lee4ever wrote:This was shot with iPhone:
If someone asked me what camera that is, I would say it looks like Pocket 4K?
![:-/ :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
With a very bad lens.
![:-) :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Denny Smith wrote:The issue with a 4K S16 Micro/Pocket, was BM has been unable to source a suitable S16 4K sensor* that gives them the look they have with the 2K sensor.
* Per BMD previous statement.
Cheers
I like the look of the latter Sony sensors. I may not be the pocket, but is nice. The latter versions of the sensor used in the micro studio had significant improvements. How come it wasn't used? BM put a tall order for themselves to match that sensor, rather than one you had to do a bit more light control. It has 88db dynamic range, and 1.2 electron volts of noise. It would have been better to have the 4k 3-4 years ago, and just use it, and still be able to get the current sort of 4k last year.
The sensor line of the one in the mini 4k or a Sigma foveon sensor would both have been exotic enough to generate sales.
Uli Plank wrote:Yes, Braw has highlight recovery now. Plus, I like it better than DNG, it has less of that digital harshness, which is probably false detail caused by the lack of an OLPF.
It's an illusion. The sensor sees what it sees, processing can try to obscure that but it is loss of real detail. The colour science in BM (which cameras I don't know) adds some sharpening I understand, which plays with the image anyway. If I was to write a routine to restore detail, I would want what the sensor see's unaltered.
lee4ever wrote:michaeldhead wrote:Why did Canon stop supporting/updating the 5d mki ?
Hmmm....
The camera came out in 2005, right? When did Canon take it out of support?
I read again and again that many are still satisfied with BMPCC and in principle find it a pity that BM give it up after 2 years. (Here three or four times this week. I think every BMPCC owner thinks it's a pity and certainly shrinks from buying another BM camera because the same expects....
They gave it up earlier, already with the firmware 2.1 (19 March, 2015? So after about two years... ).
![:-( :(](./images/smilies/icon_e_sad.gif)
So, we remind. The camera sold for years without an update. You notice how people play with dates here. Saying it's over 5 years old camera, sidestepping that most if the time it was sold without an update. I would expect more a quality camera to have updates for 5 years after it stopped being sold. That's quality, not just trying to make sure a camera doesn't have lower quality modes. There is much which could be done.
Denny Smith wrote:By March 2015, everything that could be added to the camera functionality wise, and image wise had been done. The camera then had twice the menu functionality, additional shooting aids, frame guides, etc. than it had when it was first released. I took about a years worth of FW updates to make the camera what I considered “fully functional” for practical cine shooting, adding the missing exposure and viewing aids, and correcting early camera issues.
So everything that could be done to this little camera had been done. Time to move on my friend.
Cheers
Nonsense. There was a mighty gap leaving people out in the cold as they concentrated on a unified driver scheme for future updates across cameras, rather than release a patch update for the bugs of the time, leaving people out. There is also much more which which could have been done.
lee4ever wrote:The sensor will be different with time than in the beginning so a sensor calibration via menu is desired to remove e.g. the more and more growing HotPixel(?).
If you are referring to adding 60fps to the camera, this was not possible due to hardware limitations of the camera.
Can you prove that?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84451#p470593 Not really.
Good point.
Brad Hurley wrote:The question is, what's in it for Blackmagic Design? They're a business. Of course they want to make their customers happy, but a firmware update isn't going to sell more cameras if they're not manufacturing them anymore. And the lack of compatible SD cards is going to affect demand even further. Any effort to update the firmware would be a financial loss for them; you could argue that some customers will get mad and never buy another Blackmagic product again, but if die-hard BMPCC users (I count myself among them) don't like the look from the new BMPCC 4K they weren't going to upgrade anyway.
Loyalty, reputation!
I noted the look of the new Pocket 4k from the beginning. Something you can patch up with light control and post processing, but expense.
lee4ever wrote:Of course you expect your camera to work well after buying BM. You have bought with the certain that e.g. the battery indicator works correctly, that 4K in best quality is possible and that the USB-C does not simply cancel the recording etc. and so on.
Don't expect a firmware upgrade? BRAW seems to be the solution for taking best quality pictures with less Mbps in 4K, or did I misunderstand something? So this doesn't seem to be a new option, but a solution to a problem with another codec. Then why? BRAW is no better than CinemaDNG, it also lacks the most important one: Highlight Recovery.
What kept me from Pocket 4K was IQ, it doesn't look cinematic although I expected Cinema because BM called the camera Cinema.
As noted. But I'm yet to delve deeply into Braw examples, to see how well it dues under good lighting, which the Pocket 4k will do under darker scenes from reduced noise. What I did see before was culling of detail, contrast. Consumer codecs do that too, to get better data rates.
lee4ever wrote:Australian Image wrote:lee4ever wrote:What kept me from Pocket 4K was IQ, it doesn't look cinematic although I expected Cinema because BM called the camera Cinema.
Cinematic is not just about the camera. It's about the story, location, set design, lighting, composition, framing, movement, audio, post-processing etc.
You really think the sensor isn't important? Then the filmmakers don't need Arri, no Red...? Come on, with the old BMPCC, BMMCC and other older BM cameras, almost every shot looks cinematic. It may be MY ONLY who sees things.
True, there is more intrinsic value and less work in that type of image. Real field work is go, without much post grading. It is a distopian fantasy to demand people more out of pride to compensate for worse equipment because it has a name badge. Of course the image quality out of the box makes a difference down the bottom of the hill.
michaeldhead wrote:You're right - the only thing that makes things cinematic is the camera. Not one other thing.
Like this film: shot on a RED!
How far did you get into it before you quit? I'm curious.
The Pocket is still a good camera, but there are hardware limitations.
48/50/60 fps, even for a short time: you'll melt not only the sensor, but probably the CPU, too - increasing frame rates doesn't affect just the sensor, but the entire image pipeline inside of the camera. What happens when you overclock a CPU and don't add any more cooling to the system?
Better internal mic: so you do want a hardware change? I thought you just wanted a firmware update?
Sensor Calibration: This I honestly am not too familiar with, so I'll let others who know more speak to it.
If you want to still shoot on the Pocket, great! Do it! Lots of people still watch 1080p content - most of my stuff is shot 4k for 1080 delivery.
I think the OG Pocket is pretty much pushed as far as it can be. If more comes down the line without warning a la Blackmagic raw, great! But I wouldn't hold my breath. As much as I'm one who says "the number of Ks don't matter", I don't expect anything less then 4k to be made by just about any camera company from here on forward. Did you see the hubub when Sharp put out an "8k prototype" at CES? People freaked! I, for one, think it was just an empty case with a lens mount and blank ports, but there is obviously a demand for more "Ks" (ugh).
Proof?
You could follow the other thread abs thus one. Nobody gas offered real proof that it cannot be done. Like its wishful thinking that it can't.
You with see discussion on how it could be done with minimal best increase. These presumptions things will melt are not necessary. But what Lee has to realise is that the 0.8 watts of 22 bit 100fps fullhd, is in a very small s16 sensor chip, not a hunking big processor chip with a killer heat sink and fan. I don't know the efficiency of the solid state cooler in there, but years ago it was maybe below 10%, let's say it was now 30%. That's around 2.5 watts to cool 0.8 watts, trapped in a case. If it was 10% that would be 10 watts of heat trapped in a case to deal with.
Now, it does say 0.8 watts st the top 100fps, which would include any over clocking, and you don't have to do much more processing if you are going to use the existing data rate, or less and maybe less heat, to put out over HDMI etc, or record uncompressed to card.
michaeldhead wrote:Let me try this again:
48/50/60 fps, even for a short time: you'll melt not only the sensor, but probably the CPU, too - increasing frame rates doesn't affect just the sensor, but the entire image pipeline inside of the camera.
What happens when you overclock a CPU and don't add any more cooling to the system?
This has been explained, and it uses FPGA.
lee4ever wrote:I edited my post afterwards. See again, or read this:
https://forums.xilinx.com/t5/Xcell-Dail ... a-p/826125You see any fans around there? It's also Spartan 6, another model, but it doesn't matter.
high-speed 3D camera !
Again: BM is the one who clocked down the hardware. And I ask, why not 60fps? No answer! Only users who know little about the fpga technological possibilities.
Yep. But still, it is a canwra built down to.a market, and might not contain parts with enough overhead fur a 16:9 p50 fulhd mode.
Denny Smith wrote:BM clocked down the sensor, to get the best looking image quality out of it, if you want fast frame rates, and do not care about the results, then get a GH5 or 5S, and see what happens at 120fps, it looks like crap! This is what would happen to the Original Pocket, by just increasing the frame rste or over clocking the camera. Not even the larger BMCC could do 60fps, and maintain its IQ.
When you wake up the dragon, you need to cool it’s fire!
Cheers
Different sensor. Yes. We expect a bit of quality drop off. It's OK. It's a choice between a camera and that camera with fullhd p50/60, which is more desirable?
lee4ever wrote:Lee, the BMPCC was released and first shipped in July 2013, that makes the original Pocket camera 5 1/2 years old, BM didn’t stop making it until it was replaced by the new Pocket 4K in/around July-Sept of 2018.
The last firmware was in March 2015 and nothing came since then. It was then given up.
So the camera was five years old when BM ceased production.
I don't mean the production, but with support or better said with the optimization of the firmware. This is no longer the case since March 2015. Which professional camera manufacturer has given up a camera after about two years?
Of course, there are wishes, such as
- Sensor calibration
- Improve MIC:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84748- 48, 50 or 60fps
and much more.
Yes.