Where is all the new BMCC MFT footage at?

I searched vimeo and haven't found much of anything. I know it should be the same, but I like seeing the lens choices and how the footage looks. I know someone who owns a bunch of voigtlanders and a GH2/GH3. So am curious how all that stuff has been transferring over.

I´ve been searching too.. but nothing found

The MFT cameras are only just making their way to customers. In a few weeks, I think we'll start seeing more! (Although the amount of orders for the MFT camera was significantly less than the EF mount, so we probably won't see the same abundance as EF footage for quite some time.)

Just out of curiosity, do you guys think the MFT mount would a significantly different image than the EF?

Where will the main image difference be?

The MFT cameras are only just making their way to customers. In a few weeks, I think we'll start seeing more! (Although the amount of orders for the MFT camera was significantly less than the EF mount, so we probably won't see the same abundance as EF footage for quite some time.)

If the amount of MFT orders are significantly less how is it that i´ve had no news about mine
I´m first in the line... but they do not come.. maybe BM needs a map of Europe

The MFT cameras are only just making their way to customers. In a few weeks, I think we'll start seeing more! (Although the amount of orders for the MFT camera was significantly less than the EF mount, so we probably won't see the same abundance as EF footage for quite some time.)

If the amount of MFT orders are significantly less how is it that i´ve had no news about mine
I´m first in the line... but they do not come.. maybe BM needs a map of Europe

As I've mentioned earlier, it can take a bit extra time for products to ship throughout Europe than throughout the US. There are just more countries, more forms to fill out, etc. They're coming. (I don't know where your camera specifically was ordered from, but there are several other factors involved as well. With hundreds of resellers in each region, every #1 order from every single reseller might not be filled on the very first day.)

Just out of curiosity, do you guys think the MFT mount would a significantly different image than the EF?

Where will the main image difference be?

Because they are best suited for the sensor and will offer better resolution
Any camera builder should know.. but Blackmagic didn´t!!
Look at this.. It is called science.. something guys at BM do not like a lot
A great top line lens like canon 24mm can offer around 50 lpmm in center at best (f 5.6)
http://www.lenstip.com/245.4-Lens_revie ... ution.html
Voigtlander 25mm can give up to 80 lpmm (f4) !!! That´s 80% more resolution
http://www.lenstip.com/276.4-Lens_revie ... ution.html
Even at 1.4 it gets to match the resolution of canon at 5.6
Remember this fact... The canon lenses being worst on a Blackmagic camera are more expensive and slower
Even lenses like zuiko 17mm 1.8 can get to 80lpmm while cost is 3 times less than canon 24mm (500dollars vs 1500dollars)

Conclusion:
much better resolution.. faster lenses.. wider lenses.. and less internal reflections
That is why MFT blackmagic camera is wayyyy better than the canon hommer design one
of course it is also compatible with real cine lenses like PL.. so it can get to be a real cinema camera

I don't think that's what bmcc.tv wanted to know...

Just out of curiosity, do you guys think the MFT mount would a significantly different image than the EF?

I don't think there will be a different image just because of the different lens mount. You can put almost any EF lens and many other lens types on the MFT mount (using appropriate adapter), so with mft you have a broader spectrum of lenses available, including some very good cine lenses from another era of filmmaking, while all sensor characteristics stay the same. Unless you put on some very special lenses, you won't be able to tell if the camera was an EF or MFT version.

This is all I've found so far...

Williamstown (John Brawley)
BMCC MFT with Hot Rod PL adaptor and the Angenieux 16-42 and the 45-120 PL lenses.


Sunset (John Brawley)
BMCC MFT with SLR Magic 12mm T1.6 and voigtlander 17.5mm T0.96.


Mad Cat Lady (Philip Bloom)
BMCC MFT with Voigtlander 17, 25mm F0.95 and SLR magic 35mm F1.4 50mm F0.95.



I don't know if it's my graphics card or monitor, but all the MFT footage I've seen so far looks very grainy and soft compared to the BMCC EF footage.

Blackmagic MFT and SLRMagic Primes
BMCC MFT with SLRMagic HyperPRime 25/0.95 and SLRMagic 12/1.6 REV.2.

... I don't know if it's my graphics card or monitor, but all the MFT footage I've seen so far looks very grainy and soft compared to the BMCC EF footage.

The BMCC-EF and BMCC-MFT cameras are exactly identical in terms of video quality. Only the lens mount is different, and thus (usually) the lens(es) you choose to use with the cameras.

If identical lenses are mounted on both cameras, at the same time, shooting the same subject, in the same light, with the same camera & lens settings, and the footage is post-processed identically -- then the video will look exactly the same.

If not, then the video will look different. Simple as that. Period.

-

all that footage is from beta testers

"Still not sure about the voigtlander 17.5mm T0.96. I think it's soft but I Need to see more."

"Yeah the 17.5mm is very soft and bloomy wide open..."

comments on this BMCC MFT video:



I have a friend that has a GH3 with a voigtlander and it's very crisp. Not sure why it would be so soft on a BMCC MFT.

"Still not sure about the voigtlander 17.5mm T0.96. I think it's soft but I Need to see more."

"Yeah the 17.5mm is very soft and bloomy wide open..."

comments on this BMCC MFT video:



I have a friend that has a GH3 with a voigtlander and it's very crisp. Not sure why it would be so soft on a BMCC MFT.

like every ultra fast lens it tends to flare when fully open if light hits the lens.. use a mattebox.. about sharpnest it is an amaizing lens.. you can read in my previous comment the resolution charts.

"Still not sure about the voigtlander 17.5mm T0.96. I think it's soft but I Need to see more."

"Yeah the 17.5mm is very soft and bloomy wide open..."

comments on this BMCC MFT video:



I have a friend that has a GH3 with a voigtlander and it's very crisp. Not sure why it would be so soft on a BMCC MFT.

like every ultra fast lens it tends to flare when fully open if light hits the lens.. use a mattebox.. about sharpnest it is an amaizing lens.. you can read in my previous comment the resolution charts.

You seem very knowledgeable, what lenses do you recommend with the MFT?

depends on budget but for a reasonable set

slrmagic 12mm (is not so great but it is very wide)
voigt 17.5
voigt 25
and there is a voigt 42.5 coming on july

Voigtlander 0.95 are not only sharp and fast but also have a great bokeh.. 10 blades iris!!.. there is no point in playing with depth of field if out of focus area is ugly

I have the 17'5mm and the 25mm Voigt and as far as I used them on a gh2(for testing) they were amazing, IMHO the 17'5mm is a little bit better.

I own both and received my EF after the adjustments so it was supposed to be as good as it gets. The MFT got here a few days ago and I did my own testing. The overall accuracy of the MFT was perceivable. For me, the difference was noticeable. So over the weekend I sold my EF and shipped it out this morning. Don't get me wrong, I loved the EF model and it is a great camera, but for some reason, and it could be because they have had more time to perfect it, but the MFT seems to give me better overall image quality on each of my lenses.

I own both and received my EF after the adjustments so it was supposed to be as good as it gets. The MFT got here a few days ago and I did my own testing. The overall accuracy of the MFT was perceivable. For me, the difference was noticeable. So over the weekend I sold my EF and shipped it out this morning. Don't get me wrong, I loved the EF model and it is a great camera, but for some reason, and it could be because they have had more time to perfect it, but the MFT seems to give me better overall image quality on each of my lenses.

Could you please upload your tests. We would all love to see them.

What lenses did you try out?

Yes I will try as soon as possible. I have 2 :60 commercials to get out for a client, one shot on the EF model, but all my gear had not yet arrived, matte box, ir nd filters, etc. so it is not the best the camera could do. You can view the EF spot at . My background is motion graphics, especially After Effects, so be gentle, I only picked up a camera and begin to teach myself cinematography over the past 8 months.

I will also post the equipment list so you guys can help educate me, if you don't mind? I love this cinematography art form and want to learn with all my heart!

Below I'm posting a link to Philip Bloom's website, where he reviews the BMCC MFT and compares it to the BMCC EF. He also shows some sample footage of his cats.

If you've been researching the BMCC MFT, then you've probably already seen this footage, however, I found the video elsewhere, not on Philip Bloom's site, thus I didn't get the chance to read info from his site for quite some time. On the page he explains what lenses were used in his filming.

• Voigtlander 25mm (Used to shoot himself in his review)
• Voigtlander 17mm
• SLR MAGIC 35mm F1.4
• SLR MAGIC 50mm F0.95


Next is footage from John Brawley. He shot some test footage with the BMCC MFT and used the following lenses.

• Voigtlander 17.5mm T0.96
• SLR Magic 12mm T1.6

Maybe you've already seen these. Maybe you haven't.
One observation that's helped me narrow my lens options is that almost every review and piece of test footage I've found consists of the same lenses... the Voigtlander 25mm, Voigtlander 17mm, and SLR Magic 12mm T1.6... so I've narrowed it down to the two Voigtlander Lenses, and I've read a few opinions that the Voigtlander 17mm is too wide, thus i'll probably stick with the 25mm.

THE LINKS
Philip Bloom - http://philipbloom.net/2013/03/29/bmdmft/
John Brawley -

I own both and received my EF after the adjustments so it was supposed to be as good as it gets. The MFT got here a few days ago and I did my own testing. The overall accuracy of the MFT was perceivable. For me, the difference was noticeable. So over the weekend I sold my EF and shipped it out this morning. Don't get me wrong, I loved the EF model and it is a great camera, but for some reason, and it could be because they have had more time to perfect it, but the MFT seems to give me better overall image quality on each of my lenses.

This doesn´t make any sense, the sensors are the same
(image quality is dependant on the glass you/can use)
The images i am getting out of my EF could not be better,
maybe you had a very early/unfinished version of the EF?

Sounds strange to me too. Could be you used different lenses?

Going back to the topic...
Where is the new MFT footage??
I have not been able to find it.. not even one clip.. just clips from beta testers

Going back to the topic...
Where is the new MFT footage??
I have not been able to find it.. not even one clip.. just clips from beta testers

My camera will be arriving tomorrow (had it sent to Miami but I live in NYC) will shoot some stuff over the weekend and hopefully post very soon.

Just out of curiosity, do you guys think the MFT mount would a significantly different image than the EF?

Where will the main image difference be?

Because they are best suited for the sensor and will offer better resolution
Any camera builder should know.. but Blackmagic didn´t!!
Look at this.. It is called science.. something guys at BM do not like a lot
A great top line lens like canon 24mm can offer around 50 lpmm in center at best (f 5.6)
http://www.lenstip.com/245.4-Lens_revie ... ution.html
Voigtlander 25mm can give up to 80 lpmm (f4) !!! That´s 80% more resolution
http://www.lenstip.com/276.4-Lens_revie ... ution.html
Even at 1.4 it gets to match the resolution of canon at 5.6
Remember this fact... The canon lenses being worst on a Blackmagic camera are more expensive and slower
Even lenses like zuiko 17mm 1.8 can get to 80lpmm while cost is 3 times less than canon 24mm (500dollars vs 1500dollars)

Conclusion:
much better resolution.. faster lenses.. wider lenses.. and less internal reflections
That is why MFT blackmagic camera is wayyyy better than the canon hommer design one
of course it is also compatible with real cine lenses like PL.. so it can get to be a real cinema camera

Sorry to say but you are not quite right.

When you are compering MFT diagrams to FF diagrams you must consider crop factor values.

So if decent value for FF is 30lpmm it is 48 for 1.6crop factor of APS-C and 60lpmm for MFT crop factor.
So your Voigt 80lpmm is actually 40lpmm on FF. I've seen few EF lenses that manage to go higher than this point. You actually pick one of them (24mm) to convince others that MFT is way sharper and better choice.

When you are comprising FStops for FF vs MFT you have to multiply it by its crop factor as well. So F0.95 in Voigt is 1.9 in FF.

If you would like to read something more go here:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/lens-quality-mtf-resolution.htm

Tom

Just out of curiosity, do you guys think the MFT mount would a significantly different image than the EF?

Where will the main image difference be?

Because they are best suited for the sensor and will offer better resolution
Any camera builder should know.. but Blackmagic didn´t!!
Look at this.. It is called science.. something guys at BM do not like a lot
A great top line lens like canon 24mm can offer around 50 lpmm in center at best (f 5.6)
http://www.lenstip.com/245.4-Lens_revie ... ution.html
Voigtlander 25mm can give up to 80 lpmm (f4) !!! That´s 80% more resolution
http://www.lenstip.com/276.4-Lens_revie ... ution.html
Even at 1.4 it gets to match the resolution of canon at 5.6
Remember this fact... The canon lenses being worst on a Blackmagic camera are more expensive and slower
Even lenses like zuiko 17mm 1.8 can get to 80lpmm while cost is 3 times less than canon 24mm (500dollars vs 1500dollars)

Conclusion:
much better resolution.. faster lenses.. wider lenses.. and less internal reflections
That is why MFT blackmagic camera is wayyyy better than the canon hommer design one
of course it is also compatible with real cine lenses like PL.. so it can get to be a real cinema camera

Sorry to say but you are not quite right.

When you are compering MFT diagrams to FF diagrams you must consider crop factor values.

So if decent value for FF is 30lpmm it is 48 for 1.6crop factor of APS-C and 60lpmm for MFT crop factor.
So your Voigt 80lpmm is actually 40lpmm on FF. I've seen few EF lenses that manage to go higher than this point. You actually pick one of them (24mm) to convince others that MFT is way sharper and better choice.

When you are comprising FStops for FF vs MFT you have to multiply it by its crop factor as well. So F0.95 in Voigt is 1.9 in FF.

If you would like to read something more go here:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/lens-quality-mtf-resolution.htm

Tom

we are talking about 2 cameras with different mounts BUT THE SAME SENSOR
as you mean the canon lens is a great lens for FF..They were made having a FF sensor in mind (some aps-c) so it is not a good lens choice for a 2.3x sensor as BMCC has
that is why MFT lenses get more profit out of the 2.3x sensor as they are designed for a 2x crop factor in mind

we are talking about 2 cameras with different mounts BUT THE SAME SENSOR
as you mean the canon lens is a great lens for FF..They were made having a FF sensor in mind (some aps-c) so it is not a good lens choice for a 2.3x sensor as BMCC has
that is why MFT lenses get more profit out of the 2.3x sensor as they are designed for a 2x crop factor in mind

Yes, MFT lenses are designd espesially for samller sensor, but if you are writing about lpmm parameter of image you should multiply FF value of sharpnes of FF sensor to achieve MFT sensor sharpness. In such a situation Canon 24mm will have higher value lpmm than voigt because 80lpmm is of voigt is achieved on x2.0 crop and 43-46lpmm of 24mm is achieved on FF.

John I am sure you are correct. I shot on the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, A Schneider 18-90, a 14mm Rokinon, a 35, and 85mm Rokinon, a tamron 17-55 2.8, a tamron 70-200mm 2.8,
With the EF it would take a lot of effort to get focus, and the lens readings for distance were only right on the Rokinon85mm. Way off on all the other lens. On the MFT, its dead on for all the lenses, so i could use real world measurements, rather than my poor eye site. Couldn't get infinity focus on the Ef and it's no problem on the MFT. So even though my EF came after the ADJUSTMENT, it may have needed it, but I had jobs and could not send it in. So for me it was more of a struggle because I was having to trust my eye more than measurements and readings. or science.
I am thankful for and loved the EF, it is and will be a great camera, just relaying my experience without intentions to annoy or hurt anyones feelings or expertise.
Also for some reason it was difficult to get focus at all on the 35mm Rokinon at any f-stop on the EF, and its no problem on my MFT. So again, I am sure you are correct.
Cheers