Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Black Magic: Official $1,995 raw cinema camera topic, series 2
  • 1111 Replies sorted by
  • BMC with MFT - this is huge! Next big paycheck and I'm jumping on this.

  • @peterdv_dot_com

    BMCC should have just embraced mft from the start. Think about it, pp who are used to shooting FF will have alot to consider before making the switch to BMC despite the EF mount.
    What is the EF mount supposed to facilitate? It's tokenism, nothing more than cheap consolation that you can migrate your Canon lenses over, when the truth is you will suffer a crop factor which is more than x2. If these people had wanted to make a switch they would have come over to Gh2, which is less expensive, more compact, the video it produces is unmistakably more efficient.

    So, am not sure how an EF BMCC is more valuable than MFT BMC. To me, BMC has just started to destroy Panasonic's market. As @itimjim rightly pointed out, BMC wins alone on 10 bit Pro-res 422, 12 bit Raw is an incredible bonus

  • @kazuo I don't think the EF mount is tokenism. It's purely target market, and bringing an unknown product requires a significant potential market. You get that with EF. I don't think we need to argue the merits of each mount or the timing of them anymore, as BM have proved that they listen and can execute very quickly.

    As for Panasonic, I don't think there's any destruction going on. BMCC is going to be terrible ergonomicly compared to cameras that are designed for run and gun. The only market it is going to displace is those using run and gun camera as a film, music video, corporate video making tool.

  • A lot of people who will be looking at the gh3 will already have a gh1/2, and they will be aware of it's limitations as far as codec is concerned, I am pretty sure the gh3 will have some tempting treats for me, but I have to say that I am concerned that if Panasonic sticks with 8bit I am going to be looking over my shoulder at the BMCC and wondering if I made the right decision about IQ?

    These are different cameras and are used for different reasons but when one already owns a gh2 the need for a gh3 is reduced, and could that IQ gap be filled by the BMCC?

    I will hang onto the gh2, because I enjoy it's ergonomics and flexibility, I do have a dilema about BMCC or GH3. It's great to have these options but I hope Panny narrows the IQ gap significantly.

  • @matthere for me personally the GH2 is that cheap it's almost throw away, so I can't see a GH3 replacing it, just adding to it. It would become a backup.

    I'm buying into the BMCC mFT, so if the GH3 does 1080/60p then I'll be having one. Otherwise I'll be sticking with GH2 and BMCC.

  • I'm wondering if specs will change at all on the GH3 now that the MFT BMCC is a reality. I don't care that much about panny native bitrate, at this point. That is, as long as VK and crew can crack it... I want better DR - like c/s-log and I would like 422 with clean out. That would make me consider purchasing the GH3 as a B cam. Otherwise, I can use the GH2 as a B cam knowing the baked in color restrictions going in... I love my GH2s and I plan to shoot with them when the need arises.

  • Ideally Most serious guys will want both cameras. They both have strong points that don't necessarily overlap eah other, but I bet they will be able to intercut well.

    The fact is there is no "Swiss army knife of cameras" until you get into the $30,000+ range, so a $3000 camera and a $1500 camera together make a good affordable combo.

  • Since this m4/3 version is passive, would it be possible to make the mount interchangeable? Couldn't you just unscrew the chrome mount and replace it with another lens mount type? I know you could just use adapters, but if you had all Nikon (or Pentax, Minolta, C-Mount...whatever) lenses, for example, it'd be nice just to convert it to that mount....what do you think? Would this m4/3 design allow for this?

  • @htinla You mean interchangable mounts like what RED uses on the Epic and Scarlet?

  • @thepalalias Yeah, assuming that the mount on the BMDCC is no more complex than the RED's. I guess I'm looking for theoretical answers unless someone here has the camera and can verify it more concretely.

  • I don't see why you wouldn't just want to use an adapter since the mount will be passive either way. If all your lenses are Nikon F, then just don't take off the adapter.

  • I think Black Magic saw my post at the beginning of this thread and suddenly realized that they were potentially missing out on my business...

    It will be interesting to see where the specs and prices shake out. Probably there will be some trade-offs, but the MFT-mount BMCC will put some feature and/or price pressure on the GH3 without a doubt. That's great for us. I have a feeling we'll have a lot of time to mull over the decision and pixel-peep a lot of footage before either of these cameras becomes widely available.

  • @thepalalias you mean the $2000 interchangeable mount ?

  • m43 is very interesting, suddenly the camera becomes a good partner to the voigtlanders, I bet we see the price of the used noktons increase towards retail.

    I've seen the suggestion of the Tokina and the Sigma for wide zooms. Are these the widest zooms available that work with the BMCC and M43 adapters? What is the widest possible lens for this camera, prime or zoom?

    Now M43 to B4 for 2/3" ENG lenses exist, are these lenses now going to cover the entire picture without using a 2x extender? I've seen some older 1/2" ENG lenses as well, is it possible to cover the sensor using one of these? Although I'm guessing the 2/3 lens might be a better option by using the center of the glass perhaps it helps with the problems of using 3 chip glass on a single sensor. I know these lenses are never going to offer the sharpest results, however the ability to remote zoom is very important to me in certain applications and ENG lenses do it the best.

    In the argument to get this over a GH3, a big negative is the lens crop, and I would bet the next revision of the camera bumps up the physical sensor size. However the light capability and recording formats make it an incredible tool if it delivers. I would guess many GH2 users who are shooting in a professional setting will have 2 camera bodies in their toolkit.

  • The widest Nikon zoom with a manual aperture ring is the 17-35mm f2.8:

    Nikon also made a much less expensive 18-35mm f3.5-4.5 zoom:

    At a somewhat narrower zoom range, Nikon and Tokina made 20-35mm f2.8 zooms:

    Tokina also made inexpensive 19-35mm and 20-35mm f3.5-4.5 zooms:

    For inexpensive wide-range zooms, Nikon made 24-85mm F2.8-4D and 24-120mm f3.5-5.6D:

    These lenses are all available in Nikon F-mount, which can be readily adapted to the MFT mount. The Tokinas can also be found in Canon EF mount. The focus rings of the Tokina EF-mount lenses turn in the same direction as Lumix lenses (as do all Canon lenses). The focus rings of the Tokina F-mount lenses turn in the opposite direction as Lumix lenses (as do all Nikon lenses).

    I have the Tokina 20-35mm f2.8, and it is an excellent, video-friendly lens. Its front lens barrel neither rotates nor extends, it has very little focus breathing, and it remains in-focus across its zoom range. These features make it work well with follow focus and matte boxes.

    (Note: I'm not normally a Ken Rockwell fan, but his cheesecake shots of these lenses sucked me in!)

  • @johnbrawley I just meant that the camera was available with a PL or EF mount but you did not have to choose one or the other - they could be swapped repeatedly on-site. I could not think of other cameras that had implemented that approach so I was making sure I understood the post correctly. :)

    I do not think anyone is unsatisfied with the pricing approach to the new M43 mount on the BMCC - in fact I think BM will get good PR for the way they are handling all this. I personally do not think another mount is needed (beyond m43 and EF) for the camera when the adapters already work so well, so I wanted to make sure I understood what the poster was going for.

    Personally, I think the passive M43 mount greatly increases the appeal of the BMCC. It would be great if we could use lenses like the 7-14mm Panasonic, but I understand that a lot more R&D is involved in an active mount and I am glad they will releasing a passive mount quickly instead of waiting for an active one to be completed.

    Plus, other than using wide lenses, there are very few things to complain about, and an awful lot that is looking very good.

    Now would someone be able to tell me about the respective pixel pitches of the GH2 and BMCC so I can get a sense for how the magnification will compare between 1920x1080 ETC on the former vs a 1920x1080 crop on the latter. ?:)

  • @yachacha trying to get the BMCC to behave like an ENG camera might leave you disappointed. However, if you can make it work, you'll have beautiful ENG footage :-)

  • I don't understand why lot of people are so enthusiastic about the passive M43 mount. Most criticized aspect of EF lens mount was missing wide angle lenses for this small sensor. Is the choice wider on mechanical m43 lenses??

  • Is the choice wider on mechanical m43 lenses??

    Yep :-) Also many old and new C mount lenses can be mounted via converter.

  • @peaceonearth a lens mount that's closer to the sensor lets you adapt a much broader array of lenses - not only Micro Four Thirds.

    Additionally, I think that all lenses made by Panasonic and Olympus which use electronic contacts on Micro Four Thirds Systems are pretty much useless since they are focussed electronically rather than coupling the focus ring directly to the parts being moved for focussing. This makes using focus gears and Follow Focusses almost impossible.

  • Very nice interview.

  • Psyched for the MTF, just wish I didn't have to wait until winter! I'm still going with EOS, and if its humanly possible to have the mount switched on mine once they are available I will make it happen.

  • @peaceonearth: there is soo much more to choose from! (overall)

    The slrmagic 12mm will be a gorgeous wide on the bmc. For instance.

    @thepalalias it seems like the crop of the bmc horizontally will be the same as the gh1 had. 2x, rather than 2.3? Or just the same width as a 4:3 crop on the gh2.

  • @RRRR Thanks, but that does not fully answer my question. I wanted to know the actual size of the pixels, since with ETC mode you are getting pixels 1:1 instead of downsampling from a higher resolution.

    My question is: how much smaller is each pixel? If we are dealing with 1:1 pixels, then that is what determines the apparent magnification for each pixel for each camera if using the same lens from the same position. If we were talking about the full readout (instead of the minimum 1920x1080 crop) the situation would be different.