Update on Camera Shipments

...but is it a trickle?

At least we get an announcement tomorrow (if Grant is good for his word) that might clear things up a bit.

Trickle... you're not allowed using that word here either...

Ooops! Sorry!

Personally I'm a bit deflated after playing with the camera in the flesh... all of the shortcomings are multiplied by 10 and the ONLY saving grace is the RAW, but is that enough? :S ...

But yes. The camera has major shortcomings and CVP were very honest about them, but didn't we all know this already?

Please specify the major shortcomings so I can be sure that I know about them.

A lot of it was practical stuff like LCD. Most were firmware fixable... like why only use the thunderbolt for video out? I want to use if for data transfer.

Also the costs start to mount up going for a rig, battery, xlr adapters etc... no phantom power. Like I said Mike, you know all this already. We all do.

Update?!

Update?!

Yes, Mr. Petty it is late Friday night for you in Melbourne. 20:14 to be exact and it has passed the "mid to late next week" mark. Unless you were talking about the weekend too?

Hey bro, where's the cameras at yo?

I want to know were is the original source that BMD is focussing on fulfilling all EF pre-orders before starting production on MFT? I heard this being mentioned a few times but when questioned no answers were forth comming. Is this heresay or wishful thinking from those who did not switch to MFT? ...

You mean, aside from logic? You are the one who keeps insisting that it's somehow logical for BMD to ship the BMCC-MFT model before the BMCC-EF model. This makes no sense to me.

BMD announced the BMCC-EF many months before the BMCC-MFT model. It's logical that they will ship a significant number of BMCC-EF cams (to at least partially address the backlog of orders for them), before they begin shipping BMCC-MFT cams in large numbers.

It's also logical to me that at some later point BMD will manufacture & ship both models concurrently.

You are welcome to wish for a different scenario, but the above seems most likely to me.

Having said the above, I'll be the first to say that to the best of my knowledge BMD (e.g.: Grant Petty) has not announced a production schedule concerning EF vs. MFT, other than MFT "available in Dec. 2012". Clearly anything is possible, and given how crazy things have gone so far, I don't have a strong faith that logic will prevail.

Meanwhile, if people who pre-ordered EF cams before the MFT cam was announced receive their EF cams after MFT cams start to ship, the people who ordered EF cams will have very good reason to be furious with BMD.

... Also some on here and another forum have already started banging the drums for BMD because a single person recieved his BMC in Singapore. For all we know this could be a spare or a recycled unit from an earlier demo run. Production doesnt involve just cranking out one camera at a time. That is not cost effective way of manufacture. I would hold judgement until units start appearing in credible quantities

The owner of that 1 cam in Singapore posted about it here on BMD's forum first:
viewtopic.php?p=10127&sid=d26c25657814ed39076f4826292dfe12#p10127

And yes, I agree, 1 cam popping up in Singapore probably doesn't "mean" much of anything, other than there's a very lucky person in Singapore. 1 or a few cams isn't "shipping", not really. I agree.

Cheers.

So you are saying this is speculative rather than official news. Unfounded gossips that turned into fact. The reality is no official mention that BMC EF orders are filled first before BMC MFT goes into production.

My take on this is that at least for those who switched early and moved higher up on the BMC MFT waiting list they MAY recieve theirs earlier than if they stayed with the BMC EF. The logic I'm applying is that BMD as a manufacturer would be keen to at least get some MFT version out in the field early especially since several PR testers have decide to switch because they consider EF limiting the camera and saw the benefit of lens options offered by MFT. The estimated December 2012 delivery date is not just for MFT but EF too, but of course that estimate was over a month ago.

If you had read my posts as you have claimed I also mentioned that those very few counted in one hand who recievd their BMC EF I said are extras from the same run as the demo ones sent out to testers. No production BMC has started. I would not even consider the one that appeared in Singapore as one from a production stock and most likely an extra from the orginal demo run.

I also find it hard to believe production means one camera at a time, it simply does not make sense in the modern manufacturing world.

"Hi,

I was going to do an update today, but I still have not quite got the latest info I need to update everyone accurately. However what I do know is there is a small amount of cameras shipping again, but its slow because some of the testing software needed to quality sensors before they ship to us was completed later than we expected. However things are starting to move. I hope to have more info next week.

The supplier is quite upbeat though and expects a lot more sensors next week to ship so that is good.
Sorry I cannot provide more accurate info, but I hope to get more details soon and then will update everyone.

Grant"

so if "Limited Shipping" was 2 BMCC shipped to B&H, "there is a small amount of cameras shipping again" it means 3 cameras are shaped from BM factory

well, it's an update.

Yes, hats off to BM for realizing the benefit of giving us regular updates.
thanks...

Thank you for the update Grant.
but..
Today's update wasn't the encouraging news I was waiting to hear.. more delays.. by now I would think the sensor issue would be cleared up and cameras were to begin shipping in bulk as promised in your last update. But the 'Cameras are trickling out" bit is getting old.. I'm confused.. Is the Sensor company still finding smudged glass and having to only send the few that are ok? or are they testing one sensor per week? Why only shipping one camera at a time? rather than hundreds or more per day?

Make a decision.. Either decide the sensors are ok and start shipping in bulk.. or find another sensor.. Hell.. put in the GH3 MFT sensor and ship the damn thing already. (by 'damn thing' I mean the EF mount BMCC)

Rapidly losing patience.
Seriously.. at this point if the GH3 was available I would be on the phone with B&H changing my order right now.. I know it doesn't compare to the spec's of the BMCC.. but this is starting to piss me off.

Well that update sucks. It seems every update we get, the answer is "a week or so" or "in the next few weeks." Well how many weeks do we have to wait and hear maybe next week?

Yes, hats off to BM for realizing the benefit of giving us regular updates.
thanks...

I agree. Thank you, Mr. Petty, for this 3rd status update concerning the BMCC.

BMD posting regular, possibly weekly status reports -- good news, bad news, or even no news -- is most welcome. Communication from BMD, even if it's minimal, is enormously preferable to silence.

Going forward, BMD continuing to share "numbers" will be very helpful. For example, in Grant's 2nd update he talked about BMD having $20M in camera parts waiting for assembly. Additional quantitative info will allow us to put things in perspective. Are we talking about dozens (hundreds?, thousands?) of cameras currently being tested, or assembled, or shipped, etc.? And any relevant dates would be helpful info, too.

Meanwhile, BMD might consider doing some PR: Perhaps post snapshots of your marvelous QA testing & manufacturing teams while they work on our cameras, or a wide shot of the parts warehouse, or when possible shots of BMCCs being packaged, loaded onto pallets, into trucks/boats/airplanes, etc. Something.

Again, thanks for the update, Grant. Looking forward to more. And my camera, ASAP, of course. Cheers.

So you are saying this is speculative rather than official news. Unfounded gossips that turned into fact. The reality is no official mention that BMC EF orders are filled first before BMC MFT goes into production.

My take on this is that at least for those who switched early and moved higher up on the BMC MFT waiting list they MAY recieve theirs earlier than if they stayed with the BMC EF. The logic I'm applying is that BMD as a manufacturer would be keen to at least get some MFT version out in the field early especially since several PR testers have decide to switch because they consider EF limiting the camera and saw the benefit of lens options offered by MFT. The estimated December 2012 delivery date is not just for MFT but EF too, but of course that estimate was over a month ago.

If you had read my posts as you have claimed I also mentioned that those very few counted in one hand who recievd their BMC EF I said are extras from the same run as the demo ones sent out to testers. No production BMC has started. I would not even consider the one that appeared in Singapore as one from a production stock and most likely an extra from the orginal demo run.

I also find it hard to believe production means one camera at a time, it simply does not make sense in the modern manufacturing world.

I actually don't disagree with you. Under the circumstances, anything is possible. Too many unknowns at this point.

Other than the fact that for 99.9% of us:We haven't received the cameras we were "promised"/"estimated" many, many months ago. That's one of the few facts we have to work with, unfortunately.

Cheers.

Lets look at the bright side if it takes another month canon will have released the C100 and some may rather opt for that camera instead....$6500 .ND filters/UNCOMPRESSED HDMI/XLR's/canon log etc. and you can save on all the extra stuff....SSD'S/Batteries/etc....just shoot and edit

Lets look at the bright side if it takes another month canon will have released the C100 and some may rather opt for that camera instead....$6500 .ND filters/UNCOMPRESSED HDMI/XLR's/canon log etc. and you can save on all the extra stuff....SSD'S/Batteries/etc....just shoot and edit

Um, the C100 might turn out to be a nice camcorder, but what you wrote doesn't make complete sense.

The C100's compressed internal recording (8-bit, probably 4:2:0, relatively low data rate) can't be as good as ProRes or DNxHD (10-bit, 4:2:2 @ up to 220 megabits/sec.). And of course, both ProRes & DNxHD are "ready to edit".

And of course, the C100 will require batteries and media, probably not as cost effective as those available for the BMCC.

Concerning the C100's HDMI output: I don't believe we've seen it yet, don't know exactly what its specs are, etc. And whatever external recorder you might connect to it will of course require media, power, rigging, etc.

XLR to 1/4" TRS adapter cables are inexpensive and reliable. True, the C100 will feature VUs, but maybe the BMCC will, too, someday.

Somehow one can "save" money by buying a more expensive camera?

OK ...

Lets look at the bright side if it takes another month canon will have released the C100 and some may rather opt for that camera instead....$6500 .ND filters/UNCOMPRESSED HDMI/XLR's/canon log etc. and you can save on all the extra stuff....SSD'S/Batteries/etc....just shoot and edit

Um, the C100 might turn out to be a nice camcorder, but what you wrote doesn't make complete sense.

The C100's compressed internal recording (8-bit, probably 4:2:0, relatively low data rate) can't be as good as ProRes or DNxHD (10-bit, 4:2:2 @ up to 220 megabits/sec.). And of course, both ProRes & DNxHD are "ready to edit".

And of course, the C100 will require batteries and media, probably not as cost effective as those available for the BMCC.

Concerning the C100's HDMI output: I don't believe we've seen it yet, don't know exactly what its specs are, etc. And whatever external recorder you might connect to it will of course require media, power, rigging, etc.

XLR to 1/4" TRS adapter cables are inexpensive and reliable. True, the C100 will feature VUs, but maybe the BMCC will, too, someday.

Somehow one can "save" money by buying a more expensive camera?

OK ...

Cool it a little Peter... We don't want people to live in fear of voicing an opinion for fear of you gunning them down

Yeah, this board seems to be turning into Peter's rant every time someone posts an opinion.

Yeah, this board seems to be turning into Peter's rant every time someone posts an opinion.

I'm cool. Just conveying some factual information, that's all.

Lets look at the bright side if it takes another month canon will have released the C100 and some may rather opt for that camera instead....$6500 .ND filters/UNCOMPRESSED HDMI/XLR's/canon log etc. and you can save on all the extra stuff....SSD'S/Batteries/etc....just shoot and edit

Um, the C100 might turn out to be a nice camcorder, but what you wrote doesn't make complete sense.

The C100's compressed internal recording (8-bit, probably 4:2:0, relatively low data rate) can't be as good as ProRes or DNxHD (10-bit, 4:2:2 @ up to 220 megabits/sec.). And of course, both ProRes & DNxHD are "ready to edit".

And of course, the C100 will require batteries and media, probably not as cost effective as those available for the BMCC.

Concerning the C100's HDMI output: I don't believe we've seen it yet, don't know exactly what its specs are, etc. And whatever external recorder you might connect to it will of course require media, power, rigging, etc.

XLR to 1/4" TRS adapter cables are inexpensive and reliable. True, the C100 will feature VUs, but maybe the BMCC will, too, someday.

Somehow one can "save" money by buying a more expensive camera?

OK ...

The C100 does 24Mbit natively but add a hyper deck shuttle for $300 and you're getting prores as well and broadcast quality over 50Mbit

The $$$ equation is simple and the proof is in the pudding BMCC $3k vs c100 $6.5k but?
1.price of ND filters for BMCC ...c100 comes with them
2.external battery for BMCC ?....AB's are pretty expensive
3.shooting outdoors you need a monitor or evf on BMCC ....c100 comes with evf and articulating viewfinder
4.price of ssd vs sd is significantly different ....but if using a hyper deck on c100 then it's balanced
5.raw is awesome but quite expensive and most people on here are not gonna shoot a motion picture that truly requires the benefits of the 2.5k raw ...just saying....
6.bmcc wide angle lenses is tough and a negative in my book...yes there are ways around it but non that I personally love!
7. And ergonomically YOU WILL NEED A RIG on the BMCC!

Lets look at the bright side if it takes another month canon will have released the C100 and some may rather opt for that camera instead....$6500 .ND filters/UNCOMPRESSED HDMI/XLR's/canon log etc. and you can save on all the extra stuff....SSD'S/Batteries/etc....just shoot and edit

Um, the C100 might turn out to be a nice camcorder, but what you wrote doesn't make complete sense.

The C100's compressed internal recording (8-bit, probably 4:2:0, relatively low data rate) can't be as good as ProRes or DNxHD (10-bit, 4:2:2 @ up to 220 megabits/sec.). And of course, both ProRes & DNxHD are "ready to edit".

And of course, the C100 will require batteries and media, probably not as cost effective as those available for the BMCC.

Concerning the C100's HDMI output: I don't believe we've seen it yet, don't know exactly what its specs are, etc. And whatever external recorder you might connect to it will of course require media, power, rigging, etc.

XLR to 1/4" TRS adapter cables are inexpensive and reliable. True, the C100 will feature VUs, but maybe the BMCC will, too, someday.

Somehow one can "save" money by buying a more expensive camera?

OK ...

The C100 does 24Mbit natively but add a hyper deck shuttle for $300 and you're getting prores as well and broadcast quality over 50Mbit

The $$$ equation is simple and the proof is in the pudding BMCC $3k vs c100 $6.5k but?
1.price of ND filters for BMCC ...c100 comes with them
2.external battery for BMCC ?....AB's are pretty expensive
3.shooting outdoors you need a monitor or evf on BMCC ....c100 comes with evf and articulating viewfinder
4.price of ssd vs sd is significantly different ....but if using a hyper deck on c100 then it's balanced
5.raw is awesome but quite expensive and most people on here are not gonna shoot a motion picture that truly requires the benefits of the 2.5k raw ...just saying....
6.bmcc wide angle lenses is tough and a negative in my book...yes there are ways around it but non that I personally love!
7. And ergonomically YOU WILL NEED A RIG on the BMCC!

Start with a C100 @ ~$6,500 with its weak 8-bit 24 megabit/sec internal codec (nowhere near as good as the BMCC's ProRes or DNxHD), then ...

0. Add a Hyperdeck Shuttle (~$350) to the C100, plus the same type SSDs required for BMCC ($ depends on which SSD you buy). Regardless what external recorder, the result will still only be 1080p, and unknown C100 HDMI source bit depth. Clearly the C100 "loses" on this point.

1. ND filters: C100 likely has medium-quality ones built-in (agreed: this is a huge convenience feature!). A set of similar-quality Tiffen screw-on NDs for BMCC are relatively inexpensive, but not as convenient. Or, use a best-quality variable-ND with BMCC, but costs several hundred $. I agree with you on this one: Built-in NDs rock.

2. Batteries: Cost about the same per amp-hour regardless, except that camera manufacturer brand units typically cost higher than average. Anton-Bauer is one of many battery brands available for use with both the C100 & BMCC. I don't see how this can be counted as a negative for the BMCC. Cost is about the same for either camera.

3. Shooting outdoors with the BMCC will probably require that you put a relatively inexpensive 5" monitor hood over the camera's built-in LCD. Hoodman & others sell them. Possibly also a $20 piece of 3M anti-glare film on the LCD, too. We're not talking about rocket science, or rocket expenses, here. True, EVFs are great to have, but I doubt the one included with the C100 is a world-beater, and I bet some C100 users will occasionally opt for an extra, add-on EVF for that reason. As will some BMCC users. Again, doesn't seem to be a big difference between the 2 cams in this regard, either.

4. Media costs: Quality SSDs typically cost far less per GB than do SD or CF card media. Plus, because SSDs are now increasingly being used as standard storage in personal computers, the cost of SSDs is dropping faster than that of SD & CF. This is a huge win for the BMCC.

5. RAW is awesome, period. It just is. But no one is holding a gun to anyone's head saying they must shoot RAW. Meanwhile, the cost of a BMCC can easily be justified simply because it also features ProRes & DNxHD @ 220 megabits/sec., plus all its other features & software bundle. Oh, BTW: Does C100, etc. include Resolve, UltraScope & MediaExpress?

6. Wide angle lenses: No one who is serious complains about the fact that APS-C & FF cams require expensive lenses for telephoto work. It's simply a fact of life. So why do people complain about the BMCC requiring relatively "wider" lenses for WA shooting? It's the same situation, only reversed. There are excellent rectilinear UAW & WA lenses for use with the BMCC-EF & BMCC-MFT. Some of these lenses are relatively inexpensive, and pretty decent image quality, too. Maybe quality wide lenses (for BMCC), and quality tele lenses (for APS-C & FF shooters), cost about the same? So how is this a knock against the BMCC?

7. Rigs & camera cages: My first choice is to use a tripod, or maybe a monopod. A decent, useful shoulder rig needn't be expensive or even moderately-expensive, unless perhaps if most of your shooting will be "handheld", in which case I'd recommend investing in a high quality rig. Equally true for BMCC, C100 & all other non-shoulder-mount cams. As for camera cages, the vast majority of productions don't require them. Obviously a cage can be tremendously useful, but isn't a requirement for most shoots.

There are good reasons for buying a C100, but, to "save money" compared to the BMCC? I'm not convinced.

Just a thought....what if sensor probs are somehow being "enhanced/caused/infiltrated" by other companies* jealous of BM´s launch of the CC ? the nightmares set in after the frustrations fade ...

Sorry, only joking, i´ve waited a long time and i can wait some more, in fact my heart goes out to BM who so proudly launched their CC at exhibitions and all over youtube and then had to deal with the horrors of these delays and all of our (its customers) frustrations ...

Keep up the hard work Grant & Co.
if the camera delivers we will all still be grateful.
and if you treat us with respect after we get our cameras (updates, firmware etc..)
then all will be forgotten.

(but please hurry up)

* (launches of 5Dmk3, D800, C100)

Thanks for the update Grant, just please ship me a fully tested functional camera, that is fine with me if it took a little more time to get it right.

Thanks for the update Grant, just please ship me a fully tested functional camera, that is fine with me if it took a little more time to get it right.

Don't you already have one, or does the one being used in the MYTHERAPY shootout belong to someone else?



-

Thanks for the update Grant, just please ship me a fully tested functional camera, that is fine with me if it took a little more time to get it right.

Don't you already have one, or does the one being used in the MYTHERAPY shootout belong to someone else?
http://vimeo.com/51455065-

I have nothing to do with MYTHERAPY shootout or have the BMD camera yet ??

Thanks for the update Grant, just please ship me a fully tested functional camera, that is fine with me if it took a little more time to get it right.

Don't you already have one, or does the one being used in the MYTHERAPY shootout belong to someone else?
http://vimeo.com/51455065-

I have nothing to do with MYTHERAPY shootout or have the BMD camera yet ??

Hey, sorry about that. I misunderstood posts by "rawCAM35" on this & the BMCuser forum ... the way I read them, I thought you were involved with that project. Sorry for the misunderstanding. And I hope you get your BMCC soon! Cheers.

I would like to know how many are shipping out 1 or 2, or 1000 and Do we know who's going to get these few cameras first?

BMC on Puberty Blues
John Brawley

how about shipping status for Japan?

Start with a C100 @ ~$6,500 with its weak 8-bit 24 megabit/sec internal codec (nowhere near as good as the BMCC's ProRes or DNxHD), then ...

Are you completely discounting how the larger sensor in the c100 will affect the results here?

0. Add a Hyperdeck Shuttle (~$350) to the C100, plus the same type SSDs required for BMCC ($ depends on which SSD you buy). Regardless what external recorder, the result will still only be 1080p, and unknown C100 HDMI source bit depth. Clearly the C100 "loses" on this point.

C100 has been reported as having a 4:2:2 8 bit uncompressed hdmi signal.
If true, I hardly see the c100 "clearly losing" this battle, especially once you take into account the benefit of the larger sensor.

I will stop here since the rest of your argument mostly agrees with Cuboirs

Yeah, this board seems to be turning into Peter's rant every time someone posts an opinion.

...well

Start with a C100 @ ~$6,500 with its weak 8-bit 24 megabit/sec internal codec (nowhere near as good as the BMCC's ProRes or DNxHD), then ...

Are you completely discounting how the larger sensor in the c100 will affect the results here?

0. Add a Hyperdeck Shuttle (~$350) to the C100, plus the same type SSDs required for BMCC ($ depends on which SSD you buy). Regardless what external recorder, the result will still only be 1080p, and unknown C100 HDMI source bit depth. Clearly the C100 "loses" on this point.

C100 has been reported as having a 4:2:2 8 bit uncompressed hdmi signal.
If true, I hardly see the c100 "clearly losing" this battle, especially once you take into account the benefit of the larger sensor.

I will stop here since the rest of your argument mostly agrees with Cuboirs

Yeah, this board seems to be turning into Peter's rant every time someone posts an opinion.

...well

I'm curious why you think a larger (1.6x) sensor offsets the serious disadvantages of a weak in-camera codec (8-bit 4:2:0 @ 24mbs vs. 10-bit 4:2:2 @ 220mbs) ... especially with the C100 costing more than twice as much as the BMCC?

I understand that there's a chance the C100 may have better S/N performance than the BMCC (pending testing), but the huge cost difference remains.

And, yes, 8-bit 4:2:2 1080p HDMI live out (if the C100 has it) carries far less color information than recorded in the BMCC's 10-bit 4:2:2 1080p ProRes & DNxHD, and obviously even less than its 12-bit uncompressed RAW 2.5K CinemaDNG. These color differences especially come into play for all footage that is graded, effects, chromakey, etc. And, again, the BMCC has the advantage here @ half the cost of the C100.

Also, if you read what I wrote ...
viewtopic.php?p=10459&sid=a995c727b20adec88a2fb84d8dde1561#p10459

... it's clear I don't agree with most of Cuboirs' points. I explain why I think the points he makes are mistaken.

I don't have a problem with folks stating their opinions about the BMCC or BMD. I will however, dispute statements that people make if I think they're in error.

And when someone asks an answerable question about the BMCC, I reply if I know the answer. For example:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1926

I'm curious why you think a larger (1.6x) sensor offsets the serious disadvantages of a weak in-camera codec

Im not going down that road, if you honestly dont believe the sensor size plays any part here, so be it.

And, yes, 8-bit 4:2:2 1080p HDMI live out (if the C100 has it) carries far less color information than recorded in the BMCC's 10-bit 4:2:2 1080p ProRes

How much less, taking the larger sensor into consideration, AND the fact that it will be transcoded with the same 10 bit ProRes you speak of if using the hyperdeck...?
How do you know that the bmcc isnt actually capturing at 8 bit anyhow and just transcoding to 10 bit ProRes? (im not saying it is)

and obviously even less than its 12-bit uncompressed RAW 2.5K CinemaDNG.

Yes, we all know about this, why the apples to oranges again?

These color differences especially come into play for all footage that is graded, effects, chromakey, etc. And, again, the BMCC has the advantage here @ half the cost of the C100.

Absolutely, but a moot point, considering the same 10 bit ProRes capture (as mentioned above)

How much less, taking the larger sensor into consideration, AND the fact that it will be captured at the same 10 bit ProRes you speak of if using the hyperdeck...?

If you record an 8 bit signal at 10 bits you only get 8 bit. The recorder can only record what it's being fed.

Watch this to see the real difference between 8 and 10 bit: http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/video/related- ... sentation/

Sensor size has nothing to do with bit depth or sample rate.

Hi Theodore: I largely agree with what you say in your most recent post.

My previous couple of posts are primarily in reaction to Cuboirs's emphasizing the relative performance and price (value) of the C100 vs. the BMCC. I took his statements (see below) to mean he thinks the C100 offers significantly better performance at a comparable price -- which it does not.

==================
Cuboirs wrote:

Lets look at the bright side if it takes another month canon will have released the C100 and some may rather opt for that camera instead....$6500 .ND filters/UNCOMPRESSED HDMI/XLR's/canon log etc. and you can save on all the extra stuff....SSD'S/Batteries/etc....just shoot and edit
==================

I agree with you: It's entirely possible the BMCC & C100's actual performance may turn out to be comparable, pending competent side-by-side testing. However, even if the C100 is shown to have similar or slightly better performance than the BMCC, there's still a significant (>2 times) difference in the cost of the cameras themselves. I hope the C100 proves to perform better, since it costs so much more.

As I said in my posts, I agree with Cuboirs on one important point: Built-in NDs are a fantastic feature, which I wish the BMCC included, too. However, for many shooters, this feature is not worth the ~$3,500 difference in price between the 2 cams.

Cheers.

How do you know that the bmcc isnt actually capturing at 8 bit anyhow and just transcoding to 10 bit ProRes? (im not saying it is)

To be perfectly clear...

The BMCC sensor is 16 Bit linear --> 12bit LOG for DNG. --> 10 Bit for ProRes transcode in camera.

There's no 8 Bit anywhere. The HD-SDI output is also 10 Bit.

jb

Thanks settling that John... Unfortunately us natives are getting restless waiting for our cameras.. Hopefully they will ship soon in real numbers and the conversation will be about actual workflow, shooting tips, and the latest gear.. rather than the bickering about things that can be found in the tech specs on the webpage should one desire to actually take a look.

If you record an 8 bit signal at 10 bits you only get 8 bit. The recorder can only record what it's being fed.

I think you missed what me and Peter were ultimately discussing.
The theoretical difference between a larger sensor capturing at 8bit vs a smaller sensor at 10bit both transcoding at the same 10 bits.

And I dont recall anyone bickering about things found in the tech specs...

John Brawley, thank you for the input and clarification.

Theodore, no matter the sensor size, there is a color depth to the signal being sent. It doesn't matter the size of the sensor when the signal only carries 256 shades (8-bit). The depth will never hold up to the quality of a 10-bit image which holds 1024 shades. I'll take a small sensor with raw codec any day over a large sensor with an 8-bit codec.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori ... -depth.htm

I'll take a small sensor with raw codec any day over a large sensor with an 8-bit codec.

Which RAW codec are you referring to?

Im so lost as to why this keeps getting thrown into the mix, not one time were we discussing the difference between RAW files and an 8 bit codec.

The 8 "bits" in the discussion were in relation to an UNCOMPRESSED 4-2-2 signal.

Theodore, no matter the sensor size, there is a color depth to the signal being sent. It doesn't matter the size of the sensor when the signal only carries 256 shades (8-bit).

Im going to politely step away from the discussion now.

I think you missed what me and Peter were ultimately discussing. The theoretical difference between a larger sensor capturing at 8bit vs a smaller sensor at 10bit both transcoding at the same 10 bits. ...

Hi Theodore: If you're still around ... and as I continue to wrap my head around what I think we were discussing ...

I vaguely remembered something Barry Green posted on the BMCuser forum, so I did a search and found it. I've copied & pasted it below because we're not allowed to link to other forums.

If I understand what you & Barry are saying, the pixel array size (resolution) of a single-sensor camera, after debayering, can limit the maximum color quality recorded, regardless of the recording method used (10-bit compressed, 12-bit RAW, etc.) if the sensor res isn't high "enough".

I may not have this right, but if I do, is this related to your point, or are you referring to something else?

Cheers.

===========================================
Gabriele Turchi:

Q: Are you saying that the 2.5k bayer pattern of the BMC camera even when loaded into Resolve on a 1080p project have the same chroma latitude and info of a 422 ?

Barry Green:

A: Seems like a simple question, but leads to a complex answer. It depends on what sensor made the 1080p image! But let's assume for the moment that we're talking about a true three-chip 1080p camera, so there's true color info in all of the 4:2:2 decimation, that would give you chroma resolution of 960x1080. Or, per frame, 1,036,800 color samples.

The BMC has 1200x675 chroma samples from its sensor. If you debayered and stored in ProRes 444, you could preserve all that chroma, and would have 810,000 chroma samples. So no, it's not possible to have as much chroma resolution (even with ProRes 444) as a true 4:2:2 camera would deliver.

Now, when shooting ProRes 422, it's a little worse actually, because your 1200x675 will get scaled down to fit into 960x1080, so the net result will be 960x675, for a grand total of 648,000 chroma samples.

The way to preserve the most chroma information is to avoid going to a 4:2:2 codec. Keep it raw, or transcode to a 4:4:4 codec, and you'll have the most chroma the camera can give you. ..."
===========================================

Hi Theodore: I largely agree with what you say in your most recent post.

My previous couple of posts are primarily in reaction to Cuboirs's emphasizing the relative performance and price (value) of the C100 vs. the BMCC. I took his statements (see below) to mean he thinks the C100 offers significantly better performance at a comparable price -- which it does not.

==================
Cuboirs wrote:

Lets look at the bright side if it takes another month canon will have released the C100 and some may rather opt for that camera instead....$6500 .ND filters/UNCOMPRESSED HDMI/XLR's/canon log etc. and you can save on all the extra stuff....SSD'S/Batteries/etc....just shoot and edit
==================

I agree with you: It's entirely possible the BMCC & C100's actual performance may turn out to be comparable, pending competent side-by-side testing. However, even if the C100 is shown to have similar or slightly better performance than the BMCC, there's still a significant (>2 times) difference in the cost of the cameras themselves. I hope the C100 proves to perform better, since it costs so much more.

As I said in my posts, I agree with Cuboirs on one important point: Built-in NDs are a fantastic feature, which I wish the BMCC included, too. However, for many shooters, this feature is not worth the ~$3,500 difference in price between the 2 cams.

Cheers.

What I was referring to was that the C100 is ready out the box for most people and the type of work they're actually doing with these cameras.for the black magic to be used on a real set it would need far more extras than the C100.... Shooting in raw takes up so much more space that with a 480gb ssd card u get roughly 30 mins of footage NON deletable in camera...."something to think about"....raw is great but not for everyone buying the BMCC ...480 GB for 1080p last a lifetime SD's way cheaper compared to SSD ....costs of GB per minute?

Again the BMCC camera is not out yet ! Until regular dp's/customers do reviews on it we really don't know what we're getting with the BMCC ....the people who did the reviews are in most cases paid to do the review it's a business lets face it...and I'm not knocking the pblooms and msolarios of the world I'd love to be in that position 1 day but c'mon lets not be naive ....

I think you missed what me and Peter were ultimately discussing. The theoretical difference between a larger sensor capturing at 8bit vs a smaller sensor at 10bit both transcoding at the same 10 bits. ...

Hi Theodore: If you're still around ... and as I continue to wrap my head around what I think we were discussing ...

I vaguely remembered something Barry Green posted on the BMCuser forum, so I did a search and found it. I've copied & pasted it below because we're not allowed to link to other forums.

If I understand what you & Barry are saying, the pixel array size (resolution) of a single-sensor camera, after debayering, can limit the maximum color quality recorded, regardless of the recording method used (10-bit compressed, 12-bit RAW, etc.) if the sensor res isn't high "enough".

I may not have this right, but if I do, is this related to your point, or are you referring to something else?

Cheers.

===========================================
Gabriele Turchi:

Q: Are you saying that the 2.5k bayer pattern of the BMC camera even when loaded into Resolve on a 1080p project have the same chroma latitude and info of a 422 ?

Barry Green:

A: Seems like a simple question, but leads to a complex answer. It depends on what sensor made the 1080p image! But let's assume for the moment that we're talking about a true three-chip 1080p camera, so there's true color info in all of the 4:2:2 decimation, that would give you chroma resolution of 960x1080. Or, per frame, 1,036,800 color samples.

The BMC has 1200x675 chroma samples from its sensor. If you debayered and stored in ProRes 444, you could preserve all that chroma, and would have 810,000 chroma samples. So no, it's not possible to have as much chroma resolution (even with ProRes 444) as a true 4:2:2 camera would deliver.

Now, when shooting ProRes 422, it's a little worse actually, because your 1200x675 will get scaled down to fit into 960x1080, so the net result will be 960x675, for a grand total of 648,000 chroma samples.

The way to preserve the most chroma information is to avoid going to a 4:2:2 codec. Keep it raw, or transcode to a 4:4:4 codec, and you'll have the most chroma the camera can give you. ..."
===========================================

Hey Peter ,just wanted to add something I'm not sure if I'm understanding this correctly as I might be way off ...but speaking of the sensors here ,the C100 has a 4k sensor now how does that factor in here?.?

I think you missed what me and Peter were ultimately discussing. The theoretical difference between a larger sensor capturing at 8bit vs a smaller sensor at 10bit both transcoding at the same 10 bits. ...

Hi Theodore: If you're still around ... and as I continue to wrap my head around what I think we were discussing ...

I vaguely remembered something Barry Green posted on the BMCuser forum, so I did a search and found it. I've copied & pasted it below because we're not allowed to link to other forums.

If I understand what you & Barry are saying, the pixel array size (resolution) of a single-sensor camera, after debayering, can limit the maximum color quality recorded, regardless of the recording method used (10-bit compressed, 12-bit RAW, etc.) if the sensor res isn't high "enough".

I may not have this right, but if I do, is this related to your point, or are you referring to something else?

Cheers.

===========================================
Gabriele Turchi:

Q: Are you saying that the 2.5k bayer pattern of the BMC camera even when loaded into Resolve on a 1080p project have the same chroma latitude and info of a 422 ?

Barry Green:

A: Seems like a simple question, but leads to a complex answer. It depends on what sensor made the 1080p image! But let's assume for the moment that we're talking about a true three-chip 1080p camera, so there's true color info in all of the 4:2:2 decimation, that would give you chroma resolution of 960x1080. Or, per frame, 1,036,800 color samples.

The BMC has 1200x675 chroma samples from its sensor. If you debayered and stored in ProRes 444, you could preserve all that chroma, and would have 810,000 chroma samples. So no, it's not possible to have as much chroma resolution (even with ProRes 444) as a true 4:2:2 camera would deliver.

Now, when shooting ProRes 422, it's a little worse actually, because your 1200x675 will get scaled down to fit into 960x1080, so the net result will be 960x675, for a grand total of 648,000 chroma samples.

The way to preserve the most chroma information is to avoid going to a 4:2:2 codec. Keep it raw, or transcode to a 4:4:4 codec, and you'll have the most chroma the camera can give you. ..."
===========================================

Hey Peter ,just wanted to add something I'm not sure if I'm understanding this correctly as I might be way off ...but speaking of the sensors here ,the C100 has a 4k sensor now how does that factor in here?.?

It means if the C100 has a 4k sensor recordIng ProRes 422, then it would record 422 colour sample rate. This would be better then the BMCC recording ProRes 422. You would get closer to 420 with the BMC.

While ProRes 422 HQ on this camera has proven to be quite high quality for most things, I would love to have a 12-bit 444 option. Regardless of whether there is 444's worth of chroma resolution, it means that there wouldn't be any issue of whether it does or not. Also, the raw's 12-bits would also be preserved in the ProRes 444 codec.

But... at 1/3rd the data rate (~300mbps).

Any chance we can take the C100 comparison discussion to another thread and keep this one about shipping status? It is kind of hard to troll through all of this for folks wanting to keep an eye on updates about actual shipping. Thanks

Any chance we can take the C100 comparison discussion to another thread and keep this one about shipping status? It is kind of hard to troll through all of this for folks wanting to keep an eye on updates about actual shipping. Thanks

You DO realise the sticky at the top of the main list is where to go for that? Ya know... the one entitled "camera shipping Update". I say this in a sarcastic tone in reply to your sarcastic tone which annoyed me:)

First of all, wcapps1 tone was not very sarcastic at all. Second of all, the thread you refer to is locked. Third of all, isn't this thread more suited for shipment discussions than a discussion about comparing c100 to BMCC?

Threads breath just like cheap lenses. Net nannies annoy me as well. What has this got to do with shipments?

Any chance we can take the C100 comparison discussion to another thread and keep this one about shipping status? It is kind of hard to troll through all of this for folks wanting to keep an eye on updates about actual shipping. Thanks

Hi wcapps1: Apologies for taking the thread off-topic. You are right of course: We should take discussion of the C100 & other posts not directly related to BMCC shipping (or not) to the Off-Topic section of the forum.

No worries, I'll repost there. Cheers.

See:
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1945

-

Thank you Thomas.. Yes this is the "Update on Camera Shipments" thread.. and it has gone astray..

This is a just a guess.. but I believe the comparisons between the BMCC vs C100 on this thread is a thinly veiled threat to prompt the fine folks at BMD to start shipping the BMCC's or people will tire of waiting and cancel their BMCC orders and buy the C100 instead (again.. just a guess.. I might be wrong). I too have been guilty of that as well in a time of weakness.. (ie: too much brown liquor)
Or perhaps they are too lazy to start a new forum topic. I dunno.

Believe me, I am as eager and frustrated as everyone else here to get my BMCC.. I'm definitely one of those people that has little patience for having to wait for a freshly ordered camera or bit of gear. So you can imagine what a challenge waiting for my BMCC has been (do they make video gear prozac?)

This is an exciting time to be a videographer/cinematographer/DoP/Camera Dude or Dudette! There are very cool new cameras being announced every few months now it seems.. (I'm totally getting the GoPro Hero3 Black Edition) And the BMCC for me is right on the top of that list! (damn where is that prozac?)

It's just like they said in the movie "Field of Dreams"
~ If you build it.. they will come.

Also.. the folks that have been 'reviewing' the BMCC that I've seen so far are NOT paid to do so.. at least Philip Bloom, Den Lemmie, Vincent Laforet, (apologies for any misspellings) etc.. They are established industry folks that BMD has sent cameras to for feedback and review. ie; to get the word out by putting the camera in capable hands to make pretty pictures. and to let folks know what they think of the camera. I don't believe that John Brawley is being paid by BMD either.. I'm sure he can weigh in on that himself since he occasions this forum.

So to bring the thread back true..
I had some great shoots over the weekend I had wished I had my BMCC on.. So I'm eagerly waiting for Grant to bring us good BMCC shipping news on his next update!