Not sure how you check your Patona batteries, most knock-offs are not as advertised, but I do have genuine Nikon 1020's and the listed charge times are 2-4 hours. I believe the BMD supplied battery is also pretty legit, it takes about 1.5-2 hours to charge, which is close to the advertised one-hour and fifteen minutes charge time if charged in the camera.

I am pretty sure the charger's also a genuine charger, but it could be defective. I'll check with the distributor that I bought it from.

Thanks for testing your charge time.

@kazuo

I've seen my knock around Sigma 18-35 footage on a 30ft screen (DI/finishing bay, Barco), that's not exactly theatrical but there it looked pretty damned sharp without any sharpening applied. I think next week I'll be able to go over to the ArcLight with a DCP of footage to take a look at it.

I think there's ample amounts of detail, but it's not "sharp" or edgy. Again, I'm probably not making much sense here.

@BurnetRhoades

Actually, yes, I think it's because the 2.5K RAW is rather sharp when paired with the same lens. As well, the RAW from the 2.5K is sharper. Not offensive at all, I really like it on that camera as well, but noticed that the Pocket Camera had a softer overall look.

I believe the new debayer firmware update will turn out sharper images on both cameras, which is kinda scary because of the moire on the 2.5K. Pocket Camera's moire's a lot more tolerable, though.

Here's a folder on google drive with three tiffs, taken from resolve. Zero sharpness applied, 800ISO, just a white balance adjustment after a LUT I'm building, Sigma 18-35 @ 2.0 and this isn't the sharpest the lens gets. Will explain later, but it can definitely net a bit more sharpness at 2.0.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8-f-XPnmOp6WGVVdGo1d2ZKelk&usp=sharing

Sorry for the mundane examples.

@kholi, if he's using Resolve 9 then that's accurate about sharpening starting at 50, but in Resolve 10 it starts at zero (in the RAW tab) so 47 would be fairly pronounced. Not necessarily off the charts, though. Since 10 just came out, he probably was using 9 I would imagine, but I figured it was worth mentioning.

I think he's using the sharpness setting in the blur, mist, sharpness panel.

The short was shot ProRes, so he couldn't use the debayer sharpness setting in the CinemaDNG raw tab, least not that I know of! xD

@kholi Those 3 shots from the Pocket with Sigma 18-35 look very interesting. That was the combo I'm interested in, so thanks for posting those. Do you have any videos posted by chance of Pocket with Sigma 18-35? (I guess with this sensor its equivalent to using 27-52mm on GH2, which for me is great as I generally use a 28 and a 50 on my GH2.) So what do you think of this combo for narrative filmmaking? Thanks!

@kholi What about the SLR Magic glass on this camera? Sharp enough? Nice overall image? Good combo? Thanks!
That Viewfactor cage looks really nice, btw.

I love the cage. I really don't understand the use of wood and how it's somehow become associated with the BMD cameras as a handling surface. I look at them and all I can imagine is blisters.

@kholi

I know what you mean. Actually, film is the same: not razor sharp when you actually sit at the front row of the cinema and peep at the pixels.

But when you projected BMPCC footage, did you see any aliasing? Stair stepping, jagged edges? Sounds like true progressive frames

When you press play on the camera, it shows you the last clip that you recorded and the counter at the bottom tallies how much time you've run on your card.

From there you just calculate how much space your card can hold and subtract.

Also, the CARD FULL indicator blinks for the remaining like two minutes on your card, so you'll likely see it before you run out of space.

@BurnetRhoades

I love wood for a handle. It's not a BMCC thing, it's an Aaton thing. Aaton have an awesome moudled handgrip they made for their cameras and I adapted one for my BMCC cameras. A lot of early images you might have seen were of my rig, so perhaps why you associate the camera with a wooden handgrip.

The reason the Aaton handgrip was / is so popular is because it's more comfortable to hold for long periods of time than metal. When you hand's perspire as well, it tends to absorb it and not become slipery. In extremes of tempreture, the wood isn't going to be too hot to touch when the metal could be. Or freezing cold either. It's a natural material and having your hand on it all day does not cause blisters.

Arri made a metal pistol grip for their cameras and I always saw Aaton handgrips on the Arri's, never the other way around.

It's also why you'll see programable products made of wood that cost as much as the camera.... https://www.shootingmachine.net/products

For operators, who spend a long time "interfacing" with the camera, anything that makes that easier and more intuitive will be appreciated.

A lot of people assume wod is for the "hipsters" but actually, it's incredibly practical.

@johnbrawley

I love wood for a handle. It's not a BMCC thing, it's an Aaton thing. Aaton have an awesome moudled handgrip they made for their cameras and I adapted one for my BMCC cameras. A lot of early images you might have seen were of my rig, so perhaps why you associate the camera with a wooden handgrip.

Ah, I can't say that I ever noticed the wood in Aaton ads but that makes sense now, given your history with BMD and previous experience. The BMCC handlebars were the first time I'd seen anything like that and, yes, the price on the wood stuff is pretty ridonkulous. It seemed completely ornamental but I believe you.

It seems intuitively less comfortable than a rubberized surface, which is all I've ever used. Metal doesn't sound appealing at all. Holding a rigged DSLR all day is sissy work compared to an Aaton or Arri so, yeah, metal sounds like it was an awful idea.

@Kholi

What mount/adapter combination in use with the Sigma 18-35? Or has the mount been modified?

Have you used the BMPCC w/Sigma on a tripod without additional lens support?

Thanks.