Introducing Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera

The Abakus 1061 format converter I linked is a proper converter that makes up for the fact that the lens is designed for a prism camera. ...

Hi balazer: Thanks for the additional information. I understand that the Abakus format converter is designed for lenses for prism cameras. Apologies if my post was not clear on that point. Cheers.

-

Looking at buying some CCTV lenses to get started and see what focal lengths work in demos, then SLR Magic 12mm and Voigtlander 17.5mm.

Just watch out, cctv lenses don't always fill the s16 image circle!

Thats ok mate, I'm only interested in testing focal lengths. For $20 I can cope with any defects there might be.

I'm primarily after a good portrait / interview lens which I'm hoping the Voigtlander will be ideal for.

Looking at buying some CCTV lenses to get started and see what focal lengths work in demos, then SLR Magic 12mm and Voigtlander 17.5mm.

Just watch out, cctv lenses don't always fill the s16 image circle!

Thats ok mate, I'm only interested in testing focal lengths. For $20 I can cope with any defects there might be.

I'm primarily after a good portrait / interview lens which I'm hoping the Voigtlander will be ideal for.

Basically, get something that will cover 1" (2/3" with some vignette) the 1/3" lenses will be painful. If I'm mistaken, feel free to correct me.

Basically, get something that will cover 1" (2/3" with some vignette) the 1/3" lenses will be painful. If I'm mistaken, feel free to correct me.

Nope, perfect. Some 2/3" lenses almost fill what i expect to be the image circle of the Pocket CC, but they lack in sharpness and show chromatic aberrations near the corners - might be ok to crop 720p from the middle though. Most 2/3" lenses are just unuseable.

Just found this very useful link to calculate FOV with various lenses on the BMPCC.

Apologies if the link has already been given earlier in the thread.

http://bmpcc.rubenkremer.nl/

Just found this very useful link to calculate FOV with various lenses on the BMPCC.

Apologies if the link has already been given earlier in the thread.

http://bmpcc.rubenkremer.nl/

I have checked out the resulting calculations and agree with the crop factors used on this web calculator. He has used crop factors with the sensor formats all normalized to a 16:9 aspect ratio as I have done when I use the iPhone app Angle of View. So this web page is free and accurate and useful if you are shooting with the BMPCC. Nice that he has calculated the crop factor for many, many different sensors and film formats in case you are curious about the many different implementations of Super35 for example.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

There's another update from Blackmagic at the recent Broadcast Asia 2013



In summary they expect to be shipping the BPCC in July with RAW enabled.

You ordered in europe, so lay back and wait until the camera's out in the wild - you'll still have plenty of time to buy memory cards then... If you only want to shoot ProRes you should be fine with any card capable of 30 mb/s constant write speed; for compressed raw only the top class cards seem fit, look for cards that can write 90 mb/s!

Thanks Mac Jaeger!


I saw a video clip made with Pocket camera in Vimeo.
https://vimeo.com/groups/188659/videos/64693161

When the camera turns around at 0:55, 01:02 and 01:10 everything becomes dizzy and hacks?
Is this because of the rolling shutter or low frame rate?

In this video a woman moves fast at 0:50 and a similar effect happens.
https://vimeo.com/groups/188659/videos/67562461

If it is a shutter issue, will the 4K camera be with out it since it got global shutter?

(I really don't like this effect, I don't want to only shoot flowers and sunsets)

Have this camera problem to capture movements like sport, cars, dance, animals?

I saw a video clip made with Pocket camera in Vimeo.
https://vimeo.com/groups/188659/videos/64693161

When the camera turns around at 0:55, 01:02 and 01:10 everything becomes dizzy and hacks?
Is this because of the rolling shutter or low frame rate?

Can't quite follow... dizzy? You mean unsharp? That's neither low frame rate nor rolling shutter, that's just normal motion blur, probably shot at 24hz/180° (resulting in image illumination time of around 20 ms, or 1/48 shutter speed). There is rolling shutter visible in the footage, but it's barely noticeable. Or did you mean the playback stutters? That's not part of the footage, but a problem with your vimeo-player - at least there is on my pc, probably due to lack of a proper gfx card...

In this video a woman moves fast at 0:50 and a similar effect happens.
https://vimeo.com/groups/188659/videos/67562461

Again: are you referring to the blurred background? That's normal motion blur.

Have this camera problem to capture movements like sport, cars, dance, animals?

No it hasn't, yet you might have. Hugh? Explanation: This camera can shoot at 24 to 30 frames per second, which isn't incredibly fast, but you can select how long the shutter remains open during each frame. It's common practice to shoot at "180°" shutter angle, which means that the shutter remains open for half of the duration of an image. In DSLR terms this means: if you shoot at 25 fps (usual PAL speed) with 180° shutter angle this translates to a shutter speed of only 1/50, producing nice, soft movements, yet also blurry edges around any moving object. If you need sharper images, you do the same as photographers do: you select a faster shutter speed, like 90° (shutter speed 1/100) or 45° (1/200) etc., all with respect to 25 fps image frequency. This way you get less motion blur, yet you also gather less light, so you need higher ISO and/or faster lenses, especially at night (like in the second video you linked). Using the right lens and filming in a brightly lit scene you can get crisp sharp images of moving objects - even "unnaturally crisp" images, if that is what you want.

Usually cinematographers want a certain amount of motion blur to compensate for the low frame rates of 24 fps, e.g. in the "market" video JB had to use neutral density filters to lower the amount of light captured, otherwise he would have shot "too sharp" images.

Basically, get something that will cover 1" (2/3" with some vignette) the 1/3" lenses will be painful. If I'm mistaken, feel free to correct me.

Thanks for this. I double checked and they're all 1/2" on eBay, so no good.

Picked up an EF to MFT adaptor with aperture adjustment so I'll experiment with my Canon lenses to start with and see how it looks. Dealer has the Voigtlander on the shelf anyway so may end up leaving with it.

Basically, get something that will cover 1" (2/3" with some vignette) the 1/3" lenses will be painful. If I'm mistaken, feel free to correct me.

Thanks for this. I double checked and they're all 1/2" on eBay, so no good.

Picked up an EF to MFT adaptor with aperture adjustment so I'll experiment with my Canon lenses to start with and see how it looks. Dealer has the Voigtlander on the shelf anyway so may end up leaving with it.

There's plenty of 1" c mount lenses on eBay but they aren't cheap. I've got FD glass on my gf2 and adapted to MFT they are brilliant. I'd suggest getting a few adapters for a good arsenal of glass. Wait till you have the cam first though.

Do you think this lens with work if i use m42 to m43 adaptor? anyone know the quality of the lens

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EXC-Krasnogorsk ... 43bd07501f

Heyall, just joined the forum! I've got a couple of questions:

I'm considering getting the Tokina 11-16 for this in a EF mount to also use on my DSLR. Will using a EF-to-MFT adapter with builtin aperture control have a different/worse quality bokeh than using the lens's native iris? I really don't want to lug around my DSLR just to change to iris.

I was also looking at the new Sigma 19mm DN but noticed it is focus-by-wire. I am getting mixed messages about how active the MFT mount will be on this. Will it supply power to focus, or only be capable of changing aperture?

On another note: B&H just updated the availability to end of August

Will using a EF-to-MFT adapter with builtin aperture control have a different/worse quality bokeh than using the lens's native iris?

These adapters suck big time. Heavy vignetting, on a wideangle like the Tokina even worse! Search for it on YouTube (they are also called "Kipon").

My idea would be to buy that Lens in NIKON Mount, then getting a Nikon G Adapter (Nikon G Adapter maintains real manual Aperture-Control within the Adapter). There are also Nikon G to EF Adapters available.

Will using a EF-to-MFT adapter with builtin aperture control have a different/worse quality bokeh than using the lens's native iris?

These adapters suck big time. Heavy vignetting, on a wideangle like the Tokina even worse! Search for it on YouTube (they are also called "Kipon").

My idea would be to buy that Lens in NIKON Mount, then getting a Nikon G Adapter (Nikon G Adapter maintains real manual Aperture-Control within the Adapter). There are also Nikon G to EF Adapters available.

Are you sure it'd vignette on the s16 sensor?

Will using a EF-to-MFT adapter with builtin aperture control have a different/worse quality bokeh than using the lens's native iris?

These adapters suck big time. Heavy vignetting, on a wideangle like the Tokina even worse! Search for it on YouTube (they are also called "Kipon").

My idea would be to buy that Lens in NIKON Mount, then getting a Nikon G Adapter (Nikon G Adapter maintains real manual Aperture-Control within the Adapter). There are also Nikon G to EF Adapters available.

Are you sure it'd vignette on the s16 sensor?

I'll know in a couple of weeks, I've bought one of these: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/250950029018 ... 1497.l2649

I've got a Canon 50m 1.4 and Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 and 120-400s to try with it, see what happens. There are a lot of decent reviews online, but these are on other cameras.

Well I don't understand how a lens designed for a bigger sensor would vignette on a smaller sensor. Though I'm keen to get schooled.

I saw a video clip made with Pocket camera in Vimeo.
https://vimeo.com/groups/188659/videos/64693161

When the camera turns around at 0:55, 01:02 and 01:10 everything becomes dizzy and hacks?
Is this because of the rolling shutter or low frame rate?

Can't quite follow... dizzy? You mean unsharp? That's neither low frame rate nor rolling shutter, that's just normal motion blur, probably shot at 24hz/180° (resulting in image illumination time of around 20 ms, or 1/48 shutter speed). There is rolling shutter visible in the footage, but it's barely noticeable. Or did you mean the playback stutters? That's not part of the footage, but a problem with your vimeo-player - at least there is on my pc, probably due to lack of a proper gfx card...

In this video a woman moves fast at 0:50 and a similar effect happens.
https://vimeo.com/groups/188659/videos/67562461

Again: are you referring to the blurred background? That's normal motion blur.

Have this camera problem to capture movements like sport, cars, dance, animals?

No it hasn't, yet you might have. Hugh? Explanation: This camera can shoot at 24 to 30 frames per second, which isn't incredibly fast, but you can select how long the shutter remains open during each frame. It's common practice to shoot at "180°" shutter angle, which means that the shutter remains open for half of the duration of an image. In DSLR terms this means: if you shoot at 25 fps (usual PAL speed) with 180° shutter angle this translates to a shutter speed of only 1/50, producing nice, soft movements, yet also blurry edges around any moving object. If you need sharper images, you do the same as photographers do: you select a faster shutter speed, like 90° (shutter speed 1/100) or 45° (1/200) etc., all with respect to 25 fps image frequency. This way you get less motion blur, yet you also gather less light, so you need higher ISO and/or faster lenses, especially at night (like in the second video you linked). Using the right lens and filming in a brightly lit scene you can get crisp sharp images of moving objects - even "unnaturally crisp" images, if that is what you want.

Usually cinematographers want a certain amount of motion blur to compensate for the low frame rates of 24 fps, e.g. in the "market" video JB had to use neutral density filters to lower the amount of light captured, otherwise he would have shot "too sharp" images.

Ok thanks for clearing it out!
Perhaps its just shutter speed settings.

There's a good chance it would. You can control the DoF with it, but I don't see a reason when you can get the Nikon-Version and natively change Aperture. These Adapters are simply not good.

I own too, btw; on the GH2 it's horrific, and when you can e.g. only use the Lens up to f/4 or 5.6 because of Vignetting... meh

Will using a EF-to-MFT adapter with builtin aperture control have a different/worse quality bokeh than using the lens's native iris?

These adapters suck big time. Heavy vignetting, on a wideangle like the Tokina even worse! Search for it on YouTube (they are also called "Kipon").

My idea would be to buy that Lens in NIKON Mount, then getting a Nikon G Adapter (Nikon G Adapter maintains real manual Aperture-Control within the Adapter). There are also Nikon G to EF Adapters available.

Thank you! I just researched the Nikon designs (what a huge confusing list of letters and technicalities!). I didn't realize these G type lenses still had mechanically controlled apertures. Makes it a lot cheaper to work with than buying Redrock's $550 active EF adapter. I see a $25 one from Fotodiox and a $250 one from Novoflex. Anyone have any reasons not to buy the Fotodiox?

Novoflex is a german company and here's what I heard from a german camera-store why they are so expensive:

First, flawless manufactering with best fit, best materials, good design (if you like that). Second, there's a possibility that an Adapter can hurt your Cam. E.g. the electronical contacts and then break it. The seller told me, that Novoflex will, in such a case, pay for that. Still this is only what a seller of adapters and vintage lenses told me, don't know if it's true.
I have a very cheap (20€) Adapter for Nikon G, and it works great.

Still, maybe this could be also something for you then: http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9432

Which LANC Focus and Iris controller pick?

So the Pocket cam starts shipping on Monday right? Heh

Seems should start shipping mid month, arriving with dealers late in the month depending on country.

Seems should start shipping mid month, arriving with dealers late in the month depending on country.

Where do you get this information? Or are you just guessing?

Seems should start shipping mid month, arriving with dealers late in the month depending on country.

Where do you get this information? Or are you just guessing?

Dealer I have preordered from got an update of 3-4 weeks about 10 days ago, which was mid July. Granted, I'm in Australia, but given they're not made here I wouldn't think this makes a huge difference.

Sounds reasonable, given that we've already seen footage a long time ago and JB was carrying a working modell with him for months. Still you might get the cameras earlier on your side of the globe, when living in europe i wouldn't hold my breath just now...

... Granted, I'm in Australia, but given they're not made here I wouldn't think this makes a huge difference.

I thought BMD's camera are manufactured in Australia, or at least assembled there? Not true?

-

... Granted, I'm in Australia, but given they're not made here I wouldn't think this makes a huge difference.

I thought BMD's camera are manufactured in Australia, or at least assembled there? Not true?

-

Singapore was the word I got.

... Granted, I'm in Australia, but given they're not made here I wouldn't think this makes a huge difference.

I thought BMD's camera are manufactured in Australia, or at least assembled there? Not true?

-

Singapore was the word I got.

This is what I read recently. Designed in Australia, built in Singaporean factories.

Hello everybody!

I'm new and at a lost of what should be my first m43 lens for my bmpcc.

Olympus 12-50mm (they go for about 200 on eBay)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0073A ... ttom_links

Lumix 14-45
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14-45mm ... umix+14-45


Lumix 14mm prime (I'd probably get the 20mm in the future)
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14mm-2- ... Lumix+12mm


I'm bouncing back and forth with what id like to get. The olympus is nice because of how wide it is but then no ois like the Lumix but then it's 14mm. Then the prime is fast but then I'm stuck at one focal length. The decision is hair pulling!!!
What do you guys think?
Thanks in advance

... I'm bouncing back and forth with what id like to get. The olympus is nice because of how wide it is but then no ois like the Lumix but then it's 14mm. Then the prime is fast but then I'm stuck at one focal length. The decision is hair pulling!!!
What do you guys think?
Thanks in advance

Adam, welcome and try reading some of the threads that pertain to your quandary. Both those zooms exhibit significant distortion which is corrected in-camera on Panasonic and Olympus micro four-thirds cameras. The BMPCC has no such distortion correction. They will work but you might be better waiting to see what how they perform on the BMPCC before purchasing. The 14mm also has about 5% distortion so not a good choice. Look for lenses that are designed for the MFT mount like the SLR Magic 12mm 1.6 for your wide angle. SLR Magic and Voitländer have very fast lenses, 0.95, if that interests you.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Hello everybody!

I'm new and at a lost of what should be my first m43 lens for my bmpcc.

Olympus 12-50mm (they go for about 200 on eBay)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0073A ... ttom_links

Lumix 14-45
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14-45mm ... umix+14-45


Lumix 14mm prime (I'd probably get the 20mm in the future)
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14mm-2- ... Lumix+12mm


I'm bouncing back and forth with what id like to get. The olympus is nice because of how wide it is but then no ois like the Lumix but then it's 14mm. Then the prime is fast but then I'm stuck at one focal length. The decision is hair pulling!!!
What do you guys think?
Thanks in advance

Adam, as Rick said have a look around here and see what you can find. It'll all depend on your budget.

John Brawley has used the 14-45 and seems to think it's ok: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/blackmagic- ... ost1802306

Otherwise look into the SLR Magic and Voigtlander lenses. Depends entirely on budget and what you're doing with it.

Thanks for the help everybody!

My budget is in the few hundred dollars because I'm just a hobbyist that shoots canon so m4/3 is a whole new spectrum for me.


I've been leaning towards the lumix more but when it comes to a basic zoom lens am at a lost between the 14-45 and the 14-42. I having seen jb use the 14-45 unless I'm mistaken but he has used the 14-42 mk1 (some beach footage in his second video) and it looks pretty good from my phone but reviews are kinda meh on it.

Thanks for the help everybody!

My budget is in the few hundred dollars because I'm just a hobbyist that shoots canon so m4/3 is a whole new spectrum for me.


I've been leaning towards the lumix more but when it comes to a basic zoom lens am at a lost between the 14-45 and the 14-42. I having seen jb use the 14-45 unless I'm mistaken but he has used the 14-42 mk1 (some beach footage in his second video) and it looks pretty good from my phone but reviews are kinda meh on it.

I noticed that after, 14-45 is the older version. Seems like the 14-45 is a fraction better, but they both perform like $300 kit lenses. Nice kit lenses, but some good primes will always get you better performance.

If you're just a hobbyist I don't think it can hurt, especially at the prices I'm seeing the 14-42 on ebay.

I thought about this Olympus set. But I did't realize distortion troubles ... Is it same bummer with prime lenses?

Is my focal lenght conversion right?

Olympus M.ZUIKO ED 12mm f/2,0 (BMPCC aprox. 36mm)

Olympus M.ZUIKO ED 45mm f/1,8 (BMPCC aprox. 135mm)

Olympus M.ZUIKO ED 75mm f/1,8 (BMPCC aprox. 225mm)

I just pre-ordered the BMPCC and am looking to do some in-person interviews against a backdrop. The camera will be positioned about five feet from the subject and I have plenty of lighting.

Is the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lens a good one to start with?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/8 ... al_ED.html

This is an example of the type of look I want to achieve:

http://wistia.com/learning/make-5-videos-not-1

Thanks for any insight.

For the price, you can't go wrong with a Lumix 14-42 lens. The image stabilization is sure to come in handy at some point, and it is only 2/3 of a stop slower than the Lumix 12-35 at the wide end for 1/10 the price. Yes, the distortion is kind of bad at 14 mm, but it's no worse than on the Lumix 12-35 lens, or on a Lumix 14 mm pancake. Sometimes the distortion will matter, and sometimes it won't. It really depends on what you are shooting. The distortion is easily correctable in post, though with some loss of resolution. The distortion is virtually gone by 24 mm. Resistance to flare is good. The 14-45 holds little advantage at video resolutions.

For one stop faster, no image stabilization, and the same distortion at 14 mm, get the Lumix 14/2.5 pancake.

If you need low distortion and a wide angle, you'll be looking at something like the SLR Magic 12/1.6, a Lumix 7-14 at around 10 mm, an Olympus 9-18 at around 13 mm, a Tokina 11-16/2.8, or a Sigma 10-20/4.0-5.6. Those last two would need to be Nikon versions on a Nikon G adapter with an aperture control.

I just pre-ordered the BMPCC and am looking to do some in-person interviews against a backdrop. The camera will be positioned about five feet from the subject and I have plenty of lighting.

Is the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lens a good one to start with?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/8 ... al_ED.html

This is an example of the type of look I want to achieve:

http://wistia.com/learning/make-5-videos-not-1

Thanks for any insight.

The Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 looks like a good lens in terms of distortion which is about 1% and probably not an issue for shooting interview subjects.

On the BMPCC, the vertical frame of that 45mm lens will be 0.8' with the camera 5' from the subject and 1.6' with the camera at 10'. If you can be 10' away, I think you will get the framing in the example you gave. The 45mm lens angle of view is like a 130mm lens on a full- frame camera like the Canon 5D.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I thought about this Olympus set. But I did't realize distortion troubles ... Is it same bummer with prime lenses?

Is my focal lenght conversion right?

Olympus M.ZUIKO ED 12mm f/2,0 (BMPCC aprox. 36mm)

Olympus M.ZUIKO ED 45mm f/1,8 (BMPCC aprox. 135mm)

Olympus M.ZUIKO ED 75mm f/1,8 (BMPCC aprox. 225mm)

The Olympus M.Zuiko 12mm has barrel distortion over 5%; the 17mm has barrel distortion of about 4.5%, the 45mm is about 1%; the 75mm pincushions about .4%.

Compared to a full-frame sensor, the angle of view for the 12mm is like 35mm; 17mm is like 49mm; 45mm is like 130mm; and 75 mm is like 216mm.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I just pre-ordered the BMPCC and am looking to do some in-person interviews against a backdrop. The camera will be positioned about five feet from the subject and I have plenty of lighting.

Is the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lens a good one to start with?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/8 ... al_ED.html

This is an example of the type of look I want to achieve:

http://wistia.com/learning/make-5-videos-not-1

Thanks for any insight.

The Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 looks like a good lens in terms of distortion which is about 1% and probably not an issue for shooting interview subjects.

On the BMPCC, the vertical frame of that 45mm lens will be 0.8' with the camera 5' from the subject and 1.6' with the camera at 10'. If you can be 10' away, I think you will get the framing in the example you gave. The 45mm lens angle of view is like a 130mm lens on a full- frame camera like the Canon 5D.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Hey Rick! You may have just saved me from a disappointing shoot. I only have about 5-7 feet worth of room to position the camera. Glad I asked.

I have a few follow up questions:

1. Do you think the 17mm lens is a better option?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/9 ... Angle.html

2. I heard that you're supposed to multiply the focal length by two to find its equivalent in full-frame 35mm (e.g. 17 x 2 = 34mm). Is that true?

3. How did you do the math to find the frame size? I can see that being useful to know.

Thanks again!

Regards,

Trent

I just pre-ordered the BMPCC and am looking to do some in-person interviews against a backdrop. The camera will be positioned about five feet from the subject and I have plenty of lighting.

Is the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lens a good one to start with?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/8 ... al_ED.html

This is an example of the type of look I want to achieve:

http://wistia.com/learning/make-5-videos-not-1

Thanks for any insight.

The Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 looks like a good lens in terms of distortion which is about 1% and probably not an issue for shooting interview subjects.

On the BMPCC, the vertical frame of that 45mm lens will be 0.8' with the camera 5' from the subject and 1.6' with the camera at 10'. If you can be 10' away, I think you will get the framing in the example you gave. The 45mm lens angle of view is like a 130mm lens on a full- frame camera like the Canon 5D.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Hey Rick! You may have just saved me from a disappointing shoot. I only have about 5-7 feet worth of room to position the camera. Glad I asked.

I have a few follow up questions:

1. Do you think the 17mm lens is a better option?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/9 ... Angle.html

2. I heard that you're supposed to multiply the focal length by two to find its equivalent in full-frame 35mm (e.g. 17 x 2 = 34mm). Is that true?

3. How did you do the math to find the frame size? I can see that being useful to know.

Thanks again!

Regards,

Trent

On the Pocket it's closer to multiply by 3. If you do a search on here there is a website that'll do all the heavy lifting for you.

Hello everybody!

I'm new and at a lost of what should be my first m43 lens for my bmpcc.

Olympus 12-50mm (they go for about 200 on eBay)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0073A ... ttom_links

Lumix 14-45
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14-45mm ... umix+14-45


Lumix 14mm prime (I'd probably get the 20mm in the future)
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-14mm-2- ... Lumix+12mm


I'm bouncing back and forth with what id like to get. The olympus is nice because of how wide it is but then no ois like the Lumix but then it's 14mm. Then the prime is fast but then I'm stuck at one focal length. The decision is hair pulling!!!
What do you guys think?
Thanks in advance

Hello Adam,

I'm also new to video but I have used m4/3 extensively for still photography for a few years now, both for personal projects and professionally.

I don't have the Olympus 12-50 zoom but I'm pretty sure it has a variable speed power zoom feature which is probably good for video work.

There may be a workaround for any optical distortion that the Pocket Cinema Camera doesn't correct for internally. If you shoot raw you can correct lens distortion in Adobe Camera Raw like Barrel/Pincushion Distortion, Chromatic Aberration, straighten verticals for buildings, etc. You can even create a lens profile to speedily apply preset automatic corrections.

Of course a raw workflow may be slower and more taxing on hard disk space but that's another story.

Hello all,

I'm new to video like I said in a previous post, but I've used m4/3 mirrorless cameras for still photography for a while now. Since I already have a good lens collection and am dabbling in video I'm keen to get the Pocket Cinema Camera.

I'm wondering if there is an Electronic Viewfinder available that will plug into the camera's HDMI socket. I'm aware of external portable monitors but those are both bulkier than what I'm thinking of and probably as hard to view in bright sunlight as the camera's own built-in monitor. I find a viewfinder that you can put your eye right up against indispensable in bright sunlight. And no, I'm not thinking of a bulky, awkward loupe to strap to the camera's back. Olympus has recently introduced an excellent high resolution clip-on electronic viewfinder for their Pen series cameras, the VF-4. Something like that would be great.

Does anyone have solutions?

Distortion correction is of course possible, but you'll inevitably loose some resolution, even in a raw workflow. That's no biggy with the 2.5k CC, it has some percent "spare resolution", but the Pocket CC is designed to deliver exactly 1080, so every pixel counts. And shooting raw on the Pocket CC is not very comfortable, as you need more more expensive cards (yes, two times more: more cards, each being more expensive) and will only fit some minutes of footage on each. The Pocket CC is definitely built to record ProRes, with raw capture as a last ressort possibility.

3. How did you do the math to find the frame size? I can see that being useful to know.

On the Pocket it's closer to multiply by 3. If you do a search on here there is a website that'll do all the heavy lifting for you.

My favorite online FoV calculator for BMPCC is: http://bmpcc.rubenkremer.nl

Distortion correction is of course possible, but you'll inevitably loose some resolution, even in a raw workflow. That's no biggy with the 2.5k CC, it has some percent "spare resolution", but the Pocket CC is designed to deliver exactly 1080, so every pixel counts.

Is this a big issue in real life? I'm new to video so I'm curious about workflows and accepted quality standards within video circles.

With still photographs I find that Adobe Camera Raw upsamples images just fine, even if they are relatively lo-resolution. At any rate I've had no qualms using lens corrections and upping the scale of still images in ACR.

Is this a big issue in real life?

Depends on the life. If you're producing for the web, you probably won't notice the difference; but if you're aiming at hdtv or even cinemas, you'll benefit from a lens that doesn't need distortion correction. Same goes for your scenes: if you're shooting many straight lines you'll notice distortions more than with other scenes. Finally it's up to you, how much bent trees you can stand.

Getting anxious now, just want to know the shipping dates!

I have a few follow up questions:

1. Do you think the 17mm lens is a better option?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/9 ... Angle.html

2. I heard that you're supposed to multiply the focal length by two to find its equivalent in full-frame 35mm (e.g. 17 x 2 = 34mm). Is that true?

3. How did you do the math to find the frame size? I can see that being useful to know.

Thanks again!

Regards,

Trent

The 17mm is a better lens in that the vertical frame is 2.1' with the camera at 5' from the subject. A 25mm lens will have vertical frame of 2' with the camera at 7' from the subject and that might give you a better perspective on the subject. Unless you want noses to look too large, never get closer than 5' with the subject facing the camera.

The crop factor of the BMPCC is 2.88x regardless of what BMD has previously posted when you compare the sensor to a full-frame camera with both sensors having a 16:9 aspect ratio.

If you are only interested in how lenses will work on the BMPCC, there is an excellent and free web page that will do some calculations for you. Mark de Jeu has posted the link a few messages earlier in this thread. If you want a more complete application, I recommend the iPhone app, Angle of View. Works fine on the iPad too.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD