Pros/Cons VS. BMCC, BMPC4K and BMPC

Lets pick apart the cameras and figure out the pros and cons between the three.
Submit your pros/cons and I'll add it to the list.


4K Production Camera

Pro:
-Large S35 sensor (1.5 crop) - more DOF, wider images
-Can use EF-S lenses with no vignetting (no need for expensive full frame glass)
-Global shutter – no jello effect
-4k (much more image data for easier keys/VFX)
-Comes with full copy of resolve/ultrascopes
-Lossless compressed RAW (smaller file sizes)
-Thunderbolt
-4K SDI out
-Shoots to SSD which are fairly cheap per GB of storage


Con:
-Cost - $4k vs $3k – Most expensive of the trio
-Requires more storage (4K raw? Holy hard drive space)
-New sensor = different “look”
-Max 30fps
-12 stops of dynamic range vs. 13 stops (reported, untested)
-No DNX-HD for PC users
-EF lens compatible only (PL possibly eventually)
-Uses more of the lens, softer images with cheaper consumer lenses
-No uncompressed RAW (to come eventually, but it will be lossy)
-Awkward body shape
-Non-removable battery
-Less light sensitive - base ASA 400 instead of 800
-SSD requires dock and seem to be finicky


BMCC 2.5K V1

Pro:
-13 stops of dynamic range
-EF/MFT lens compatible
-Amazing “look” that we’ve grown to know and love
-2.5k uncompressed raw (not as great as 4K, but still awesome for keys/VFX)
-Comes with a full copy of resolve/ultrascopes
-Thunderbolt
-Clean HD-SDI out
-Better low light performance than 4k version
-Available for purchase (…kind of)
-Shoots to SSD which are fairly cheap per GB of storage


Con:
-Rolling shutter (jello)
-No compressed RAW (yet)
-Awkward body shape
-No overcranking
-Smaller sensor (2.4 crop)– less DOF, tighter images
-Non-active MTF mount
-Not 4K
-SSD requires dock and seem to be finicky


Pocket Camera

Pro:
-Active MFT mount – wide variety of cheap glass
-Same sensor as 2.5K – great color science
-Removable batteries are cheap and readily available
-Clean HDMI out
-Small and light for on the go shooting
-Shoots to SD cards which plug straight into many laptops/computers without the use of a dock
-Cost – cheapest of the trio - $995

Con:
-Rolling shutter (jello) – needs to be locked off/stabilized
-No uncompressed raw
-Smallest sensor of the bunch – hard to get ultra wide
-No over cranking
-Nothing above 1080p
-SD cards are much more expensive per GB of storage compared to SSD
-Only active MTF mount (no electronic EF lenses)
-Only comes with Resolve Lite and not the full version

The pocket camera can get wide angles very easily now. Just use c mount glass, or other m4/3 lenses and you will be fine. I think Olympus has a 7-14mm that is quite good.

The pocket camera can get wide angles very easily now. Just use c mount glass, or other m4/3 lenses and you will be fine. I think Olympus has a 7-14mm that is quite good.

7-14mm could totally work for most wide shots, but it's still only the equivalent of 21-42mm. My point being that even the widest of glass still isn't going to be ULTRA wide on the pocket cam.

4K is 30p

RAW will come. Just not yet.

Jb

4K is 30p

RAW will come. Just not yet.

Jb

Thanks for the quick reply, John!
Can you elaborate/clarify this which I pulled from the 4K spec sheet?

Frame Rates
3840 x 2160p23.98,
3840 x 2160p24,
3840 x 2160p25,
3840 x 2160p29.97,
3840 x 2160p30,
1920 x 1080p23.98,
1920 x 1080p24,
1920 x 1080p25,
1920 x 1080p29.97,
1920 x 1080p30,
1920 x 1080p50i,
1920 x 1080p59.94i.

there are some issues with the info posted on BM web and at the show floor, and also waiting for test result.
on BM web site, it says Da Vinci Resolve "Lite" is included, thought it's a free download in v.9?
Yes, the show floor tech says 13 stops, but web site says 12.
Tech says global shutter, but I found at Vimeo a footage seems to show rolling shutter, but since I can't proof if it's the 2.5k BMCC or 4K in the footage (there's onlyl 1 4K BMCC at show floor), so that video may not be valid.
S35 sensor size, but at 21.1mm x 11.8mm (web site), and that's slightly smaller than Canon's APS-C so the cropping factor is at least 1.6 or larger.
The compressed CinemaDNG RAW is interesting as this maybe the biggest advantage over all Sony and Canon's expensive toy and if it is nearly as good as it sounds, this maybe the biggest blow to RED industry. I don't expect it to be as small as R3d format, but not everyone is a fan of R3d anyway.

As a BM rep mentioned from NAB, the 4k is also "softer"

Frame Rates

1920 x 1080p29.97,
1920 x 1080p30,
1920 x 1080p50i,
1920 x 1080p59.94i.

Yes i also notished this when looking at the specs. I mean nice 4K UltraHD output. And nice they have thoughed of mixer that fits the 4K camera.

But with this i guess the 2,5K and 4K camera would / could have a update in the near future that supports interlaced recording / output
[/quote]

@ Sean>>

BMCC 2.5K V1

Pro:

-Clean HDMI out

Clean HD-SDI out

The pocket camera can get wide angles very easily now. Just use c mount glass, or other m4/3 lenses and you will be fine. I think Olympus has a 7-14mm that is quite good.

7-14mm could totally work for most wide shots, but it's still only the equivalent of 21-42mm. My point being that even the widest of glass still isn't going to be ULTRA wide on the pocket cam.

21mm equivalent on full frame? What would the focal length be for an equivalent FOV on an APS-C DSLR?

If this is true, it may make me reconsider my pre-order for the pocket cinema camera. Won't the Metabones Speedbooster eventually fix this, though?

Why is it a common assumption that compressed the BMPC Cinema DNG will use less hard disk space to record than BMCC? Are we considering the fact that the increased resolution will probably make the file sizes to be close to what they are on the 2.5k version?

Thanks to this video from Dan we now know on the pocket cinema camera lightly compressed raw is planned to be included by launch, and a 64gb SD card will roughly hold about 15 minutes of this 1.5 to 1 compressed raw. This is instead of 70-80 minutes of ProRes on the same card. As they mention, these are still being worked on and not final.

Why is it a common assumption that compressed the BMPC Cinema DNG will use less hard disk space to record than BMCC? Are we considering the fact that the increased resolution will probably make the file sizes to be close to what they are on the 2.5k version?

It's lossless compression and that means "lightly" compressed. Take a DNG file on your hard drive and try to compress it with zip. Then compress it with the best compression you can find - maybe 7z maximum compression. When I do this I get maybe 10-20% compression. Not much at all. But it must be enough to overcome the 6gbs limits of the sata interface. The drive I use (Samsung Pro 840) hits those limits at 500MB+ per second sequential writes. All of the ssds coming out are maxing out at that; they are literally running into the limits of the interface. Black Magic has to keep their writes to the drive well under that mark.

If the lightly compressed 4k raw files are compressed in the same sort of range the pocket camera uses, they should be well under 500MB/s. A few quick calculations (multiplying the data by 4 times over the pocket camera raw) brings it to about 280MB/s. That's about 9MB per frame at 30fps, which is about the same size as RAW image files from 8 megapixel DSLRs.

If the lightly compressed 4k raw files are compressed in the same sort of range the pocket camera uses, they should be well under 500MB/s. A few quick calculations (multiplying the data by 4 times over the pocket camera raw) brings it to about 280MB/s. That's about 9MB per frame at 30fps, which is about the same size as RAW image files from 8 megapixel DSLRs.

Yeah, math looks good. Even uncompressed though the math is still good though I believe. It only makes sense at this point to buy the absolute fastest ssd possible. No messing around. I am using a Samsung 840 pro which is one of the top ones. Should be ultrahd ready when my 4k camera comes in.

So I actually just got off the phone with my friend at NAB who I had ask a ton of questions over at the Blackmagic booth. Here's some information for those that need help.

1.BMPC sensor sensitiy? Rep said 400ASA.
2. DR? Rep said 12 stops. (although EOSHD says it's probably the same as the Leica M sensor which is closer to 11 stops and change). My friend mentioned that the rep made it very clear that there will be a noticeable difference in the look as far as sensitivity and dynamic range (similar thing that Brawley said in his blog where he didn't sound so confident).
3. Why production camera? Rep mentioned that the production is just that- an answer to productions with a movement more towards TV and Broadcast as opposed to the BMCC. Thus the 4K, 6G SGI, and Global shutter.
4. Is the BMCC tailored more for cinema than the BMPC? Rep says yes.
5. How good is the global shutter? I had my friend shake both cameras to test the difference and my friend said the BMPC has a noticeable difference (meaning much better-as expected) but that the the rolling shutter in the BMCC is not horrible. I've used the EF BMCC in the past and it's ok as far as rolling shutter.
6.What does "visually" lossless mean? Not an extremely noticeable difference, still a DNG, but with a compression of about 1.5:1-2:1 (which if I remember correctly it's what Brawley said).
7. 4:3 mode on any of the cameras? Rep says nope, up to now just 16:9.
8. What is the timeline roll for the MFT BMCC? Rep says things are moving along and should be catching up to backlog soon (did not specify if backlog means EF or MFT).
9. Any new features in the next firmware update? Rep said audio meters and then didn't really get specific or provide a timeline.

Currently I own multiple MFT glass- alot of them f0.95. That coupled with 800ASA sensitivity and 13 stops of dynamic range and 2.5k raw, I think is more than enough. Not to mention that I can use pretty much any other glass on it. My friend at NAB (who is a filmmaker as well) mentioned that he would also get a MFT BMCC over the EF BMPC. It's not about one being better than another- just different tools for different tasks.

OUR CAMERAS ARE NOT OBSOLETE

I hope this information helps.

So I actually just got off the phone with my friend at NAB who I had ask a ton of questions over at the Blackmagic booth. Here's some information for those that need help.

1.BMPC sensor sensitiy? Rep said 400ASA.
2. DR? Rep said 12 stops. (although EOSHD says it's probably the same as the Leica M sensor which is closer to 11 stops and change). My friend mentioned that the rep made it very clear that there will be a noticeable difference in the look as far as sensitivity and dynamic range (similar thing that Brawley said in his blog where he didn't sound so confident).
3. Why production camera? Rep mentioned that the production is just that- an answer to productions with a movement more towards TV and Broadcast as opposed to the BMCC. Thus the 4K, 6G SGI, and Global shutter.
4. Is the BMCC tailored more for cinema than the BMPC? Rep says yes.
5. How good is the global shutter? I had my friend shake both cameras to test the difference and my friend said the BMPC has a noticeable difference (meaning much better-as expected) but that the the rolling shutter in the BMCC is not horrible. I've used the EF BMCC in the past and it's ok as far as rolling shutter.
6.What does "visually" lossless mean? Not an extremely noticeable difference, still a DNG, but with a compression of about 1.5:1-2:1 (which if I remember correctly it's what Brawley said).
7. 4:3 mode on any of the cameras? Rep says nope, up to now just 16:9.
8. What is the timeline roll for the MFT BMCC? Rep says things are moving along and should be catching up to backlog soon (did not specify if backlog means EF or MFT).
9. Any new features in the next firmware update? Rep said audio meters and then didn't really get specific or provide a timeline.

Currently I own multiple MFT glass- alot of them f0.95. That coupled with 800ASA sensitivity and 13 stops of dynamic range and 2.5k raw, I think is more than enough. Not to mention that I can use pretty much any other glass on it. My friend at NAB (who is a filmmaker as well) mentioned that he would also get a MFT BMCC over the EF BMPC. It's not about one being better than another- just different tools for different tasks.

OUR CAMERAS ARE NOT OBSOLETE

I hope this information helps.

Even though this information is still beta, good to know! Thanks for posting!

POLL TIME!

If you could only have ONE camera, which would you choose and why?

The BMCC, BMPC, or BM4k?

It's really hard to say without first seeing some footage from the BMPC 4K. It remains to be seen if it will have that look that we all love plus the 800ASA and 12 stops of DR that reps are claiming. For now I'll have my pre-order for both and wait. But from what I'm getting now MFT BMCC is the better choice for cinema- complete uncompressed raw, mft mount, 2.5K, beautiful look from the sensor, and I can use it with 0.95 slr magic and voigtlanders. And you save $1,000 bucks. Roger Deakins picked 2K workflow over 4K and in IMAX it looked great. It's no always about the pixel, the true cinematic look is DR (not sensor either as Upstream Color shot on GH2 and Voigtlanders looked great).


That being said though....I'm still somewhat undecided

In the first post, it is mentioned that the original BMCC has better low light capacities than the BMPC.
Why is this? Is it confirmed for sure? Wouldn't the larger sensor of the BMPC help for greqter sensitivity in low light and also have less noise?

In the first post, it is mentioned that the original BMCC has better low light capacities than the BMPC.
Why is this? Is it confirmed for sure? Wouldn't the larger sensor of the BMPC help for greqter sensitivity in low light and also have less noise?

John Brawley:
http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... e-orginal/

"... And you’ll loose a little ISO sensitivity as well ..."

As for reasons why, my guess is it has to do with the relative size of the sensor photosites, the fact that the cameras use completely different sensors from 2 manufacturers, and the processing required for 2.5K vs. 4K. But these are guesses until the camera is closer to shipping or perhaps after.

I decided to cancel my pre-order with CVP today. I'm not willing to part with DR, ISO performance, real uncompressed RAW, and probably the sensor's colour science... I hope the next BMCC (not BMPC) will have a global shutter and somehow manage to keep DR and ISO performance the same. 4K isn't necessary (yet), but a larger sensor and global shutter sure would have been nice.

I decided to cancel my pre-order with CVP today. I'm not willing to part with DR, ISO performance, real uncompressed RAW, and probably the sensor's colour science... I hope the next BMCC (not BMPC) will have a global shutter and somehow manage to keep DR and ISO performance the same. 4K isn't necessary (yet), but a larger sensor and global shutter sure would have been nice.

Yeah, I am on the same wavelength, hovering over the cancel button. Of course, I'll wait for sample footage and hopefully some preliminary hands-on impressions before I make my decision, but in 2013 I feel the need for my camera to far surpass the lowlight capabilities of my outgoing 5-year-old 5D Mark II. If I could afford two cameras, this would absolutely be one of them, but unfortunately I can only realistically afford to keep one on hand so I need it to be as versatile as possible. It's just not a good sign that they didn't slap the "cinema camera" name on it suggesting that "Production" camera is a lower tier of cinematic quality.

My dream setup right now is an FS700 with that new 4K raw recorder and a speed booster, but it's quite out of my range. If only the BMCC was 2.5K S35... Does anyone know what the state of affairs is for the Speed Booster on MFT? I've got a lot of thinking to do.

I decided to cancel my pre-order with CVP today. I'm not willing to part with DR, ISO performance, real uncompressed RAW, and probably the sensor's colour science... I hope the next BMCC (not BMPC) will have a global shutter and somehow manage to keep DR and ISO performance the same. 4K isn't necessary (yet), but a larger sensor and global shutter sure would have been nice.

Good. One less person on the list

In the first post, it is mentioned that the original BMCC has better low light capacities than the BMPC.
Why is this? Is it confirmed for sure? Wouldn't the larger sensor of the BMPC help for greqter sensitivity in low light and also have less noise?

John Brawley:
http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... e-orginal/

"... And you’ll loose a little ISO sensitivity as well ..."

As for reasons why, my guess is it has to do with the relative size of the sensor photosites, the fact that the cameras use completely different sensors from 2 manufacturers, and the processing required for 2.5K vs. 4K. But these are guesses until the camera is closer to shipping or perhaps after.

My guess is there are about 1/3 stop difference in sensitivity
If its anything like still photos when everything is resized equally visually the 4k hold up better at lowlight than 2.5k because noise get squeezed out.

In the first post, it is mentioned that the original BMCC has better low light capacities than the BMPC.
Why is this? Is it confirmed for sure? Wouldn't the larger sensor of the BMPC help for greqter sensitivity in low light and also have less noise?

John Brawley:
http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... e-orginal/

"... And you’ll loose a little ISO sensitivity as well ..."

As for reasons why, my guess is it has to do with the relative size of the sensor photosites, the fact that the cameras use completely different sensors from 2 manufacturers, and the processing required for 2.5K vs. 4K. But these are guesses until the camera is closer to shipping or perhaps after.

My guess is there are about 1/3 stop difference in sensitivity
If its anything like still photos when everything is resized equally visually the 4k hold up better at lowlight than 2.5k because noise get squeezed out.

The BMCC and the BMPCC apparently use the same sensor technology which includes 6.5um photosites versus the 5.5um photosites on the sensor in the BMPC4K. Sean's friend said the BMD rep at NAB said the BMPC4K would only have a speed of 400ASA or half that of the BMCC and BMPCC. if you look at the BMCC and BMPCC MFT mount and the lenses you can put on it, you have some very fast lenses or use slower and larger EF lenses with the Metabones Speed Booster. Either option means the most sensitive sensor has the fastest lenses in front of it and that is very appealing in many situations.

In comparing the three camera options I think the lenses must weigh very heavily in the equation. For example, mounting a fast lens designed for the BMPCC MFT will require much less weight on the tripod or less weight to handhold or stabilize or mount on a drone. Sure the pocket camera doesn't have quite the grand aspirations of the BMCC or the BMPC4K, but it is likely going to make lovely HD imagery at the least cost to acquire, operate, outfit, and handle in post. Buying the BMPCC likely would save me thousands on a new tripod and head as it may not be needed as an example.

After having spent months deciding that the BMCC MFT was best for me and deciding on my approach to lenses (primes from SLR Magic or the two new lens upstarts here), I do find it difficult to adjust to lensing the BMPC4K since I don't think I can afford to put fast lenses on it even roughly equivalent to the MFT cameras.

I don't know what the colour will look like when the BMPCC doesn't have the 2.5K sensor to debayer and downsize to HD ProRes 4:2:2 (HQ) video. Will it look more like 4:2:0 or really somehow still be convincing as 4:2:2? And balance that look against the UltraHD raw DNG from the BMPC4K sensor that in post where Resolve could generate glorious HD ProRes 4:4:4 (HQ)!

We really need to see all three cameras performing together on the same shoot in various conditions and then decide where and when to use each. For example, the BMPC4K global shutter is going to handle certain fast motion better and should key better and the sensor recording options will be well-suited to broadcast production. The BMCC with its wide dynamic range and reasonably large sensor may handle cinema best. And the BMPCC footage will be fine to edit alongside the BMCC in situations where its smaller camera size or weight are needed. I think it is unfair to pick just one camera as I think many people are going to end up with two of the three and some all three.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

For example, the BMPC4K global shutter is going to handle certain fast motion better and should key better and the sensor recording options will be well-suited to broadcast production. The BMCC with its wide dynamic range and reasonably large sensor may handle cinema best.

So the advantage of the BMCC is that it has a reasonably large sensor to handle cinema best in comparison to the BMPC 4k? Don't think that is the right answer.

The BMPC 4k is more suited to cinema work (despite the product naming) with global shutter, larger sensor and 4k.
BMCC has better DR and a little bit better low light, its application is suited slightly more extreme lighting condition and fixed tripod filming as a "B" camera.

Don't read too much in the product's name to what it actually does. Just think about it, does it perform blackmagic?

... The BMPC 4k is more suited to cinema work (despite the product naming) with global shutter, larger sensor and 4k. BMCC has better DR and a little bit better low light, its application is suited slightly more extreme lighting condition and fixed tripod filming as a "B" camera. ...

I agree. Those are pretty much the same conclusions I've come to.

A week ago I would have committed a serious crime to get a cam with the BMPC-4K's features & price. Now I only have to wait an indeterminate length of time* for mine to ship ...


*Which is interesting: If I had committed a serious crime and been arrested & imprisoned, I'd also be "waiting" an indeterminate length of time. Life is funny that way.

Personally I'm waiting for some sample footage to see how colors hold up and to see how big of a difference losing a stop or 2 of dynamic range really is. I would love a global shutter just to be able to move the camera around a bit faster and shoot moving vehicles, (rolling shutter on spinning wheels does not look the greatest). the larger sensor size will also be nice to have that smaller depth of field that people/clients love. though using the samyang 85mm at T1.5 makes a really nice shallow depth of field look. Then there's also the "well if the depth of field is shallower, pulling focus will be harder on that small screen" however I hope the double-tap to zoom in for focus feature will come to the current cinema camera.

In the mean time I'll continue to rent out my camera, so that I can either afford to buy the 4k version outright or just be able to pay for an upgrade.

So the advantage of the BMCC is that it has a reasonably large sensor to handle cinema best in comparison to the BMPC 4k? Don't think that is the right answer.

The BMPC 4k is more suited to cinema work (despite the product naming) with global shutter, larger sensor and 4k.
BMCC has better DR and a little bit better low light, its application is suited slightly more extreme lighting condition and fixed tripod filming as a "B" camera.

Don't read too much in the product's name to what it actually does. Just think about it, does it perform blackmagic?

I agree the BMPC4K has the greater resolution and should produce very good colour when scaled to 2K and HD. I didn't make my point very clearly though, I just meant the BMCC sensor was still large enough to support cinema uses but not large enough to be used for broadcast UltraHD. I do suspect the BMCC's greater dynamic range will be important for some looks but in others not so much. Underneath all this is the unknown quality of the image of the BMPC4K. If BMD can pull off nearly the same image colour science as the BMCC, then you are absolutely correct the BMPC4K will clearly be their flagship camera. And a slight loss in colour may be compensated by the higher resolution and global shutter. Will be a great debate when the samples start appearing. I am getting dizzy weighing the pros and cons!

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I didn't make my point very clearly though, I just meant the BMCC sensor was still large enough to support cinema uses but not large enough to be used for broadcast UltraHD.

You still havent explain it well enough. UltraHD has nothing to do with sensor size.

The MFT mount of the BMCC is a significant advantage... I think a BMPC4K with a PL mount would be killer.

I decided to cancel my pre-order with CVP today. I'm not willing to part with DR, ISO performance, real uncompressed RAW, and probably the sensor's colour science... I hope the next BMCC (not BMPC) will have a global shutter and somehow manage to keep DR and ISO performance the same. 4K isn't necessary (yet), but a larger sensor and global shutter sure would have been nice.

Good. One less person on the list

That may be the case, but as we all know...

The MFT mount of the BMCC is a significant advantage... I think a BMPC4K with a PL mount would be killer.

Interchangeable mounts would be ultimate!! (like that other brand "not green" )

Interchangeable mounts would be ultimate!! (like that other brand "not green" )

I think BMD should really consider exchangeable mounts for the next version of the BMCC.

When BMD introduced the BMC v1 their aim was a video camera to succeed the 5DMkII so anyone enjoying the Canon can blend into this new camera which is potentially the largest group of indie filmmakers. For me this was a mistake as it inherit one of the worst thing about the 5DMkII. Rolling Shutters. In this day and age this is no longer an option for high end video cameras but for still cameras only. I'm still surprise by BMD using rolling shutter for its Pocket Camera, surely this would benefit more with a Global Shutter due to its ergonomics which made it prone to camera shakes and exaggerate jello effects a lot more.

When BMD introduced the BMC v1 their aim was a video camera to succeed the 5DMkII so anyone enjoying the Canon can blend into this new camera which is potentially the largest group of indie filmmakers. For me this was a mistake as it inherit one of the worst thing about the 5DMkII. Rolling Shutters. In this day and age this is no longer an option for high end video cameras but for still cameras only. I'm still surprise by BMD using rolling shutter for its Pocket Camera, surely this would benefit more with a Global Shutter due to its ergonomics which made it prone to camera shakes and exaggerate jello effects a lot more.

Even Red cameras and Sony's new F5 have rolling shutters.

When BMD introduced the BMC v1 their aim was a video camera to succeed the 5DMkII so anyone enjoying the Canon can blend into this new camera which is potentially the largest group of indie filmmakers. For me this was a mistake as it inherit one of the worst thing about the 5DMkII. Rolling Shutters. In this day and age this is no longer an option for high end video cameras but for still cameras only. I'm still surprise by BMD using rolling shutter for its Pocket Camera, surely this would benefit more with a Global Shutter due to its ergonomics which made it prone to camera shakes and exaggerate jello effects a lot more.

Even Red cameras and Sony's new F5 have rolling shutters.

Are they as bad as BMC?
Looking at the reviews Sony F5 has been slated for rolling shutter so not something to have. Great for stills not for video.

Are they as bad as BMC?

I've seen more than enough footage from BMC users, Red users, and CineAlta users to wonder why so many people are complaining so much about rolling shutters on any of these cameras.

Are they as bad as BMC?

I've seen more than enough footage from BMC users, Red users, and CineAlta users to wonder why so many people are complaining so much about rolling shutters on any of these cameras.

Well lets put this into a bit of perspective.
Sony launch both the F55 and F5 the same time. One was around $35k and the other around $15k. No prize for guessing which one they put a Global Shutter and which one they gave Rolling Shutter to. It certainly clear for Sony what their higher end video camera got. Likewise BMD did the same, they may not admit to it to protect sales but it is obvious.

Are they as bad as BMC?

I've seen more than enough footage from BMC users, Red users, and CineAlta users to wonder why so many people are complaining so much about rolling shutters on any of these cameras.

Any action/fast pans with the new Global Shutter will = insane, no more jello ever, Simply put this alone is worth $1000 extra for the new BMDPC but lets not stop there...Well you know the rest so I'll stop here.

Someone posted on some obscure blog and I quote "If you pre orderd the BMD 4K production camera based on the Global Shutters non existent rolling shutter you should be ashamed"

Well hell call me shameless then
I did exactly that, no Image/Video yet. No Beta testers yet/Nothing but Spec!
why? Because It is what I always wanted for under $7000, And who knows what BMD Firmware updates may bring us in 8-16 months from now.

Are they as bad as BMC?

I've seen more than enough footage from BMC users, Red users, and CineAlta users to wonder why so many people are complaining so much about rolling shutters on any of these cameras.

Any action/fast pans with the new Global Shutter insane, no more jello ever, Simply put this alone is worth $1000 extra for the new BMDPC but lets not stop there...Well you know the rest so I'll stop here.

Someone posted on some obscure blog and I quote "If you pre orderd the BMD 4K production camera based on the Global Shutters non existent rolling shutter you should be ashamed"

Well hell call me shameless then
I did exactly that, no Image/Video yet. No Beta testers yet/Nothing but Spec!
why? Because It is what I always wanted for under $7000, And who knows what BMD Firmware updates may bring us in 8-16 months from now.

The BMPC 4k uses a CMOS sensor, even if it has a very slight rolling, ie Arri Alexa style, it is still a country mile different than having a free fall jello of the BMC v1.
BTW a lot of people pre-ordered this just as many who pre-ordered the BMC v1 when no footage from final production camera was released. So what are you suggesting is nothing more than waiting until it arrives at a dealer's shelf. Not realistic.
I know the likes of Philip Bloom is saying caution until you see what it can do but hey guess what, he has already placed an order for one at NAB.

Taikonaut wrote:
When BMD introduced the BMC v1 their aim was a video camera to succeed the 5DMkII so anyone enjoying the Canon can blend into this new camera which is potentially the largest group of indie filmmakers. For me this was a mistake as it inherit one of the worst thing about the 5DMkII. Rolling Shutters. In this day and age this is no longer an option for high end video cameras but for still cameras only. I'm still surprise by BMD using rolling shutter for its Pocket Camera, surely this would benefit more with a Global Shutter due to its ergonomics which made it prone to camera shakes and exaggerate jello effects a lot more.

Those fast action flicks you see on the silver screen were produced with deep pockets. Yes boy, those are kahunas. If you want to play with them big boys, you will come out short. Rolling shutters or not, it's in your creativity and a good story. We should be grateful BMD have come close with the 4k for 4k.

Taikonaut wrote:
When BMD introduced the BMC v1 their aim was a video camera to succeed the 5DMkII so anyone enjoying the Canon can blend into this new camera which is potentially the largest group of indie filmmakers. For me this was a mistake as it inherit one of the worst thing about the 5DMkII. Rolling Shutters. In this day and age this is no longer an option for high end video cameras but for still cameras only. I'm still surprise by BMD using rolling shutter for its Pocket Camera, surely this would benefit more with a Global Shutter due to its ergonomics which made it prone to camera shakes and exaggerate jello effects a lot more.

Those fast action flicks you see on the silver screen were produced with deep pockets. Yes boy, those are kahunas. If you want to play with them big boys, you will come out short. Rolling shutters or not, it's in your creativity and a good story. We should be grateful BMD have come close with the 4k for 4k.

If you look back a few yrs fast action was/can be done with Canon Camcoder cameras lol you guys need to realize that it's not the camera, but how you use/manipulate it.

Just search for CRANK and CRANK 2 HIGH VOLTAGE BTS footage.

A FULL FEATURE FILM with most of the action shot on $800 Camcorders / Cameras, With DP's on roller blades.

http://www.movieweb.com/movie/crank-hig ... the-scenes

No one needs to jump on the banana boat this time with pre-ordering.
If it does ship in July, you will get yours soon enough if you order then.
If it doesnt then you could be in for the same kind of wait before, in which case who wants to go through that again?

So wait and see the results before buying this time.

People are bandying about 1-2 stops now of resolution loss. That is significant if it is 2 stops. Definitely important to know. Surely, some vimeo/youtube nut will do a comparison in very short order once the 4K is released.

Personally, I think the global shutter might be worth the extra cash. There are times too when the 4K will be helpful. These two things alone fill a gap. To be honest, I think this camera is meant to be a tool in your arsenal, not the camera to end all other cameras.

I also think not having to invest in entirely new set and species of lenses is quite cost saving and that alone makes it valuable.

The jury is out on the exchange between larger sensor size and the sensitivity of the BMCC. Noise is a big part of the equation and that remains to be seen.

For myself the Pocket camera is a non starter. The primary reason is the lack of OLPF. That is inexcusable.
I do not understand how BM could make this mistake a second time. It will be even more pronounced (as well as the noise) because the usuable sensor is even smaller and the scaling is greater. Combine this with the rolling shutter, the lack fast wide angle options (more detail to get aliased), poor low light performance and you have a recipe for some awful home movies. Only in the best of production environments or a sunny afternoon on Sundays can all of those things be tamed, but then in the case of the former what is the point of a pocket camera?

No one needs to jump on the banana boat this time with pre-ordering.
If it does ship in July, you will get yours soon enough if you order then.
If it doesnt then you could be in for the same kind of wait before, in which case who wants to go through that again?

So wait and see the results before buying this time.

People are bandying about 1-2 stops now of resolution loss. That is significant if it is 2 stops. Definitely important to know. Surely, some vimeo/youtube nut will do a comparison in very short order once the 4K is released.

Personally, I think the global shutter might be worth the extra cash. There are times too when the 4K will be helpful. These two things alone fill a gap. To be honest, I think this camera is meant to be a tool in your arsenal, not the camera to end all other cameras.

I also think not having to invest in entirely new set and species of lenses is quite cost saving and that alone makes it valuable.

The jury is out on the exchange between larger sensor size and the sensitivity of the BMCC. Noise is a big part of the equation and that remains to be seen.

For myself the Pocket camera is a non starter. The primary reason is the lack of OLPF. That is inexcusable.
I do not understand how BM could make this mistake a second time. It will be even more pronounced (as well as the noise) because the usuable sensor is even smaller and the scaling is greater. Combine this with the rolling shutter, the lack fast wide angle options (more detail to get aliased), poor low light performance and you have a recipe for some awful home movies. Only in the best of production environments or a sunny afternoon on Sundays can all of those things be tamed, but then in the case of the former what is the point of a pocket camera?

In short there is no such thing as Super16 RAW (with 13 Stops of DR) BAD HOME MOVIES, get your facts straight.

The primary reason is the lack of OLPF. That is inexcusable.

I've heard this complaint before, about other cameras. It didn't hold up then, either - particularly when it's addressable. You can't get rid of the OLPF if it's built in, but you can add one if it's not. This is however one of the areas where the Digital Bolex has an edge over the pocket and 2.5 K versions of Black Magic cameras.

Only in the best of production environments can all of those things be tamed, but then what is the point of a pocket camera?

I wish I'd had one of the Pocket Cinema Cameras when I climbed Mount Rainier last summer...

Bolex is not even here yet, or not ready yet, But it looks like they are in a loss for words after the Pocket camera announcement anyway, they had there hayday!
It's a niche, and from the price...It will stay a niche.
not only that But from what i know they will be taking orders from there website only.

"There will be No Mass production or 3rd party sales, You can only purchase Direct?
Not to say that's a bad thing...But shows the interest in the DB is slacking big time.

Bolex is not even here yet, or not ready yet, But it looks like they are in a loss for words after the Pocket camera announcement anyway, they had there hayday!
It's a niche, and from the price...It will stay a niche.
not only that But from what i know they will be taking orders from there website only.

"There will be No Mass production or 3rd party sales, You can only purchase Direct?
Not to say that's a bad thing...But shows the interest in the DB is slacking big time.

Was there ever a plan for the digital bolex to be mass produced or sold through resellers?

If there wasn't then it's not much of a sign of reduced interest. RED effectively only sell direct (there are about 2 specially authorized resellers in the world) and they manage fine.

The primary reason is the lack of OLPF. That is inexcusable.

I've heard this complaint before, about other cameras. It didn't hold up then, either - particularly when it's addressable. You can't get rid of the OLPF if it's built in, but you can add one if it's not. This is however one of the areas where the Digital Bolex has an edge over the pocket and 2.5 K versions of Black Magic cameras.

Only in the best of production environments can all of those things be tamed, but then what is the point of a pocket camera?

I wish I'd had one of the Pocket Cinema Cameras when I climbed Mount Rainier last summer...

It was addressable. At the time of the design and production. Putting that off to a mysterious potential 3rd party means that it is at least a year out. Has one been made for the v1 yet? NO. Not a word. I personally know three people who have sold there v1's already because of it. The problem is that this kind of artifact bites you in the ass at the most inopportune moments. It puzzles me that something which could so easily be addressed (it's not like OLPF's are new to the industry) has not been. The only thing worse than a mistake, is repeating it.

The primary reason is the lack of OLPF. That is inexcusable.

I've heard this complaint before, about other cameras. It didn't hold up then, either - particularly when it's addressable. You can't get rid of the OLPF if it's built in, but you can add one if it's not. This is however one of the areas where the Digital Bolex has an edge over the pocket and 2.5 K versions of Black Magic cameras.

Only in the best of production environments can all of those things be tamed, but then what is the point of a pocket camera?

I wish I'd had one of the Pocket Cinema Cameras when I climbed Mount Rainier last summer...

It was addressable. At the time of the design and production. Putting that off to a mysterious potential 3rd party means that it is at least a year out. Has one been made for the v1 yet? NO. Not a word. I personally know three people who have sold there v1's already because of it. The problem is that this kind of artifact bites you in the ass at the most inopportune moments. It puzzles me that something which could so easily be addressed (it's not like OLPF's are new to the industry) has not been. The only thing worse than a mistake, is repeating it.

There is a solution for this that is coming very soon.

It's actually very difficult to design an optimised OLPF. You don't just bang an off the shelf filter in there. It takes months of iterative testing to fine tune it. Which is precisely why one hasn't appeared yet.

jb