Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
2K BlackMagic Pocket Cinema Camera, active m43, $995
  • 4493 Replies sorted by
  • @vapourtrail I could have sworn that's what I read to. Thanks man!! I don't go on the BM Forum anymore. It's too crazy over there. And that's says a lot coming from me :)

  • Thanks guys. Fixed. Operator headspace and timing issue! ;) Knew I wasn't going insane.

  • and one could simply purchase one, shoot with it, and make a decision to either love it and keep it, or hate it and return it (minus the restocking fee)

    A bit OT, but on that note, B&H (for one) has previously acknowledged (assuming the quote is accurate) that non-defective returned merchandise may be (and is) resold as "new", which is probably true of all retailers which accept returns, with or without a restocking fee (B&H doesn't charge one), whatever else they may claim.

    It does seem unlikely a distributor would take back an item simply because a customer of the retailer didn't like it. That still leaves the "open box" sales approach, but those are usually items which have defaced packaging or are missing material, and could never pass as new.

  • For the BMPC footy, are you guys using Resolve and Captain Hook's LUT or going the FilmConvert route?

  • @Kellar42

    Not sure if you're still paying attention to this thread, but here's a random still from a moving shot screen capped:

    It's the Sigma 18-35@2.0 with a Tiffen WW ND on it. The camera's overall "softness" still kind of lays over the image, but it's also pretty sharp IMO. You have some room to add sharpening as well, I didn't add any.

  • For the BMPC footy, are you guys using Resolve and Captain Hook's LUT or going the FilmConvert route?

    In my testing, filmconvert is far more reliable and accurate than the captain hook LUT.

  • The mount is surprisingly solid and capable of holding a lot of weight. I managed to shoot handheld today with a Helios and a Sankor 16c attached to it. Excuse the softness of some of these takes. My aperture was open a bit too wide.

  • @peaceonearth I know it was and it didn't make sense. I was referring to people bitching about things they have no idea what they are talking about and at people who've never even touched the camera which seems to be the majority of the people who post here. I shoot with these cameras. I posted an image earlier and stated how much I like the camera. I asked about update and replied "Bummer" Not, I hate BM, BM is lying to us, BM should be held responsible. I said bummer. I knew there was a fix but couldn't figure out what was going on. For you to tell me to shut up and get over it and move to another camera when I only use BM cameras now and sing there praises makes no sense and yes, it pissed me off. Go back and read through everything. THIS is why certain people are dissapearing from this forum.

  • @vicharris i read it as a joke haha.. hence the smiley face at the end. but only peace knows.

    back on topic, i find film converts lut abit too dark and captain hooks too light/specific for getting a base look. so far ive just been using the BMCC lut in resolve as base and working off that. Has anyone noticed the slight browny muddy cast from the pocket? Anyone made a lut to get rid of it? maybe im seeing things =)

  • @MRfanny

    Can you post an example? I'm not seeing it but I do remember the grey cast of the 2.5K, no longer plagued by that.

  • @kholi ahbleza's ungraded example had a brownish muddy cast.

  • @kholi, I am and thank you for posting. That frame has 'organic/filmic' written all over it which is of course, big. Definitely feel the softness you describe laying over the image, but plenty of details seems to be there, so some people will post sharpen to taste, as you say.

  • I'm not seeing a brown, muddy cast either.

  • I will be out this morning shooting again with my BMPCC. This time, I will try a variety of other lenses, and compare the results. Also this time, I'll be using a tripod.

  • @ahbleza

    let me know as you'll start shooting topless girls using steadicam :-)

  • @keller42 +1 re "organic/filmic". The images coming out show big potential for this camera.

    @Kairutan Thanks for posting footage. Looks very nice and shows potential of this camera. I'm curious if you tried any sharpening yet, and if so, how the image responds to that and how well it holds up.

  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev For you Vitaliy, anything. :-)

  • Ohhh, so that's just how the Log looks out of the camera, the muted "muddy" cast. Doesn't look like it was touched at all so that's what it'll look like.

    Are you guys seeing it in footage after color or a curve? You kinda want to get it out of the Log space so you can work with it.

  • maybe "muddy" was abit overkill ha. yeah out of the cam maybe or off white balance, but it does go away to a degree after grading. I see it in some pocket clips posted up, could simply come down to people not realy noticing when grading or just wanting that look.

    That ouback clip for example, to me just has that slight brown haze to it.

    and this

    this is interesting, i can see a slight cast in ungraded footage that becomes more obvious when its graded

    The greens in foliage doesn't look green enough to me. Like i said it could just be the grading or film grain applied. I mean I am no colourist so if you and vicchriss dont see it theres a good chance you guys just know how to correct it better.

  • Part of the reason it feels muddy is that I think many people are attempting to apply an S curve to it, which is not what you want to do with this footage. My sense from a few days of filming that 18 percent grey is falling really low, and the vast bulk of the stops — 8 or 9 would be my guess, are above 18 percent gray, so if you are exposing for highlights, you are actually pushing most of your mid-tones on down into the bottom 25 percent of your negative (which is fine because you can lift them). But if you apply a S curve to the footage, you are turning everything from midtones down into mush. Adding to that, even in really dark situations, when I look at the footage on a waveform, there is sometimes not a true black, which contributes to the muddy feeling because without a visual reference of true black on screen, it will feel muddy.

    I find I get very clear, non-muddy results by dropping the setup to legal or just below (usually -4 to -10) then raising highlights until they are just about to clip. Maybe lift gamma tiny bit (and then bring setup down again). But no S curve.

    I think a lot of shooters on this camera will be coming from DSLR where S-curves are great because 18 percent gray is falling in the middle of your 8 or so useable stops. As a consequence, I think you can expect to see some really poorly graded footage out there.

  • This is not the best example because there are no bright highlights in it, but it its what is infront of me right now, and it does show much must is contained in that bottom 25 percent. Luckily, they lift up easily.

    (1600ASA panny 25mm @f1.4)

  • Yes, everyone does understand you need to grade and possibly sharpen the footage right?

  • @MRfanny

    Definitely the way that they're handling the footage. Similar to the grey-blue cast thing that existed on the 2.5K. Also, I see a number of people turning to film convert for the footage, so maybe that's it as well?

    Also, older glass/vintage glass. It's part of the look shooting with Kowa Anamorphics and Super Baltars, this like "muddy" haze. Something that you almost can't correct out in broad daylight.

  • @kholi I think you're right about the FilmConvert stuff. Now that I think about it, all that footage is muddy. LUTs I use from the 2.5K work much better as starting points here.