Blackmagic Forum

Congratulations!

Congratulations. I now see we should add on an emoticon to the list that shows congrats for the birth of a baby. But a smiley face will have to do.

Gan Eden wrote:Are you an employee of BMD? Just asking.

No, why would you think that? If i was, i'd either give out facts (instead of educated guesswork) or keep silent. But since i'm not, i'm just reciting what was said and written elsewhere, and what i deducted from it.

LMACKREATH wrote:Official statement from Blackmagic on new camera shipping:

Simon Westland of Blackmagic Design EMEA

"Blackmagic Design is making significant progress in production of the new Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera and Blackmagic Production Camera 4K. Full production manufacturing is underway on the Pocket Cinema Camera with first production units in final testing. This is inline with our initial expectations of the end of July and means the camera will start to ship in quantity during August. There are several weeks of work to do on Production Camera 4K before this will enter full production manufacturing, however we expect to ship the first quantities of this model before the end of August."

Here's more extensive detail: http://www.televisual.com/news-detail/Blackmagics-new-cameras-delayed_nid-3068.html

Mac Jaeger wrote:

Gan Eden wrote:Are you an employee of BMD? Just asking.

No, why would you think that? If i was, i'd either give out facts (instead of educated guesswork) or keep silent. But since i'm not, i'm just reciting what was said and written elsewhere, and what i deducted from it.

I think its because you said "we" in one of your responses. That might have been misinterpreted.

Yeah the pocket cam is now entering full production...I'm number 85 on the list from my distributor so unless there shipping a good amount I probably won't see my camera in August. I am going on a trip early September and really wanted this camera with me. My local camera store which is privately owned ordered some pocket cams a couple weeks back so hopefully even though there not a big vendor they get in some of them because once they get it then I get it as they have told me the first cam they get will be held for me.

A quick question about lenses. I have a few canon lenses I'd like to be able to use on the pocket cam. Does anyone know if the EOS lenses that focus by wire will work with a non active adapter? I keep trying to find info for this and can't seem to have any success.

I can't wait to get my pocket cam, even if it takes a couple months.

Anthony Vescio wrote:

Mac Jaeger wrote:

Gan Eden wrote:Are you an employee of BMD? Just asking.

No, why would you think that? If i was, i'd either give out facts (instead of educated guesswork) or keep silent. But since i'm not, i'm just reciting what was said and written elsewhere, and what i deducted from it.

I think its because you said "we" in one of your responses. That might have been misinterpreted.

Ah, i see. Sorry if i mislead you! In that particular posting i was repeating knowledge found elsewhere in this forum, so "we" meant "people in this forum".

thorthefifth wrote:A quick question about lenses. I have a few canon lenses I'd like to be able to use on the pocket cam. Does anyone know if the EOS lenses that focus by wire will work with a non active adapter? I keep trying to find info for this and can't seem to have any success.

The Pocket CC has an active mft mount, but that's of no help when using a passive adapter. So the answer is "no".

Mac Jaeger wrote:

thorthefifth wrote:A quick question about lenses. I have a few canon lenses I'd like to be able to use on the pocket cam. Does anyone know if the EOS lenses that focus by wire will work with a non active adapter? I keep trying to find info for this and can't seem to have any success.

The Pocket CC has an active mft mount, but that's of no help when using a passive adapter. So the answer is "no".

Thanks. I hate to buy mft lenses since I already have some L lenses. That redrock adapter looks pretty sweet. May need to look into that.

I'm hoping that Australia gets some priority on the BMPCC. Not too fussed though, I make do with what I have. Still pondering on what lenses to get, I have an FD to MFT adapter and some nice FD glass already. I'm very tempted by the Zeiss CP.2's.

Benjamin Pearce wrote:Not to some people apparently! Judging on what has been said over the past few weeks the world is going to end if these cameras aren't shipped by the end of the month.

well it certainly is unfortunate to hear stories of people who had planned on on them for a shoot that began on July 30th. not smart to build a production schedule on a camera that isn't in your hands yet.

thorthefifth wrote:A quick question about lenses. I have a few canon lenses I'd like to be able to use on the pocket cam. Does anyone know if the EOS lenses that focus by wire will work with a non active adapter? I keep trying to find info for this and can't seem to have any success.

I can't wait to get my pocket cam, even if it takes a couple months.

I wouldn't think so. The lens has to be powered if it's focus by wire, and the aperture needs to be powered as well with EF lenses.

jb

Jace Ross wrote:I'm hoping that Australia gets some priority on the BMPCC. Not too fussed though, I make do with what I have. Still pondering on what lenses to get, I have an FD to MFT adapter and some nice FD glass already. I'm very tempted by the Zeiss CP.2's.

Of course, we're all waiting on baited breath for a Speed Booster adapter to get more out of our FD lenses on an MFT mount. Ironically, the Lens Turbo might beat Metabones to market, as it's promised in the next few weeks.

hpmoon wrote:

Jace Ross wrote:I'm hoping that Australia gets some priority on the BMPCC. Not too fussed though, I make do with what I have. Still pondering on what lenses to get, I have an FD to MFT adapter and some nice FD glass already. I'm very tempted by the Zeiss CP.2's.

Of course, we're all waiting on baited breath for a Speed Booster adapter to get more out of our FD lenses on an MFT mount. Ironically, the Lens Turbo might beat Metabones to market, as it's promised in the next few weeks.

What benefits will the Speedbooster give? The image the FD gives me on my GF2 is pretty impressive with the cheap ebay adapter I have.

Jace Ross wrote:

hpmoon wrote:

Jace Ross wrote:I'm hoping that Australia gets some priority on the BMPCC. Not too fussed though, I make do with what I have. Still pondering on what lenses to get, I have an FD to MFT adapter and some nice FD glass already. I'm very tempted by the Zeiss CP.2's.

Of course, we're all waiting on baited breath for a Speed Booster adapter to get more out of our FD lenses on an MFT mount. Ironically, the Lens Turbo might beat Metabones to market, as it's promised in the next few weeks.

What benefits will the Speedbooster give? The image the FD gives me on my GF2 is pretty impressive with the cheap ebay adapter I have.

The two major flaws of the Blackmagic Cinema Cameras are poor low-light sensitivity, and an excessive crop factor of almost 3x. A Lens Turbo/Speed Booster dramatically reduces these problems.

Here's some footage of the bmpcc from the L.A. event yesterday. It's got the 7-14mm panasonic lens on it. The jello effect is exaggerated by the gh3 I shot it on, it didn't look like that to my eye:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-J8MGO ... sp=sharing

Also, as far as I know the low light on the black magic cameras is better than the 5d iii which is heralded as the greatest low light camera. Although in reality the dynamic range of the 5diii suffers noticeably at 1600 and above. I owned one for about 5 months before switching to m43 (gh3 and gh1) to get ready for the bmpcc.

After a month of shooting on the 5diii, I decided to never shoot above 800 because I could see how crushed the image got at iso 1600+. Also, the sensor was less sensitive at the same iso as my canon 60d. My biz partner and I would frame up shots side by side and he'd be like why is yours so dark what Iso are you @ and we'd be at the same iso, shutter and aperture. Anyway getting off topic just wanted to say the bmpcc raw is probably better than any dslr's in low light. but won't know for sure till I've got one.

Thx black magic you guys are doing great. Keep drinking Canon and Red's milkshake!

hpmoon wrote:
The two major flaws of the Blackmagic Cinema Cameras are poor low-light sensitivity, and an excessive crop factor of almost 3x. A Lens Turbo/Speed Booster dramatically reduces these problems.

In light of the fact that the BMCC's low light performance is actually quite good and that its sensor format is a commonly used standard format, describing these as flaws is nonsensical.

hpmoon wrote:The two major flaws of the Blackmagic Cinema Cameras are poor low-light sensitivity, and an excessive crop factor of almost 3x. A Lens Turbo/Speed Booster dramatically reduces these problems.

Did you see the night footage JB shot? It's low light is superb, though if it's improved I can't complain with that. Crop factor isn't too big of a deal for me, I can work with what I've got.

The BM(P)CC has a native Iso of 800. So you may simply download some darker DNG sample and push it up by four EV steps to see how the Camera's ISO 12800 equivalent looks. In my opinion the BMCC looks superior to any DSLR at ISO 12800. Let's assume that the Pocket Cinema will behave similiarly.

And the Speed Booster/ Lens Turbo combined with the Tokina 11-16mm and a 17-50mm f/2.8 will give you an 8 - 35mm with f/2 range, equivalent to apprx. 24-100mm on fullframe. So a lot of fun

In the bmd webpage still shipping for bmpcc in July Why?

Tellme the truth pleeeeease.


Enviado desde mi iPad con Tapatalk HD

photostrobist wrote:In the bmd webpage still shipping for bmpcc in July Why?

Tellme the truth pleeeeease.

Because the BMPCC is ready to ship. The final tests on production models are being done. Probably ship early next week if they have not already.

So expect to start seeing them (in limited numbers) in users hands in the next 2 weeks.

adamroberts wrote:

photostrobist wrote:In the bmd webpage still shipping for bmpcc in July Why?

Tellme the truth pleeeeease.

Because the BMPCC is ready to ship. The final tests on production models are being done. Probably ship early next week if they have not already.

So expect to start seeing them (in limited numbers) in users hands in the next 2 weeks.

The 4K still says shipping July.

Tamerlin wrote:

hpmoon wrote:
The two major flaws of the Blackmagic Cinema Cameras are poor low-light sensitivity, and an excessive crop factor of almost 3x. A Lens Turbo/Speed Booster dramatically reduces these problems.

In light of the fact that the BMCC's low light performance is actually quite good and that its sensor format is a commonly used standard format, describing these as flaws is nonsensical.

It's actually your logic that's nonsensical. By firstly depicting those two concerns as just adequately met on the BMCC, then trying next to extinguish the critique, you don't advance the discussion.

You should take a look around at the high-level performers in this area: the Super 35mm sensors on the Canon C100/C300 and Sony NEX-FS100/PMW-F5. Sure, they have flaws of their own, but in terms of crop factor and low-light performance, they kill the Blackmagic cameras (obviously).

My point was that the Speed Booster/Lens Turbo adapters help to alleviate those major flaws.

speed booster helps anyway

hpmoon wrote:You should take a look around at the high-level performers in this area: the Super 35mm sensors on the Canon C100/C300 and Sony NEX-FS100/PMW-F5. Sure, they have flaws of their own, but in terms of crop factor and low-light performance, they kill the Blackmagic cameras (obviously).

You're basically claiming that no one can make movies with super 16 cameras, which is pure BS.

My point was that the Speed Booster/Lens Turbo adapters help to alleviate those major flaws.

Your point is still bogus, because they're not flaws in the camera. They're design parameters.

The speed booster and its ilk aren't there to correct flaws in the camera, they exist to allow people with lens sets geared toward super 35 formats to work with super 16 formats without investing in new glass.

I wasn't bothered by the size of the sensor, and neither has anyone else I've been working with lately, because we planned for the sensor size, so we have the lenses we need. We ran two BMCCs on a short film shoot this week, and we had no issues resulting from the format, and the low light performance on the cameras ended up being an asset for a lot of it.

If you still think that they're flaws, you should probably just go hang out on another forum where people are more interested in specs than in cinematography.

Mac Jaeger wrote:I think its because you said "we" in one of your responses. That might have been misinterpreted.

Ah, i see. Sorry if i mislead you! In that particular posting i was repeating knowledge found elsewhere in this forum, so "we" meant "people in this forum".[/quote]

No worries.

Jace Ross wrote:I'm hoping that Australia gets some priority on the BMPCC. Not too fussed though, I make do with what I have. Still pondering on what lenses to get, I have an FD to MFT adapter and some nice FD glass already. I'm very tempted by the Zeiss CP.2's.

I hope so too. We tend to often be the last place for distribution. Would be nice if an Australian company would include it's very nation 'up there' too.

Gan Eden wrote:

Jace Ross wrote:I'm hoping that Australia gets some priority on the BMPCC. Not too fussed though, I make do with what I have. Still pondering on what lenses to get, I have an FD to MFT adapter and some nice FD glass already. I'm very tempted by the Zeiss CP.2's.

I hope so too. We tend to often be the last place for distribution. Would be nice if an Australian company would include it's very nation 'up there' too.

That's what I'm hoping.

someone just posted this link to bmpcc footage on the personal-view thread. looks like someone got one

Don't believe anyone who hasn't posted an image/clip of the actual camera...

Either s/he had one of the first samples, but then why not make a fuss about it and show everyone the proud new aquisition? Or s/he just wants to get attention...

woodybrando wrote:someone just posted this link to bmpcc footage on the personal-view thread. looks like someone got one

smells fishy to me...

user claims "bought on ebay used from international seller, used so no box. Footage looks good lots of detail and latitude when color correctin"

Marcel Beck wrote:

woodybrando wrote:someone just posted this link to bmpcc footage on the personal-view thread. looks like someone got one

smells fishy to me...

user claims "bought on ebay used from international seller, used so no box. Footage looks good lots of detail and latitude when color correctin"

Yeh coz people would be selling used pocket cameras by now on eBay, especially considering the postage time from the first client :p

Tamerlin wrote:

hpmoon wrote:You should take a look around at the high-level performers in this area: the Super 35mm sensors on the Canon C100/C300 and Sony NEX-FS100/PMW-F5. Sure, they have flaws of their own, but in terms of crop factor and low-light performance, they kill the Blackmagic cameras (obviously).

You're basically claiming that no one can make movies with super 16 cameras, which is pure BS.

My point was that the Speed Booster/Lens Turbo adapters help to alleviate those major flaws.

Your point is still bogus, because they're not flaws in the camera. They're design parameters.

The speed booster and its ilk aren't there to correct flaws in the camera, they exist to allow people with lens sets geared toward super 35 formats to work with super 16 formats without investing in new glass.

I wasn't bothered by the size of the sensor, and neither has anyone else I've been working with lately, because we planned for the sensor size, so we have the lenses we need. We ran two BMCCs on a short film shoot this week, and we had no issues resulting from the format, and the low light performance on the cameras ended up being an asset for a lot of it.

If you still think that they're flaws, you should probably just go hang out on another forum where people are more interested in specs than in cinematography.

Your ego has gotten ahead of your logic -- a typical geek behavior, of staunchly defending toys owned, dogmatically -- but when reading between the lines, the fact is you compromised on quality -- just as surely as I'll compromise in certain areas when adding this camera to my kit, downgrading from my Super 35mm sensor but gaining more stops of dynamic range and a better codec. Different cameras for different purposes. Heard of the notion?

You evince a fundamental misunderstanding of lens optics, shrugging off the compromise of using ultra-wide lenses to compensate for the crop factor, while still being stubborn about the virtues of photosites being spread out over a larger sensor. Go read up on these fundamental concepts before posting, please. And good luck.

To everyone else, I promise this is my last response to his slapping match. Back on-topic...

I just received an email from the Videoguys in Melbourne that their new ETA date is the 31st of August. I was expecting that would happen but I was really hoping for good news when I saw that email!

focuspulling wrote:

Jace Ross wrote:

hpmoon wrote:Of course, we're all waiting on baited breath for a Speed Booster adapter to get more out of our FD lenses on an MFT mount. Ironically, the Lens Turbo might beat Metabones to market, as it's promised in the next few weeks.

What benefits will the Speedbooster give? The image the FD gives me on my GF2 is pretty impressive with the cheap ebay adapter I have.

The two major flaws of the Blackmagic Cinema Cameras are poor low-light sensitivity, and an excessive crop factor of almost 3x. A Lens Turbo/Speed Booster dramatically reduces these problems.

To go back to the original post I think that there is a point you actually missed about what you call crop Factor.
In traditional Cinematography a Super 35 kit would e.G. consist of a 32mm, 50mm and 75mm Lens. (there are of course some Variations as a 28 or 35 instead of a 32 and a 85 instead of a 75 e.G.).
If you compare that to a typical set of S16 Lenses you will find that a kit of those would be a 12mm 16mm and 25mm Lens. Given the fact that you have a approximate Cropfactor of 2x from S16 to S35 these would have the same angle of view as a 24mm, 32mm and 50mm lens on a S35 sensor. However as the image circle of these lenses can be smaller it is easier to make them faster without a massive increase in size and or weight.
So while a 50mm S35 Lens could typically be something from T2-T2.2 a S16 25mm Lens could be T1.6 or even faster. As result of this the the depth of field from those lenses might actually be closer together then thought.

Regarding the quality of the Image outputted by the Sensor you will also have to understand that resolution is fixed on the sensor so while shooting on film a S35 Frame contains more physical information then a S16 Frame this wont apply for all digital Sensors.
For example a Frame of a BMPCC would contain the same amount of Pixels as that of a PMW-F3 for the simple reason that the Pixles are bigger on the F3.

The initial problem with people complaining about the missing option of wide lenses came from people joining with a pure Photography background being used to odd lenses as a 14mm F2.8 FF lens e.g. .
Whilst this might be seen as an usual wide lens on a stills camera this is an crazily wide lens to the standards of cinematography.

In conclusion the problem you seem to have with S16 is that you want to use pointless lenses with it.
To put it photographic terms, you would neither use your 210 F5.6 Large formate standard lens on your full frame body as a replacement for a FF 50mm Prime.

And considering lowlight, even though this is quite a different topic... .
If you are all about lowlight you should rather lean towards The FS700 with an S-Log2 option having a base ISO of 2000. However bare in mind that ISO 2000 will be troublesome when shooting in bright light even considering that the FS700 has built in ND filters.

http://www.innocinema.com/blackmagic-de ... amera.html

rinamov wrote::o

http://www.innocinema.com/blackmagic-de ... amera.html

I find it incredible that you can actually buy from stock at this point in time!

focuspulling wrote:

Tamerlin wrote:

hpmoon wrote:You should take a look around at the high-level performers in this area: the Super 35mm sensors on the Canon C100/C300 and Sony NEX-FS100/PMW-F5. Sure, they have flaws of their own, but in terms of crop factor and low-light performance, they kill the Blackmagic cameras (obviously).

You're basically claiming that no one can make movies with super 16 cameras, which is pure BS.

My point was that the Speed Booster/Lens Turbo adapters help to alleviate those major flaws.

Your point is still bogus, because they're not flaws in the camera. They're design parameters.

The speed booster and its ilk aren't there to correct flaws in the camera, they exist to allow people with lens sets geared toward super 35 formats to work with super 16 formats without investing in new glass.

I wasn't bothered by the size of the sensor, and neither has anyone else I've been working with lately, because we planned for the sensor size, so we have the lenses we need. We ran two BMCCs on a short film shoot this week, and we had no issues resulting from the format, and the low light performance on the cameras ended up being an asset for a lot of it.

If you still think that they're flaws, you should probably just go hang out on another forum where people are more interested in specs than in cinematography.

Your ego has gotten ahead of your logic -- a typical geek behavior, of staunchly defending toys owned, dogmatically -- but when reading between the lines, the fact is you compromised on quality -- just as surely as I'll compromise in certain areas when adding this camera to my kit, downgrading from my Super 35mm sensor but gaining more stops of dynamic range and a better codec. Different cameras for different purposes. Heard of the notion?

You evince a fundamental misunderstanding of lens optics, shrugging off the compromise of using ultra-wide lenses to compensate for the crop factor, while still being stubborn about the virtues of photosites being spread out over a larger sensor. Go read up on these fundamental concepts before posting, please. And good luck.

To everyone else, I promise this is my last response to his slapping match. Back on-topic...

Okay, have you even used... Say a set of 16mm zeiss super speeds? As you cut the image circle, the easier it is to control flaws at wider FOV's, making your 'wide lenses are a compromise in quality' irrelevant, take even the slr magic 12mm 1.6... Sure 14mm for super 35mm I see your point, but anyone serious isn't going to use that type of glass on this camera

StephenH wrote:

rinamov wrote::o

http://www.innocinema.com/blackmagic-de ... amera.html

I find it incredible that you can actually buy from stock at this point in time!

It says the 4k is in stock too lol! :p

focuspulling wrote:
Your ego has gotten ahead of your logic -- a typical geek behavior, of staunchly defending toys owned,

You got it entirely backward, but whatever.

Got an email from videoguys in Australia saying that the pocket is delayed until the 31st August. I think thats just a guess though and im fine with waiting.

StephenH wrote:

rinamov wrote::o

http://www.innocinema.com/blackmagic-de ... amera.html

I find it incredible that you can actually buy from stock at this point in time!

FYI, I had a little chat with them just now and they say it's a mistake. They also said they'd fix it.

Has anyone ordered one from Lemac?

F.K. wrote:To go back to the original post I think that there is a point you actually missed about what you call crop Factor.
In traditional Cinematography a Super 35 kit would e.G. consist of a 32mm, 50mm and 75mm Lens. (there are of course some Variations as a 28 or 35 instead of a 32 and a 85 instead of a 75 e.G.).
If you compare that to a typical set of S16 Lenses you will find that a kit of those would be a 12mm 16mm and 25mm Lens. Given the fact that you have a approximate Cropfactor of 2x from S16 to S35 these would have the same angle of view as a 24mm, 32mm and 50mm lens on a S35 sensor. However as the image circle of these lenses can be smaller it is easier to make them faster without a massive increase in size and or weight.
So while a 50mm S35 Lens could typically be something from T2-T2.2 a S16 25mm Lens could be T1.6 or even faster. As result of this the the depth of field from those lenses might actually be closer together then thought.

Regarding the quality of the Image outputted by the Sensor you will also have to understand that resolution is fixed on the sensor so while shooting on film a S35 Frame contains more physical information then a S16 Frame this wont apply for all digital Sensors.
For example a Frame of a BMPCC would contain the same amount of Pixels as that of a PMW-F3 for the simple reason that the Pixles are bigger on the F3.

The initial problem with people complaining about the missing option of wide lenses came from people joining with a pure Photography background being used to odd lenses as a 14mm F2.8 FF lens e.g. .
Whilst this might be seen as an usual wide lens on a stills camera this is an crazily wide lens to the standards of cinematography.

In conclusion the problem you seem to have with S16 is that you want to use pointless lenses with it.
To put it photographic terms, you would neither use your 210 F5.6 Large formate standard lens on your full frame body as a replacement for a FF 50mm Prime.

And considering lowlight, even though this is quite a different topic... .
If you are all about lowlight you should rather lean towards The FS700 with an S-Log2 option having a base ISO of 2000. However bare in mind that ISO 2000 will be troublesome when shooting in bright light even considering that the FS700 has built in ND filters.

Thanks for the mature critique. The short of it is, I just don't like the look of moving images through ultra-wide lenses, even at the center where the crop factor solely reveals things. There's inherent distortion in any ultrawide as a matter of physics (not just at the corners, on a slippery slope) that simply is not preferable to a larger sensor using lenses where the focal length gets closer to the reference spec. This is a subjective preference as well as an objective regarding lens physics (and wasted glass!).

As for low light, we're usually starved for it, aren't we? And in those rare situations when we've got too much of it, generally outdoors, that's when my shot composition calls the least for shallow depth of field, so I just close up the aperture (paired with ND filters only when necessary). Whereas, lower-light situations tend to be character-driven, and three-dimensional space through manipulating depth of field becomes facilitated by a larger sensor without blaring light kits and lumbering down a production (especially in the documentary genre). In short, the low-light performance on the Blackmagic Cinema Cameras is disappointing and they skimped on the sensor size. But you get what you pay for. I love the bargain. But I'd be willing to drop another grand on a Blackmagic Cinema Camera at Super 35mm (or larger). Competition will take care of that.

focuspulling wrote:Thanks for the mature critique. The short of it is, I just don't like the look of moving images through ultra-wide lenses, even at the center where the crop factor solely reveals things. There's inherent distortion in any ultrawide as a matter of physics (not just at the corners, on a slippery slope) that simply is not preferable to a larger sensor using lenses where the focal length gets closer to the reference spec. This is a subjective preference as well as an objective regarding lens physics (and wasted glass!).

What people are trying to say is that an S16 12 - 14mm lens is not considered ultra wide for a Super 16mm camera, it is considered normal. The lenses are constructed for the smaller sensor size. The image circle is smaller and no glass is wasted.

Of course there will be problems and flaws if you use glass that is designed for larger format cameras.

CreativeVideo - large European A/V reseller is now showing BMDPCC "Expected: 14/08/2013" .
It was showing "Expected: 31/07/2013"

plegilink wrote:CreativeVideo - large European A/V reseller is now showing BMDPCC "Expected: 14/08/2013" .
It was showing "Expected: 31/07/2013"

My dealer reports "September".

thorthefifth wrote:Thanks. I hate to buy mft lenses since I already have some L lenses. That redrock adapter looks pretty sweet. May need to look into that.

I have the redrock adapter and the 85/1.2L doesn't work with it - it can control the aperture but focus still doesn't work.