XL.

Boxier for friendly gimbal use, but bulky enough so you can mount it on the shoulder / easyrig and attatch accessories so its feels and behave like a A-Camera.

I would love that Blackmagic keeps most of the control on operator side as well.
https://vimeo.com/nathanhenneton/showreel2019
Offline

robert Hart

  • Posts: 526
  • Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:16 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 01, 2021 6:08 pm

BM has to take care not to do what Australian car manufacturers did with overlapping models and compete with itself.

As for "boxing" the Mini Pro into a cube shape, the cameras will continue to need a significant space for a cooling system unless BM goes the RED route and uses an ASIC design instead of FPGA.

The camera body may therefore be long, high or wide but unlikely to be a compact cube. Within the Mini Pro casework, the existing circuit boards are already folded assemblies using broad ribbon cables.

There is no wasted space. Using miniature plugs/sockets or a single mulitipin breakout socket, eliminating the ND filter wheels and using an intermediate mount system close to sensor might lose about 50mm of length at best.

What confounds me is that by the time cube cameras have been built to usefulness, the assemblies take up much more workspace and things have started to become covered over. Is the cube function or a fad I wonder?
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 3296
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Los Angeles California

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 4:35 am

robert Hart wrote: Is the cube function or a fad I wonder?


Gimbals.

It's the only reason.

So are Gimbals a fad ?

JB
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 5:26 am

John Brawley wrote:
robert Hart wrote: Is the cube function or a fad I wonder?


Gimbals.

It's the only reason.

So are Gimbals a fad ?

JB

Gimbals are a tool.

So, I think the Cube/Box camera is for that purpose and needs to function as such.

I hate how some people I work with have the Alexa Mini as their "A" Camera and you have to build it out just to make it into what would be a normal functioning camera like the Alexa Classic. Use a real Alexa as "A" and then use the Alexa Mini for "B" or Gimbal work.

So that's why I want Blackmagic to keep the URSA Mini Pro design for Main Body Camera. Then have a "Micro" for Gimbal purposes. But limit it to what works for that body. The URSA Mini Pro should have the best features for that camera body. Then I do believe the OG URSA Body had a nice design that could work for the much higher frame rates and for certain other purposes. So I'm fine with 3 Bodies.

But everyone just wants a one body type for some reason. Maybe because they don't believe in spending a lot of money on extra bodies? But, that's the purpose of different body builds. I think that's the evolution. Bodies that accommodate certain purposes.

Don't try to fit a square into a circle hole. Use the right cut piece for the right hole.
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline

robert Hart

  • Posts: 526
  • Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:16 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 9:25 am

If BM was to attempt to "cube " the existing G2 that might happen by folding the sensor to mainboard flat ribbon cable a further 90 degrees to lay the sensor and its PCB parallel to the main processor PCB. This would require a common narrow active heatsink mass between the sensor and the main processor. It would probably have to be fluid cooled.

The optical axis would be offset to the right of the front panel, not centrally placed. The ribbon cable and its attached PCB which feeds the LCD screen, the media docks, the input audio, output SDI sockets, lanc port and accepts the power supply cables cannot be folded in a reverse direction to fit the cube without masking off the various sockets and internal cables.

However if the sensor PCB, the main processor PCB and the PCB which feeds the various inputs, outputs and LCD screen were arranged in a Z-shape, there may remain enough space between the rearmost PCB and main processor PCB for elbowed plugs to offer up to the partially shrouded sockets

The best you might hope for would be a cube of about 135mm on each face.

The wrinkles of this arrangement may be the length of the cable run from the LCD display to the main processor PCB and a very critical cooling problem to solve.

With the "Z" rearrangement of the PCBs, a 110mm cube arrangement might be doable with the existing G1/G2 guts. The small touch screen LCD of the Mini Pro might possible be placed in the rear face of the cube. The audio inputs would remain located on the upper face.

The rear SDI/power/LANC array might have to be located high on the rear face or more likely across the rear of the upper face.

The good Lord alone might be able to work out how to re-arrange the slide switches of the G1/G2 left side and where to put the monochrome small screen. I certainly cannot presently.

The front power-out/SDI/LANC sockets would be on the front right face of the cube. They are already oriented at an angle to the main PCB in the existing body so may not be too challenging to re-arrange.

A rosette for the side-handle would remain on the right face of the cube.

So how to re-arrange the cooling system and vent it adequately? This occupies considerable real-estate within the existing URSA Mini body and about 30mm vertically outside of it inside of the lower base and the upper handle mount? The really vexed question isn't it.

If I wasn't tied up doing fuel reduction for the upcoming fire season and home repairs, it would be a interesting exercise to do with the remains of the dead URSA Mini Pro G1 I ratted for parts to fix the URSA Mini 4/6K, some balsawood and a stanley knife. - Stuff CAD programs. I cannot get my head around the 3D option.

If the ND filter wheel and internal microphones were to be retained, the front lens mount support would have to be significantly redesigned. The lens control ribbon cable runs from the lens mount to the main PCB in the G1. ON the URSa Mini 4.6K, it runs from the sensor PCB.

I can see why the Komodo is arranged the way it is.

Heat dissipation will not be the CURSA's strong suite and it may not lose much weight versus the URSA Mini body form.

If a person was an adventurous entrepeneur, one would make the cube and offer a swap service for the rich folks who have the 12K and the G1/G2. But alas, I am too old and the prospect of being on the fag-end of a product-liability suit scares the dickens out of me.
Offline

Ellory Yu

  • Posts: 2614
  • Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:25 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 4:33 pm

My opinion on this is not to touch their URSA product line and have that a box form factor. It is more for the Pocket product line where I think that DSLR form factor is getting outdated and needs to be redesigned to a box form factor. I said this before and will say it again, take the guts of the pocket 6K pro and configure it around a box form camera like the Komodo. Do away with the large display and drop the price. If the pocket market is still good for BMD, then they can introduce a new line of box cameras that is between the pocket and the URSA. They can even have a box form 6K, 8K, and maybe 12K. I would prefer if they design it such that the sensor is interchangeable. Price it at $2000 to $3000 depending on sensor purchase and that will be amazing. If they can have global shutter and EF + PL adapter mounts that would make it awesome. 15+ stops DR and dual ISO and we are in business.
Blackmagic Design URSA Mini Pro 4.6K G2, Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 6K
PC Workstation Core I7 64Gb, 2 x AMD R9 390X 8Gb, Blackmagic Design DeckLink 4K Mini Monitor, Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, Blackmagic Design DaVinci Resolve 17.1.4
Offline

Tony Spiraletti

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:29 am
  • Location: Australia

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 9:23 pm

I think the pocket line of cameras should be made into box cameras.

Lop the grip off the right hand side of the camera so the lens mount is centred on the body. Where the grip was, have a rosette similar to those found on the C200, FS6 etc so that you can attach the grip if required that contains the NPF battery slot. The current design of non removable hand grip and off centre mount makes the camera so much harder to rig on gimbals than it needs to be. Also, when on gimbals, I always power the camera from the gimbal so a grip that holds an empty battery compartment is a waste and gets in the way. Sure, some thought would need to be given to button placement since the hand grip area contains most of the camera's physical buttons but I'd almost say that because the menu system and touch screen are so good, you could keep the buttons as they are on the grip so they are present when hand holding with the attached grip and you just use the menu when the grip is off.

Keep the screen. While I always use an external monitor, lot's of people love not having to rig the camera up and want to use it 'straight out of the box'. The screen on the 6KPro is fantastic and contains one of BMD's best features, their wonderful menu system!.

The 6K Pro contains a dedicated video output for an EVF which is great. This output can be customised to show different overlays to the HDMI output and LCD Screen. When not using an EVF, I'd like BMD to sell an accessory that turns the EVF output into an SDI output. It could slot straight into the current spot.

I'd be happy with these changes as a start for the pocket line keeping in mind the budget it is currently aimed at.
Maybe in a more Pro version, I'd also consider moving the screen (and shrinking it?) to accomodate a battery sled on the rear of the camera. A battery slot that is not bound by the current fully enclosed design that limits battery size would be a great addition, like the c200 or Komodo. You can stick extra long batteries on those if needed.

Just a start ;)
Offline

Tony Spiraletti

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:29 am
  • Location: Australia

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 9:39 pm

John Brawley wrote:
robert Hart wrote: Is the cube function or a fad I wonder?


Gimbals.

So are Gimbals a fad ?

JB


Ha, I think not!

I hate gimbals even though I own one and it gets requested on so many jobs. A steadicam is a much better tool. Gimbals are still not at steadicam levels of smoothness and can have a mind of their own sometimes but with low to mid-tier budgets coming down and gimbals getting better I think they are here to stay.
Having one on set that the DP can just pick up and use with usually satisfactory results saves so much compared to having a dedicated Steadicam op.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 3296
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Los Angeles California

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 9:47 pm

Tony Spiraletti wrote:Ha, I think not!

I hate gimbals even though I own one and it gets requested on so many jobs. A steadicam is a much better tool. Gimbals are still not at steadicam levels of smoothness and can have a mind of their own sometimes but with low to mid-tier budgets coming down and gimbals getting better I think they are here to stay.
Having one on set that the DP can just pick up and use with usually satisfactory results saves so much compared to having a dedicated Steadicam op.


I think I'll disagree with you.

There's something intrinsically unemotional and mechanical about them. They are really an extension of lens or sensor based IS. Everyone knows they're a cheap fix or bandaid to a problem.

I say this as someone that owns a Ronin S, Ronin 2 with Master wheels and an Arri SRH 360.

I almost always use them as remote heads.

JB
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 3296
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Los Angeles California

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 9:49 pm

Tony Spiraletti wrote:
Keep the screen. While I always use an external monitor, lot's of people love not having to rig the camera up and want to use it 'straight out of the box'. The screen on the 6KPro is fantastic and contains one of BMD's best features, their wonderful menu system!.




THIS IS THE PROBLEM.

Think about how big that screen is. Then make a box that can accommodate that screen size. Then look at how big your cube camera is. It's suddenly a lot bigger than anyone wants. And where do you put it? On top ? On the back ? It's awkward.

JB
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Offline

Tony Spiraletti

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:29 am
  • Location: Australia

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 02, 2021 9:58 pm

John Brawley wrote:
Tony Spiraletti wrote:
Keep the screen. While I always use an external monitor, lot's of people love not having to rig the camera up and want to use it 'straight out of the box'. The screen on the 6KPro is fantastic and contains one of BMD's best features, their wonderful menu system!.




THIS IS THE PROBLEM.

Think about how big that screen is. Then make a box that can accommodate that screen size. Then look at how big your cube camera is. It's suddenly a lot bigger than anyone wants. And where do you put it? On top ? On the back ? It's awkward.

JB


I agree, that is the problem if we start to look at mounting a battery slot on the rear but if we keep the slot in the grip as it currently is but make it detachable, I don't think it's too much of an issue. The current Pocket body is MUCH wider than the screen. You could have the screen on the back and have the ‘box’ as wide as the screen and the camera would still be much narrower than it currently is. A 5” screen is only 4.3” wide so don’t think it a huge problem if we keep the battery compartment in the removable grip. Another option would be to reduce the screen size slightly to around 4". Would still be perfectly usable IMO.
Sure the body might need to be made a bit deeper than the current Pocket but this has advantages in being able to accomodate more ports and buttons on the side as well as providing more rigging points.
Moving the screen to the top (Have it be able to tilt up slightly too) and shrinking it a little is the option you could adopt if trying to fit a battery slot on the rear but not sure it’s 100% necessary at this stage.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 3296
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Los Angeles California

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 1:29 am

Tony Spiraletti wrote: Another option would be to reduce the screen size slightly to around 4". Would still be perfectly usable IMO.


I don't think so. It's already the very way you drive the camera. It's on the edge considering how complex the menu is getting, and it's a touch screen.

Tony Spiraletti wrote:
Sure the body might need to be made a bit deeper than the current Pocket but this has advantages in being able to accomodate more ports and buttons on the side as well as providing more rigging points.


But it's now an overall BIGGER VOLUME than the current camera. Sure it's a cube shape, but larger.

Tony Spiraletti wrote:
Moving the screen to the top (Have it be able to tilt up slightly too) and shrinking it a little is the option you could adopt if trying to fit a battery slot on the rear but not sure it’s 100% necessary at this stage.


Top mounted screen is terrible for glare. It's pointing at the sky. Cant easily be shaded for operating. Already mentioned why it wouldn't work being smaller with the way the OS works and the level of menus you now need. Even more so with sky glare. It's now terrible to use operationally...if you're hand holding the camera and using the built in screen....

No one is using the Komodo top screen to operate and people literally list it as the biggest problem.

This literally IS the problem.

JB
Last edited by John Brawley on Sun Oct 03, 2021 1:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 1:37 am

I HATE THE KOMODO TOP SCREEN!!! Also, the Komodo's touch screen is very irksome when operating. It literally was the thing I instantly recognized as what I hated about it.

I'm impressed with the Komodo. But I'm not racing out to buy it.
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline

Tony Spiraletti

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:29 am
  • Location: Australia

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 3:08 am

I'll chuck my replies below in red...

John Brawley wrote:
Tony Spiraletti wrote: Another option would be to reduce the screen size slightly to around 4". Would still be perfectly usable IMO.


I don't think so. It's already the very way you drive the camera. It's on the edge considering how complex the menu is getting, and it's a touch screen.

So leave it at 5" then. like I said, having the body of the camera at the same width as the screen makes it narrower than it currently is anyway. Having the body at 4.35 inches wide (the width of a 5" screen would make the camera only .35" wider than a Komodo. Hardly huge!

Tony Spiraletti wrote:
Sure the body might need to be made a bit deeper than the current Pocket but this has advantages in being able to accomodate more ports and buttons on the side as well as providing more rigging points.


But it's now an overall BIGGER VOLUME than the current camera. Sure it's a cube shape, but larger.
Not really, is doesnt have to be as long as it is wide. aside from the grip and battery compartment, the volume of the body is tiny.

Tony Spiraletti wrote:
Moving the screen to the top (Have it be able to tilt up slightly too) and shrinking it a little is the option you could adopt if trying to fit a battery slot on the rear but not sure it’s 100% necessary at this stage.


Top mounted screen is terrible for glare. It's pointing at the sky. Cant easily be shaded for operating. Already mentioned why it wouldn't work being smaller with the way the OS works and the level of menus you now need. Even more so with sky glare. It's now terrible to use operationally...if you're hand holding the camera and using the built in screen....

I agree, this was for a possibly different model and the screen would be purely for Menu navigation. I do think there is a need for a camera between the Pocket and Ursa Mini. A box style camera.....

No one is using the Komodo top screen to operate and people literally list it as the biggest problem.

This literally IS the problem.

JB


Ultimately, these were all just ideas. I would really like to be able to detach the handgrip though.

Do you really think that this camera can't be improved upon in it's design?
Offline

robert Hart

  • Posts: 526
  • Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:16 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 7:18 am

In regards cubing the 6K but using its existing hardware, it may not be so easy as with the URSA Mini Pro form unless the existing single mainboard is split which will likely introduce many electronic problems to be engineered out.

The CBMPCC6K may not become significantly smaller than the cubed URSA Mini, if at all. I understand that the main processor and sensor are integrated into a common PCB assembly. This eliminates any possibility of repositioning the main PCB diagonally within the cube.

It may be possible to fold to comply with the cube shape, the existing ribbon cables which attach battery power, inputs/outputs and the button controls. I have not had a 6K to bits, only seen photos of one which was wrecked by a violent trauma.

No doubt the gnomes and elves in BM's design department will be examining the cube form. I doubt it will turn up on the market place unless it is calculated to be profitable without stealing from the other product sales. That would be plainly bad business.
Offline

Tony Spiraletti

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:29 am
  • Location: Australia

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 3:52 pm

Thinking about it, I should correct myself as I used the wrong terminology for what I was trying to describe.

I don’t necessarily think the body has to be a complete ‘box’or ‘cube’, I just would like the mount to be centred on the body much more than is currently is. This could be done by using a similar design to the current 6KPro but lopping off the hand grip as I previously suggested. Then, possibly having a rosette for the detachable grip to attach further forward, where the camera narrows closer to the mount.

I don’t think the body has to be the same width all the way to the front just for the heck of it.

Playing around with the menus today I think there is scope to reduce the screen slightly without greatly reducing its usability.

If the screen has to be 5” and is the limiting factor on making the camera more equally proportioned, then maybe it’s time the screen on the back was done away with and a detachable 5” screen that can be mounted to the top of the camera similar to what Red have been doing for years is a better approach. This would also free up the back of the camera for a battery sled allowing different size batteries to be used.

I have my 7” SmallHD 702 Touch mounted on top of the 6KPro as it’s the position I find most useful and comfortable when handholding.

I think the new camera should be called the ‘pro’ and the current DSLR like form factor cameras could just be called 6k but that ship has kind of sailed. Most ‘Pros’ I’ve seen using these cameras have them rigged up with a battery on the back and a screen up top kind of negating the current screen as good as it is.
Offline

Tony Spiraletti

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:29 am
  • Location: Australia

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 4:53 pm

timbutt2 wrote:
Jamie LeJeune wrote:
timbutt2 wrote: The Solution: Definitive Purpose Bodies. People understand they all have the same sensor, but each body does a unique task.
This is the model that ARRI has followed since the original Alexa. Even the larger sensor ARRI models are simply multiples of the same sensor stitched together.

And, (I think,) a strong model to live by.


I don’t think Arri’s model and Grants model could be further from each other.
Arri is not concerned with giving filmmakers affordable tools. They can release multiple camera bodies and productions choose the ones they need for the job
Owner operators are looking for more affordability as they can’t choose one of each so that is why they choose a camera that is more flexible and can be used in more situations. Many Arri owner operators now choose the Alexa Mini line as it’s shape can be rigged up easily for handheld use or torn down when needed.
Similar thing with Blackmagic but at the other end of the spectrum. To make it truly affordable for filmmakers, where possible I think you want to create one versatile camera that covers most bases and this, I think is where a form factor closer to a Canon c300, Sony FX6 or ideally for me DSMC2 etc that can be used out of the box in the hand with just a grip, and monitor or rigged up as much as needed for on the shoulder operating come into play.

Personally, I’d be happier if BMD chose a form factor more similar to the Red DSMC2 cameras. Detachable hand grip, top mounted detachable screen and space on the back for battery sled of choice. I’m no Red fan in general but using the DSMC2 system in the hand, it ticks most of the boxes for me. I really like having a big usable touch screening top of the camera. BMD already pretty much make it in the 5” Video assist and they have already created an interface on the top of the camera for an EVF that could be also used to attach a screen with swivel and tilt on the camera rather than at the back of the camera. I’d prefer this over something like the Canon and Sony solutions that still rely on dicky little LCDs hanging off them.

Understandably, this all adds cost so may be more of a Ursa Mini replacement than a Pocket replacement although I could see it fitting in between. Having the detachable screen, handle and a smaller box-like form factor could also make it attractive to the many broadcasters that liked the original micro cameras that have never been replaced. A micro on roids could be a hit with both film and tv broadcast .
Offline

JordanWright

  • Posts: 45
  • Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 1:54 pm
  • Real Name: Jordan Wright

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 5:13 pm

Personally i'm very happy with the 6K Pros form factor however, if people really want a box form factor, a FS700 style 5inch fold-up and rotatable monitor would make space for back mounted batteries and ports to be moved to the back also. It might be difficult to add mounting points on top and I think a majority of users would still add on a side handle anyway.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 3296
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Los Angeles California

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 7:24 pm

I actually suspect people don't really want a CUBE.

They just think this is the best shape for using on a gimbal.

SO....maybe BMD should focus on a camera that can be like the one everyone already has now and seems to like.....but better balances on a gimbal....

JB
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Offline
User avatar

Mark Foster

  • Posts: 1241
  • Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 10:59 am
  • Location: austria - no kangaroos +g*

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 8:39 pm

gimbal work is not a argument for me.

both my pocket 4k and 6k pro balanced very well on my RS-2
cMP 5.1 2x3,46/96GB/2x2TB 860pro/4x4TB/SSD7101A 4x2TB 970evo+/HP1344/BMD4k/Radeon VII
macOS 11.6.1
BMPCC 6k pro (7.5.1)
BMPCC 4k (7.3)+ MB speedbooster ultra 0.71 (3.60)
resolve studio 17.4.2
speed editor
desktop video 12.1
intensity pro 4k
atem extreme
Offline

Tony Spiraletti

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:29 am
  • Location: Australia

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 9:54 pm

John Brawley wrote:I actually suspect people don't really want a CUBE.

They just think this is the best shape for using on a gimbal.

SO....maybe BMD should focus on a camera that can be like the one everyone already has now and seems to like.....but better balances on a gimbal....

JB


Well, you just summed up what it took me to long winded posts to write!

But, as well as not being a cube, almost everyone I see using these cameras has a Vlock on the back negating the wonderful rear screen and a monitor on the top. So these changes wouldn’t just be for gimbal work, they’d also make the camera far more ergonomic to use and allow much longer run times than by being limited to the NPF550 batteries. Aim THIS at the pros. Don’t forget to centre the lens mount much more than what it is now. Keep it 6k if that keeps the price in line with where the 6k pro is now, I’m rarely delivering over 1080p for broadcast and 6k BRAW is great but around 2k more than what my clients want for commercial work so I deliver them 4K ProRes most of the time.
I think a more modular camera like this could be an exciting one for BMD and have them taken more seriously in the camera market.
Offline
User avatar

Jeffrey D Mathias

  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 3:54 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSun Oct 03, 2021 11:17 pm

I like the form of the UMP best. I also like the Pocket 4K. The Pocket 6K I find too large. And, I really like the new production camera although have not used one... but nice features BMD.

My suggestion for a gimbal camera would be to add transmitter and receiver and eliminate any screen (monitor), knobs, switches and strip off any unnecessary weight. Controls and viewing can all be done remotely. Maybe in two parts: A box with lens mount and battery mount or connection and a monitor with controls for camera, lens functions and a means to power.
AMD Threadripper 1950x 16-core 3.4 GHz
96 GB Crucial DDR4 2666 ECC UDIMM RAM
AsRock Fatal1ty x399 motherboard
AMD FirePro W8100 GPU & AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 GPU
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit version 2004, build 19041.1165
DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K
Offline

Ellory Yu

  • Posts: 2614
  • Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:25 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostMon Oct 04, 2021 6:46 am

Tony Spiraletti wrote:
John Brawley wrote:
Tony Spiraletti wrote:
Keep the screen. While I always use an external monitor, lot's of people love not having to rig the camera up and want to use it 'straight out of the box'. The screen on the 6KPro is fantastic and contains one of BMD's best features, their wonderful menu system!.




THIS IS THE PROBLEM.

Think about how big that screen is. Then make a box that can accommodate that screen size. Then look at how big your cube camera is. It's suddenly a lot bigger than anyone wants. And where do you put it? On top ? On the back ? It's awkward.

JB


I agree, that is the problem if we start to look at mounting a battery slot on the rear but if we keep the slot in the grip as it currently is but make it detachable, I don't think it's too much of an issue. The current Pocket body is MUCH wider than the screen. You could have the screen on the back and have the ‘box’ as wide as the screen and the camera would still be much narrower than it currently is. A 5” screen is only 4.3” wide so don’t think it a huge problem if we keep the battery compartment in the removable grip. Another option would be to reduce the screen size slightly to around 4". Would still be perfectly usable IMO.
Sure the body might need to be made a bit deeper than the current Pocket but this has advantages in being able to accomodate more ports and buttons on the side as well as providing more rigging points.
Moving the screen to the top (Have it be able to tilt up slightly too) and shrinking it a little is the option you could adopt if trying to fit a battery slot on the rear but not sure it’s 100% necessary at this stage.

I think not too. The Komodo is 4x4x4 and that box form factor and size is comfortable. I know I have used it. If they can put a monitor like it is in the Komodo then I am okay with it. But for the camera to be the size of a Pocket 4/6K screen dimension will be ridiculous. Also, that built in monitor on the pocket even with that swivel on the 6K pro is not good for composing and outdoor. I rather used my external monitor which I often do with my 6K and even the UMP.
Blackmagic Design URSA Mini Pro 4.6K G2, Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 6K
PC Workstation Core I7 64Gb, 2 x AMD R9 390X 8Gb, Blackmagic Design DeckLink 4K Mini Monitor, Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, Blackmagic Design DaVinci Resolve 17.1.4
Offline

Peter Selbie

  • Posts: 64
  • Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:38 pm
  • Real Name: Peter Selbie

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostMon Oct 04, 2021 2:50 pm

Just Upgrade the Micro Cinema Camera !!!
With a nice sensor enough dynamic range makes it slightly bigger with easier to reach buttons..

And there we are who needs RED Komodo !!
Camera : BMCC / BMPCC / BMPCC 6K
Threadripper 2920x/32GB ram/1070 oc 8GB
Windows 10 pro
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 10:58 am

There is something to be said for the Pocket 6K Pro design for emulating a stills camera however. Using it that way is interesting, but I truly believe that will be most opened up Full Frame 135mm Stills Sensor Size.

An open idea would be for Stills to change on the entire system to Blackmagic RAW Frames in the Stills directory. Replacing DNG with BRAW makes sense because you could create power grades in Resolve off stills of matching color science.

Honestly, at this point I think Camera Firmware should be handled inside DaVinci Resolve. I think this may become one of the best moves for Blackmagic Design to take. That would truly mean unified color science moving forward.

This means with the body evolution we go with the URSA Mini design for one body of the three types. Then the new Micro Box everyone wants. Then we still have the Pocket design. Leading to singular sensor tech across all three platforms.

With the 12K Blackmagic created their own sensor. I’d love to see continued development of it across all three body types. Or, even more body types if it comes to that.

Still, if Blackmagic opened up the photo stills functionality of the Pockets a bit more then we could maybe see Uncompressed BRAW allowing the most advanced color grade look that can be saved as a power grade with the sidecar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline
User avatar

Kim Janson

  • Posts: 1611
  • Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 6:54 pm
  • Location: Finland

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 11:22 am

I wonder why they did not make the new studio camera with detachable screen.

Screenshot 2021-10-07 at 14.19.37.jpg
Screenshot 2021-10-07 at 14.19.37.jpg (720.53 KiB) Viewed 1847 times
LeViteZer Smooths the movement, www.levitezer.com
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 3:15 pm

Kim Janson wrote:I wonder why they did not make the new studio camera with detachable screen.

Screenshot 2021-10-07 at 14.19.37.jpg
I think on that front they’re trying for a different class of camera meant for Live TV in studio and at Stadiums.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline

Phandemonium

  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:21 pm
  • Real Name: Julian Smith

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 3:18 pm

Well, Panasonic have just announced a new camera, the BS1H. 6K Full Frame.

Another boxy camera!

https://cvp.com/product/panasonic-lumix ... aff_id=126
Offline

jallen0

  • Posts: 658
  • Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:04 pm
  • Real Name: Justin Allen

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 3:36 pm

Phandemonium wrote:Well, Panasonic have just announced a new camera, the BS1H. 6K Full Frame.

Another boxy camera!

https://cvp.com/product/panasonic-lumix ... aff_id=126



And it can shoot BRAW! well with a BMD external monitor.
2019 MacPro OS 11.5.2, 3.2GHz 16 Core, 160GB Mem, 4TB Drive, 8TB Internal Sonnet Raid, Dual Radeon Pro W5700X 16GB
LG UF 5k, 27" Tbolt Display, 55" LG C8
Resolve Edit Keyboard, Mini Panel, US 4K Mini
Resolve Studio Ver. 17.3.1
Desktop Video 12.1
Offline

Phandemonium

  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:21 pm
  • Real Name: Julian Smith

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 4:02 pm

I get the feeling that this design is going to become the norm. Although I’m wondering what BM could do whilst making it look like it’s a BM camera.
Offline
User avatar

Kim Janson

  • Posts: 1611
  • Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 6:54 pm
  • Location: Finland

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 4:28 pm

Nice, and enough attachment points so that no gage is needed. RF mount would be nicer tough, but maybe that has issues with Canon.

Phandemonium wrote:Well, Panasonic have just announced a new camera, the BS1H. 6K Full Frame.

Another boxy camera!

https://cvp.com/product/panasonic-lumix ... aff_id=126
LeViteZer Smooths the movement, www.levitezer.com
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 14911
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 4:47 pm

Rick Lang
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 14911
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 5:05 pm

Phandemonium wrote:… I’m wondering what BM could do whilst making it look like it’s a BM camera.


Nice there’s a Genlock interface to keep Netflix happy, but for one thing, the 3G SDI likely won’t appear on a BMD camera using this sensor as I’d expect that’s too limiting.
Rick Lang
Offline

Phandemonium

  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:21 pm
  • Real Name: Julian Smith

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 5:57 pm

With all these cameras being announced or being released; could there be a new BM camera on the horizon?
Offline
User avatar

Kim Janson

  • Posts: 1611
  • Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 6:54 pm
  • Location: Finland

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostThu Oct 07, 2021 7:24 pm

It is more and more difficult to see what the next camera could/should be, there is so many image wise good enough cameras.

There is much to improve though on the system wide integration and economics, maybe we see more stuff like zoom and focus demand controller, lens control leaves still much to desire.

There is also new areas that many have tried, but not really succeeded due lack of the complete ecosystem, what good is 360, or 180VR video if there is not good enough viewing devices, and if people do not have them, but I think it is slowly getting there. Canon just announced 180VR lens. Maybe if Apple would make a VR headset, the content creators would also start looking on that direction.
LeViteZer Smooths the movement, www.levitezer.com
Offline

CaptainHook

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 1935
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:50 am
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • Real Name: Hook

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 08, 2021 3:13 am

jallen0 wrote:And it can shoot BRAW! well with a BMD external monitor.

The BS1H is supported in Video Assist 3.5, Blackmagic RAW 2.2 and Resolve 17.3.2 releases that all went out today.
**Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**
Offline

Ellory Yu

  • Posts: 2614
  • Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:25 pm

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 08, 2021 6:42 am

CaptainHook wrote:
jallen0 wrote:And it can shoot BRAW! well with a BMD external monitor.

The BS1H is supported in Video Assist 3.5, Blackmagic RAW 2.2 and Resolve 17.3.2 releases that all went out today.

Nice. Now only if BMD made a camera that has the guts of the pocket 6K Pro in a box form factor, with BRAW and Prores with Gen5 in-camera, and price it for half the price of the BS1H? That would be epic!
Blackmagic Design URSA Mini Pro 4.6K G2, Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 6K
PC Workstation Core I7 64Gb, 2 x AMD R9 390X 8Gb, Blackmagic Design DeckLink 4K Mini Monitor, Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, Blackmagic Design DaVinci Resolve 17.1.4
Offline

Dennis Sørensen

  • Posts: 144
  • Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 9:59 am
  • Location: Denmark

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 08, 2021 11:20 am

Ya I agree with Tim Buttner.. we still need a nice all intergrated design like we have on the UMP series. Is just a workhorse. No faffing about with small controls, cables etc.

But this should be supported by a smaller cube version for gimbal or rigging. Just like they had beforehand with the micro series. Remove stuff like big XLRs, big 4-pin power (both front and rear), remove the 4” screen (maybe a smaller non-rotating 3”? For control - not for monitoring usage) and just make it as small as possible.
Offline

Kamil Sarnowski

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:42 pm
  • Real Name: Kamil Sarnowski

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 08, 2021 8:21 pm

+1 for a box-shaped BM camera. And +1 for p6k pro external EVF support. Lightweight cam with small EVF would be my dream pocket camera
Offline

Sisaytez

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:36 pm
  • Real Name: Sisay tez

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 09, 2021 12:47 pm

:D MAYBE THIS
Attachments
Vision.jpg
BLACK MAGIC VISION CAMERA
Vision.jpg (248.39 KiB) Viewed 1174 times
Offline

Robert Castiglione

  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:36 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 15, 2021 4:17 am

Talking about camera form factors, I remember the early days of Red when forum members were chiming in about what they wanted. The best one of all was this one:
Attachments
Red.jpg
Red Cam evolution suggestions
Red.jpg (7.37 KiB) Viewed 1116 times
Rob Castiglione
robcastiglione.com
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 15, 2021 4:48 pm

Sisaytez wrote::D MAYBE THIS
Looks too much like a RED.

But technically Blackmagic cameras already have a lot of those features. They do do true 16 Bit color, as 16 Bit Linear. So maybe 24 Bit Linear for 16 Bit Log is what people want?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline
User avatar

timbutt2

  • Posts: 2035
  • Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostFri Oct 15, 2021 4:49 pm

Robert Castiglione wrote:Talking about camera form factors, I remember the early days of Red when forum members were chiming in about what they wanted. The best one of all was this one:
Hahahaha!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"I'm well trained in the art of turning **** to gold." - Tim Buttner (timbutt2)

Cameras: URSA Mini Pro G2, Pocket 6K Pro, Pocket 6K, & Cinema Camera 2.5K EF
Computers: iMac 5K (Mid 2020) & MacBook Pro Retina 15.4in (Mid 2018)
Offline

Robert Castiglione

  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:36 am

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 16, 2021 8:45 am

Red was going down the vegetable and fruit route originally and I was all on board with that. But then they suddenly swerved into heavy artillery, munitions etc and lost me.

Obviously, Black Magic's philosophy is quite different ....
Attachments
bmpp.jpg
bmpp.jpg (138.74 KiB) Viewed 891 times
Rob Castiglione
robcastiglione.com
Offline
User avatar

Kim Janson

  • Posts: 1611
  • Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 6:54 pm
  • Location: Finland

Re: Camera Body Evolution

PostSat Oct 16, 2021 9:19 am

The micro camera
Attachments
BMMCC.jpg
BMMCC.jpg (33.61 KiB) Viewed 876 times
LeViteZer Smooths the movement, www.levitezer.com
Next

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AntonioAlva, chbkoiklp457, Dmitry Shijan, Google [Bot] and 21 guests