Add a speed booster to the BMPC to counter 5D raw

You guys should add a speed booster to the BMPC to make it a full frame equivalent in order to counter the 5D MKIII with the raw hack. If it's not something you could do yourselves then contract with metabones or mitakon. That with 4K and global shutter should give you quite an edge and put the 5D back in its place.

Why does BMD need to "counter" the 5D RAW? Why don't you just buy the speed booster when (if) it comes out for MFT?

You guys should add a speed booster to the BMPC to make it a full frame equivalent in order to counter the 5D MKIII with the raw hack. If it's not something you could do yourselves then contract with metabones or mitakon. That with 4K and global shutter should give you quite an edge and put the 5D back in its place.

You're suggesting that BMD significantly delay release of the BMPC-4K cam to add a "135 format"-like capability that has almost no place in film/video production?

Or spend time & resources convincing another company to do it for them? When BMD has their hands 200% full just accomplishing what they've already set out for themselves to do?

As it is, the BMPC-4K pushes the envelope of what's reliably possible with currently-available technology at a $4K price-point.

The ML hack is a long, long ways from proving its reliability or usefulness. For folks who are interested, hopefully that happy day will come someday soon, but it's not here yet.

Meanwhile, my hope is that the BMPC-4K as advertised will be shipping in relatively large quantities by late "July 2013" or very soon thereafter. That alone will be a huge accomplishment. Fingers crossed ...

Cheers.

-

Why does BMD need to "counter" the 5D RAW? Why don't you just buy the speed booster when (if) it comes out for MFT?

The Production camera is EF mount, or will be when it appears and not MFT. If it appears.

This means EOS lens owners will require an EF-to-EF version of the Speed Booster, which was supposed to appear "shortly" after the beginning of this year but now has been postponed indefinitely, no reason given by Metabones, the manufacturer.

Putting aside for a moment the very interesting hack furore, I agree with OP that the Speed Booster will be a huge plus with & for the BMPC, and even more for the other two BMD cameras with its crop-reducing reverse-teleconversion (factor: 0.71x) plus the speed enhancement (a full stop) and (proclaimed) large increase in resolving power, though how this last is measured I dunno. It also preserves all lens electrical contacts, whether for aperture control, auto-focus, IS. In the various lens mount versions it would make a Huge number of large-sensor lenses available to all the BMD cameras under optimal conditions.

The Speed Booster can only work on mirrorless cameras. (So far it exists only for Sony NEX/Fuji X in various lens mount versions.) This means that an EF-EF version would have no other use than on Black Magic cameras, which still don't exist in any numbers. Maybe this explains the semi-cancellation of this item. Or maybe patent issues have been raised concerning lens electrical contacts; it would be good to learn just what the matter is.

The designers' explanation and description of the Speed Booster is here:
http://www.metabones.com/images/metabon ... 0Paper.pdf

News from the company dribbles out on their FAQ page:
http://www.metabones.com/sony/questions

I agree that BMD should be working on this and maybe offering inducements to Metabones. The problem of finding wide and ultra-wide lens for their cameras is all-too real.

This means EOS lens owners will require an EF-to-EF version of the Speed Booster, which was supposed to appear "shortly" after the beginning of this year but now has been postponed indefinitely, no reason given by Metabones, the manufacturer.

...

I agree that BMD should be working on this and maybe offering inducements to Metabones.

Maybe they already are working together.

I do not believe that full frame is better bs.
If you choose right lenses for bmcc, there will be nothing important in case of sensor size...

by the way I will not understand that full frame and 5dmk2/3 love that you have because full frame is not belong to cinematography... yes their output images "were" really good but know we have bmcc and others which are produced for making films.

You guys should add a speed booster to the BMPC to make it a full frame equivalent in order to counter the 5D MKIII with the raw hack. If it's not something you could do yourselves then contract with metabones or mitakon. That with 4K and global shutter should give you quite an edge and put the 5D back in its place.

You're suggesting that BMD significantly delay release of the BMPC-4K cam to add a "135 format"-like capability that has almost no place in film/video production?
-

Actually the Speed Booster, by shortening the focal length of every lens mounted on it, will make focusing easier and not harder. Seems to me that this and the whole dslr thing are two entirely different subjects.

"Shortening the focal length" through reducing the net crop factor, that is.

I urge anyone unclear on just what this thing does, and how, to read the "white paper"

Why does BMD need to "counter" the 5D RAW? Why don't you just buy the speed booster when (if) it comes out for MFT?

The Production camera is EF mount, or will be when it appears and not MFT. If it appears.

This means EOS lens owners will require an EF-to-EF version of the Speed Booster, which was supposed to appear "shortly" after the beginning of this year but now has been postponed indefinitely, no reason given by Metabones, the manufacturer. ...

I agree that BMD should be working on this and maybe offering inducements to Metabones. The problem of finding wide and ultra-wide lens for their cameras is all-too real.

This thread is about SpeedBooster on the BMPC-4K camera, which has a S35 sensor & EF mount.

There is no "problem of finding wide and ultra-wide lens" for the camera we're discussing here.

And, as you say, a EF-to-EF SpeedBooster is delayed. Yet another good reason for BMD to stay far away from it, at least in regard to the BMPC-4K, especially since 135-format FOV is essentially unnecessary for the vast majority of professional film/video production.

Cheers.

Why does BMD need to "counter" the 5D RAW? Why don't you just buy the speed booster when (if) it comes out for MFT?

The Production camera is EF mount, or will be when it appears and not MFT. If it appears.

This means EOS lens owners will require an EF-to-EF version of the Speed Booster, which was supposed to appear "shortly" after the beginning of this year but now has been postponed indefinitely, no reason given by Metabones, the manufacturer. ...

I agree that BMD should be working on this and maybe offering inducements to Metabones. The problem of finding wide and ultra-wide lens for their cameras is all-too real.

This thread is about SpeedBooster on the BMPC-4K camera, which has a S35 sensor & EF mount.

There is no "problem of finding wide and ultra-wide lens" for the camera we're discussing here.

And, as you say, a EF-to-EF SpeedBooster is delayed. Yet another good reason for BMD to stay far away from it, at least in regard to the BMPC-4K, especially since 135-format FOV is essentially unnecessary for the vast majority of professional film/video production.

Cheers.

Interest in BMD cameras and related lenses centers on the twin considerations of low cost and high IQ. Appropriate Speed Boosters will hugely expand lens choice at all price levels, even more than the MFT mount would have done in that version of BV1. That gift of a stop will be huge cost saver too, when shopping for lenses, even factoring in the high price of the S-B.

I'm not making the argument that BMD should sit down by the side of the road and wait for them to appear, or give them away. I do say these will be a very important part of BM cams' ecosystem, maybe not for you, but for many of us. It will allow many people to use non-EF lenses they already own, on the BMPC, and will double number of EF focal lengths for the EOS crowd.

What's not to love?

An EF-EF speed booster is not possible as it would modify the flange distance. You can only adapt from a shorter distance (MFT/NEX, etc) to a longer distance (EF).

"put the 5D back in its place."
It is in it's place "Historically Speaking" Great Camera for Still and Video, but it's History,
Time for some Blackmagic reign, Besides within 2 more years we should have a few more options
other than Canons 5D's.

I'd like to see a 5DmkIII in it's hacked raw mode in a real motion picture set environment. I'd be taking bets how many seconds till it catches fire.

An EF-EF speed booster is not possible as it would modify the flange distance. You can only adapt from a shorter distance (MFT/NEX, etc) to a longer distance (EF).

The EF-EF version would indeed modify the flange distance but you're incorrect to say it's not possible -- it would just require more optics, at the cost of some or maybe even all of the speed gain. The real treasure -- focal length reduction -- would remain.

Normally adopters that require optics subtract too much IQ to be worthwhile, but the Speed Booster already contains four elements and there are no flies at all on its (independent) design team, which recently designed the range of primes for Panavision's new digital 70mm line. The Sony NEX and Fuji X versions are doing very well indeed, I'm told.

I downloaded the 5D3 hacked raw files and they were less than impressive to say the least. Nothing like the BMCC raw files I played with from John Brawley.

I found they lacked sharpness, ghosted when highlights were pulled back and overall just flat and horrible to work with.

Heres hoping the BMPCC files are lovely.

I downloaded the 5D3 hacked raw files and they were less than impressive to say the least. Nothing like the BMCC raw files I played with from John Brawley.

I found they lacked sharpness, ghosted when highlights were pulled back and overall just flat and horrible to work with.

Heres hoping the BMPCC files are lovely.

This seems to contradict others beliefs... Perhaps the shooting environment is what made it different to work with? Don't think we will REALLY know until there are some serious tests between the 5D3 and and BMCC

I'd like to see a 5DmkIII in it's hacked raw mode in a real motion picture set environment. I'd be taking bets how many seconds till it catches fire.

actually seems to generate less heat, since it isn't processing into h.264 there's less near the sensor to heat up. the cf card stuff will heat up, but that's not any more of an issue than it already is.

I'd like to see a 5DmkIII in it's hacked raw mode in a real motion picture set environment. I'd be taking bets how many seconds till it catches fire.

actually seems to generate less heat, since it isn't processing into h.264 there's less near the sensor to heat up. the cf card stuff will heat up, but that's not any more of an issue than it already is.

I don't think it's possible to say now that heat won't be an issue on the 5D in raw mode.
Still a lot of programming and modifications to be done.

Just to early to draw conclusions on anything regarding raw rec on the 5D.

Get the hack properly done, then do some serious testing.

But interesting for sure!

Re EF-EF Speed Booster -

I've just heard from someone who truly knows, and he informs me that in this connection "nothing useful can be done". I apologize to anyone I've encouraged in this false hope!

The ML hack is just recording from the camera's live view onto card therefore by passing all the internal compressions which means less CPU intensive and even less chance of over heating than a unhacked camera. I would expect the battery to last longer too. Previously this hack was'nt even considered because the memory card just wasnt fast enough but as they get faster it opened the possibility for RAW video.
As for dSLR FF I'm hearing such nonesense as it has no place in cinematography. Give me a break. Shallow DOF is optional not determined by sensor size alone but the lenses you use and the aperture you are dialling in. I can never understand the logic of those dissing dSLR FF sensor size suitability for cinematography yet sought out the widest and fastest lenses for their S16 and S35 sensor.
A bigger sensor allows you bigger headroom for your lenses. Some film/video uses super shallow, some don't. When technology opened new possibility any percieved notion of a rule book regarding cinematography is thrown out of the window. For example super slow motion started appearing in films and TVs once the feature came into existence in video cameras. If you don't need it don't use it.

I would be concerned mostly about the post workflow.

Even now people have hard time to use bmc raw in post so how does ML make it different ?
It even adds some steps to it.

With ml material there also the problem of missing tc like it used to be?

Imo just an alternative hack platform like hacintosh but the question is if all the weirdness
pays of seemingly different platform usage.
It will always need some more handholding and tuning.

For example ssd usage and no conversion need for editing puts bmc light-years ahed of ml.

Different people have different needs and emotions but this is what i see now.
Maybe exiting technology but not very usable when you think of real world production.
As a hobbyist tool maybe but still with relatively not free price tag.

The ML hack is just recording from the camera's live view onto card therefore by passing all the internal compressions which means less CPU intensive and even less chance of over heating than a unhacked camera. I would expect the battery to last longer too. Previously this hack was'nt even considered because the memory card just wasnt fast enough but as they get faster it opened the possibility for RAW video.
As for dSLR FF I'm hearing such nonesense as it has no place in cinematography. Give me a break. Shallow DOF is optional not determined by sensor size alone but the lenses you use and the aperture you are dialling in. I can never understand the logic of those dissing dSLR FF sensor size suitability for cinematography yet sought out the widest and fastest lenses for their S16 and S35 sensor.
A bigger sensor allows you bigger headroom for your lenses. Some film/video uses super shallow, some don't. When technology opened new possibility any percieved notion of a rule book regarding cinematography is thrown out of the window. For example super slow motion started appearing in films and TVs once the feature came into existence in video cameras. If you don't need it don't use it.

I believe you are missing what most are saying. What I've seen mostly is trying to get the point across that you don't NEED a FF sensor, it's not mandatory and adds very little. FF isn't the be all of cameras and there is little care for it in the video world. People produce great results using FF cameras but not because it's FF, because they are talented.

The ML hack is just recording from the camera's live view onto card therefore by passing all the internal compressions which means less CPU intensive and even less chance of over heating than a unhacked camera.

You're assuming the h.264 encoder on these cameras generates a lot of heat... it doesn't. Canon uses a highly optimised purpose-built dsp for handling h.264... and on top of that's it's actually quite inefficient at encoding h.264.

If you've used the slow video fps function, which you could argue barely touches the h.264 encoder, you'll know that the camera overheats in that mode.

Light has to be collected and data has to be retrieved off of the sensor and placed into the VRAM before it can be sent to card, this is where most of the heat comes from.