BMCC6K Facts and Findings

My guess is that the sensors in the BMPCC 6K and BMCC 6K FF are from the same family of Sony sensors. Also they probably read them out in 12 bit, which kind off limits the DR to what they achieve right now (although its anyones guess if the sensor is even capable of reaching higher DR numbers in higher bit depth modes).

https://youtu.be/gbMkjqrzmp4?si=EFoo0fwgXsPEJ19_

This guy compares the FF and the regular 6k. Slightly disappointing as they seem to perform exactly the same? No way that's possible, right?

I am confused. To my eye, in all the videos that I have seen on the web so far, the BMCC 6K FF produces better quality images than all the prior BMCCs . If you ask me to do a blind test choosing between the two (FF vs s35 6K G2), I am sure I will perform with near 100% accuracy. In fact, at the beginning of this video, I spontaneously use my hands to block the info about which camera was which, just to have the chance to 'feel' the difference and to choose freely. And, in all times, I was correct: I prefer the one on the left (6K FF) than on the right (s35 6K G2).

I think that what Josh Sattin tested, when comparing the overexposed and underexposed images, was technically 'latitude' (image recovery), not 'dynamic range'. For dynamic range you have to do the kind of quantitative tests that the guys at CineD, Gerald Undone, and others do (you have to measure signal to noise ratios at the extreme stops).

The problem with comparing cameras with just a couple of basic static scenes is that you don't get the 'feeling' of the image. I consider much more informative to show 'real' scenes, side by side, hopefully as many different ones as you can (also including people and camera movements). This is the only way you can get a proper idea of the quality and character of an image, and I am surprised that few people are doing this in a time of abundant camera tests on YouTube (CVP, CineD, Gerald Undone, they don't do that either). Instead, all of them use charts and plastic artificial scenes that don't let you have a 'feeling' of the scene (this is not saying that you can't do the charts, they can be informative, but that you cannot jump into conclusions just by looking at those charts, you need real complex real scenes to judge properly; and they shouldn't last just a couple of seconds, the brain needs time to judge!). And you shouldn't judge this approach too subjective if you can guess which camera is which with more than 80% accuracy. Maybe you don't know why you prefer one over the other (it's difficult to put an experience into words), but if you can guess systematically and with good accuracy an image difference, this means you are pretty aware that there is a 'real' difference.

I appreciate all the excellent work Josh Sattin does to educate people about camera technologies and how to use them, but in this case I have to deeply disagree with his statement that the BMCC 6K FF produces basically identical images than the s35 6K G2. I think that the just too simple design of his test was not adequate to capture the real and significant differences between these two cameras in terms of image quality.

If an analysis contradicts most of the experiences of seeing real footage coming from the 6K FF (versus the s35 6K G2), well, good scientific practice tells you that you have to revise your testing, instead of concluding that they produce basically identical images.

Here's my first day with the camera. Not a lot of footage, but the light was nice towards the end of the day.
I do say that the ability to utilize the 'full character' of a lens that's FF (APO Microprimes) along with the FF bokeh, it's really nice. Especially coming from a Pocket 6k Pro user with an APS-C sized sensor.

Looks good Adam, thanks.

Pretty quick, pretty work, pretty colours, pretty ‘cinematic’ as they say. Doesn’t feel like Super16.

https://youtu.be/qeHjyBzF3Ds?si=L-PqMp3FghEN54FI

Here's my first day with the camera. Not a lot of footage, but the light was nice towards the end of the day.
I do say that the ability to utilize the 'full character' of a lens that's FF (APO Microprimes) along with the FF bokeh, it's really nice. Especially coming from a Pocket 6k Pro user with an APS-C sized sensor.

Adam,

From an image standpoint, do you prefer the new full frame to the 6k Pro?

He compares the image of both, it's the same except s35 vs FF obviously:

But maybe you mean something else.

https://youtu.be/qeHjyBzF3Ds?si=L-PqMp3FghEN54FI

Here's my first day with the camera. Not a lot of footage, but the light was nice towards the end of the day.
I do say that the ability to utilize the 'full character' of a lens that's FF (APO Microprimes) along with the FF bokeh, it's really nice. Especially coming from a Pocket 6k Pro user with an APS-C sized sensor.

Adam,

From an image standpoint, do you prefer the new full frame to the 6k Pro?

I'm still making a call, haha.
I think if I write out my thoughts it may help. Initially, I'm really happy with the image quality. Once I get proper NDs I'll be able to determine how much the speed of internal NDs plays into the type of work I do. I have FOUR shoots next week, some are single cam and others two cam shoots, so I'll be able to report back on shooting doc-style moments and corporate interviews in a week or so!

Coming rom the P6KPro...

Image quality is similar between the CC6K and P6kPro. I really like having Dual ISO on both cameras, and relatively the same data rate. Which makes you wonder why the CFExpress? The OLPF seems really nice, but I also have a Rawlite in my P6kPro so my expectation is really high of how good it can look. I do say that the Rawlite was worth the investment.

Sensor Readout (Rolling Shutter)
P6kPro @ 6k = 19.73ms
CC6K @ 6k DCI =19.90ms
When i’m shooting 2.4:1
P6kPro - 14.61ms
CC6k - 15.67ms
They are close enough to not consider it a deciding factor, IMO. Sure, Open Gate 3:2 is the 'worst in class' but if you take precautions and figure out stabilization options, I think I'll be fine.

Internal NDs vs No NDs
I’ve had issues with the mechanical ND’s in the 6k Pro for a while. Every once in a while, i have to ‘jimmy’ them into place, by smacking the camera around and pray the client or talent isn’t noticing.
Using a VND takes a little time from removing and placing it back on the lens, for sure, but if you have a way to carry or keep it on you conveniently, it’s a non-issue. Or using a Matte Box option.

Open Gate is FUN.
Seeing the full beauty (character) of your FF lenses on an actual FF sensor is really pleasant. But it does reveal the full character of your lens. I’m thinking how there’s SO many videos of the DZOfilm Vespid Primes on s35 sensors like the Komodo and people LOVE them, and they look great! Then i see a full-frame lens test with them and i see cut off bokeh and CA. But maybe that’s just me. I'm not knocking on DZO. I like the look of the Vespids, for sure, but Cat’s Eye Bokeh and sharpness is what I’m craving at the moment, haha. I tried some other vintage lenses I have and they looked ok, some better than others.

Adapting other lenses
The fact that I can use m42, Canon FD, PL, EF, etc on this sensor in Full frame? Man is it nice. Lenses should outlast any electronic gear you own, if well maintained, and it’s really cool to see all these lenses i have from 35mm film photography days to be able to be utilized and have fun with.

Codec
BRAW only vs Other
I’ve worked with many clients over the past year as a full-time freelancer and not once have they said “no” to BRAW. Most editors, IMO, deal with BRAW and actually enjoy the flexibility in post of dialing WB and such for correction. I can’t remember the last time I didn’t shoot in BRAW, so it is a non-issue for me.

Weight and feel (ergonomics)
Taking out the NDs does make this camera feel and sit better in the hand for sure. It just feels very comfortable. I’m left handed, so maybe that means something?

Cost:
$2500 + $300 (NDs) + Adapter(s) @ $200ish = $3000 for the CC6K
$2500 + $500 (Rawlite) = $3000 for the Pocket 6k Pro
You tell me what is more important?

Flexibility with lenses, and ND filtration? OR Speed and efficiency with Internal NDs and ProRes?

I'm surprised image quality would be the same. The FF camera has bigger photosites, the result if true translate to more colour information. Also there should be more details in FF. There were written article somehere I read that says in a landscape image what look like a small white dot in a S35 camera was actually a house in the FF. Are you seeing this from a 4k UHD 10 bit monitor?

Edit I meant to say what looks like a white dot was actually a bird.

I haven’t pixel peeped yet, so I’ll honestly say I may be wrong.
I just notice that the images feel pleasant and similar.

JB mention the 6k FF the colour is closer to the Ursa Mini 12k. I use a LG 32 inch UHD 10 bit FRC monitor. I cant claim this is a great monitor by today standard but I have notice differences when others have said they cant tell on their own screen.

I don’t recall saying the new camera was closer to a 12k.

It’s very good. It’s obviously the same sensor family as the other pocket cameras so it performs very similarly.

This idea that FF sensors are better at colour / noise / DR is just not really that accurate in the real world. It’s an old wives tale from stills photography days. It’s only a small part of the story and in this case it’s barely any different.

This is a 6k pocket that has a larger sensor and L mount. That’s it. It’s not going to be a huge difference better and the OLPF is probably making up most of the noticeable difference.

JB

Sorry JB if I thought it might be you who mentioned but it was from a tester I cant recall who had mention the colour is closer to the Ursa Mini 12k. However you did mention when comparing to the other Pocket cameras "highlight roll off is great, but this new camera is ever better."

Yes, that is interesting if someone thinks it compares to the 12K image. My guess is the much larger photosite of the BMCC6K versus the BMPCC6K series is either not used effectively by the BMD image processor or the sensor circuitry differs with the IMX410 lacking in some way such as a higher noise floor. If everything else was equal, the sensor with over 2.5x the light gathering capability should fare better. I don’t know if other vendors using the same sensor have squeezed out higher dynamic range.

The 12K camera is even more amazing given its photosites that are more than 2.5x smaller than the BMPCC6K thanks to the rather novel CFA and 6x6 matrix processing so the virtual pixel is much larger than the actual pixel.

With BMD we have a company that is dedicated to producing the best image possible in post so it doesn’t surprise me that the delivered images of the BMCC6K will rival the 12K. And their next camera likely will be their best camera yet.

We live in such an absurdly discordant world that while we debate which is the most supremely beautiful delivered imagery, B&H Photo is soliciting your opinion of The Best-Looking Camera Ever! Sigh.

Florent Piovesan Of Two Lands
"I have always thought the BMPCC6K Pro highlight roll off was pretty good, but this is another step up from that camera."

Florent Piovesan Of Two Lands
"I have always thought the BMPCC6K Pro highlight roll off was pretty good, but this is another step up from that camera."

It looks exactly the same in the video posted earlier which compares them side by side.

Guys. Get away from the larger photosite logic = better.

That’s not really a great way to compare.

You’re comparing the older 6k to the newer 6k as if it’s a huge difference and then the gold benchmark is a sensor with photosites a fraction of the size. The logic is flawed.

The sensors are basically the same except one is a bit larger physically. Everything else is the same aside from what an OLPF brings.


JB

Florent Piovesan Of Two Lands
"I have always thought the BMPCC6K Pro highlight roll off was pretty good, but this is another step up from that camera."

It looks exactly the same in the video posted earlier which compares them side by side.

Youtube compression aside at 4:55 +5 stops the Pocket G2 looked worse on my screen. The 6k FF has worse horizontal banding at -4 stops than the Pocket G2.

You were quoting a YouTuber saying that highlight roll off was levels better on the BMCC 6K when in reality it's the same. No word about noise, yes noise is apparently worse on the new 6K.

You were quoting a YouTuber saying that highlight roll off was levels better on the BMCC 6K when in reality it's the same. No word about noise, yes noise is apparently worse on the new 6K.

The youtuber I quoted is a tester from BMD product page for this camera. I would'nt randomly qoute someone who is not.

I've seen the video too, it was just his impression but he didn't even compare them side by side. The other guy did.
And John has now said 2 times, in all clarity, that they are essentially the same. Just DoF and OLPF differ, and tad bit more noise on the new one.

In his test the +5 stops shows the G2 was worse, that is on my screen, not sure how you are seeing it?

That's tiny exposure differences, he can't 100% expose the two cameras equally.

There is DR different, shadows are darker on the G2, also there is more red and green as well as highlight more clipped. Its stands out pretty obviouse on my screen. What monitor are you using?

My screen is very good.
Look, if you want them to be so different, I won't stop you anymore.

If you want them to be the same I won't stop you either.

If you want them to be the same I won't stop you either.

Haha, even BM rates their DR exactly the same but still you believe something different?

Just seen a good online side by side review and as I have predicted all along, there is zero difference in image quality between the FF and the 6K pro and with the extra pain of the no internal ND's and no ProRes recording I have no idea why anyone would by the FF camera. Sort of disappointed because an upgrade is always nice but also it's nice just to realise you're ok with what you have, not to mention saving money!

I have no idea why anyone would by the FF camera.

Neither have most of the people who were badgering BM to produce one.....

I mean the other two BIG upgrades that everyone was pestering Blackmagic for were mirrorless mount and OLPF, which are pretty huge to me (still doubting if they're 500 euros difference significant, but still).

L-mount is big imo.
I never wanted FF so am waiting for a L-mount s35 version.

OLPF, I missed it but not as much as decent IR cut and the verdict on that is still out.

I'm still playing around with my CC6k, but the noise pattern does look more pronounced vs the P6kPro.

Interesting Noise Comparisons:
@400 ISO both CC6k and P6kPro noise looks even, can't tell the difference.
CC6k @ 1250 ISO looks the same as P6kPro @ 3200 ISO.
The P6kPro @ 1250 ISO looks incredibly clean.
The CC6k lower ISO range looks vary usable from 100-800 ISO.
CC6k @ 3200 ISO looks very noisy.

(I'll try to get some images up)

Matteo Bertoli discussing the BMCC6k in comparison to the different Blackmagic camera. He also mentions doing a full review soon.

...and link to his LUTs. No thanks

Here's a very bland focal length test with the 12k and CC6k.
It's actually kinda fun to see how close a 32mm on s35 looks so close to a 25mm on FF. And 25mm FF vs a 17mm on s35.

If you want them to be the same I won't stop you either.

Haha, even BM rates their DR exactly the same but still you believe something different?

This is were you are wrong.
BMD rate the Ursa Mini 12k as 14 stops but many here who uses it thinks its has the same DR as the 15 stop UM4.6k.
Pocket 4k is also 13 stops but people who own this and the Pocket 6k thinks the 6k has more DR.

CVP also did a test, at least they correcty checked the images unlike the other youtuber above who cant seem to see the different

CVP also did a test, at least they correcty checked the images unlike the other youtuber above who cant seem to see the different

The link does not seem to work.

Were you trying to share this test from CVP from a few weeks ago?

https://youtu.be/Q0dmMOWFaBM

Here's a very bland focal length test with the 12k and CC6k.
It's actually kinda fun to see how close a 32mm on s35 looks so close to a 25mm on FF. And 25mm FF vs a 17mm on s35.

12K looks so nice. I'd love this sensor in a small cam with L-Mount <3

Cinematographer Sittipong Kongtong from Bangkok, Thailand:

"I just had a quick test of the new DZOFilm PAVO 2x anamorphic Prime with the high profile, Alexa 35 and the new Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6K Full Frame (in Super 35 4:3 mode)

Alexa 35 in ARRIRAW 25P
Blackmagic 6K FF in BRAW Q3 25P

Bringing in to DaVinci Resolve Studio 18.6 in ACES. Set Blackmagic BRAW to using High Light Recovery.
Then just very small adjust both camera for very close exposure, no any other touch.

I love the image of Alexa 35, but the new Blackmagic 6K is very impressive. Do not underestimate this small beast."

Cinematographer Sittipong Kongtong from Bangkok, Thailand:

"I just want to see the 'LOOK' of a new Cooke S8/i FF from 4 different cameras; Alexa 35, Alexa mini LF, Red V Raptor XL 8K and the new comer, Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6K FF.

I shot all 4 cameras in maximum resolution and in native raw format.
Alexa 35 in ARRIRAW Open Gate 4.6K
Alexa mini LF in ARRIRAW Open Gate 4.5K
Red V Raptor in 8K REDRAW
Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6K FF in BRAW Q3

All 4 cameras set at same T Stop (2.8 and 1/2)
Shutter Angle 180
25P

I brought all file into DaVinci Resolve Studio 18.6 using ACES
Set REDRAW in IPP2 pipeline
Set Blackmagic Cinema Camera using High Light Recovery
Set ARRIRAW in native and Loc C4 decoding for Alexa mini LF
I set up the test at Red Snapper, a rental house in Bangkok, Thailand.

No any color adjustments, I only slightly adjust global exposure to match all 4 cameras. Nothing else."

Quick battery test with included battery.

- 57 minute record time (6k DCI Q5)
- 26 minutes of operation after battery indicator went red

EDIT: Wasabi 570 battery only went about 43 minutes total record time with 23 minutes being in the red battery indicator

I have to say those Alexa's look really nice compared to the other camera's. Especially if you look at the highlights and the way they hold on to the color information. Very natural looking.

And those skin colors…
Nothing beats an Alexa 35 at this point in time. I had the pleasure to test it next to a Venice, a UMP, and a Red. No other camera holds what you saw in the highlights.

I have to say those Alexa's look really nice compared to the other camera's. Especially if you look at the highlights and the way they hold on to the color information. Very natural looking.

Alexa 35 is another level and will probably be the benchmark for the next 10 years, like the Alexa was for the past 10+ years.

But, the other cameras only look 'worse' because there's a side-by-side comparison to the Alexa 35. Leave that away and all these cameras look great, certainly plenty good enough for anything I'd plan to shoot.

And that <$3k BMPCC LF looks better than the 15x more expensive RED V Raptor XL to me. Good times.

There's something weird with the V-Raptor footage? Like it's not supposed to be that monochromatic, right?

Quick battery test with included battery.

- 57 minute record time (6k DCI Q5)
- 26 minutes of operation after battery indicator went red

EDIT: Wasabi 570 battery only went about 43 minutes total record time with 23 minutes being in the red battery indicator

Thank you for the test. What was the screen brightness?

There's something weird with the V-Raptor footage? Like it's not supposed to be that monochromatic, right?

Yeah I think he used mostly the same exposure values for all camera’s. So you might be able to hold on to a bit more highlight detail on the V-Raptor if you would use a different exposure.

He adjusted exposure in post to match them as close as possible.
I think it's just color temperature being cooler and tint a lot more towards magenta than the others (he didn't change those in post).