Yea, I don't see this being settled any way other than Thunderdome...

@no_surrender Despite the rhetorical eloquence you show by using carefully reasoned arguments like calling people morons, we are in agreement that it is intended for pros, and doesn't that mean it should not fail under ordinary pro work? Don't bother to respond as I am a moron and will not understand.

If someone doesn't mind the orbs and can work around them in their workflow, great. Telling everyone else to 'STFU' because they don't agree with you isn't.

'Cinema' does not mean 'controlled lighting' to BM - if you're in doubt, check out their product page for it: http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/uk/products/blackmagicpocketcinemacamera

"Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera is everything you need to bring cinematic film look shooting to the most difficult and remote locations, perfect for documentaries, independent films, photo journalism, music festivals, ENG, protest marches and even war zones."

Bottom line, BM did NOT want this artifact, and they will fix it. If it takes a recall, so be it.

I can't imagine how BMD missed that... shooting direct light should be one of the main tests to check how a camera's sensor behaves... They have to resolve that issue for sure!

1000$ is not cheap - a small sensor camera isn't supposed to cost 1500-2000$ only because of an 'old-film-camera' hipster housing... or 10 000 because RAW and prores are professional formats.

Pocket has video only, simple basic functions and no complicated codecs etc. - just great image, basic shutter and storage. That's what really matters to get your shot. Everything else has a workaround. If the sensor can't handle properly a single reflection of light, the whole camera is pretty compromised. And that's not the BMD camera line is all about.

Just to clear my POV. It's still the best that my money can buy and of course that it's awesome for the money, no doubt about it. So it's still on the top of my list despite the orb issue (that it's still an issue). Whenever it becomes available in stores, then I'll have to make my mind. Just chill out ;)

@shian

I agree with ya buddy but I planned to use this as a Bcam to my BMCC. I don't want to worry about something "blooming" or whatever you want to call it in one angle and not the other. And most normal viewers wouldn't see it but it would cause me to drink more than I normally do and you can only imagine that from first hand experience :) Anyways if this is someones only camera, yeah, probably an easy work around and most people wouldn't notice. Everyone has a different angle on this. Good for some, bad for some and apparently life ending for others!!! ;) BTW, did you get my message about CGH?

I have been reading all comments with interest. We all Obviously can now acknowledge the problem with the blooming.. It's now down to BMD to respond and let us know if this is a hardware or software fix. If they have already got 200,000 BMPCC's on a boat towards our shores as we speak with this issue then they and we have a problem.

If they have indentified the problem in the review cams they have sent out.. Halted production and started working on fixing the issue then that's a good sign.

The problem is as usual with BMD we just don't know where we stand. I fail to believe that their own QC department failed to see this blooming issue.. Or they did and hoped it would go unnoticed.

All I know Is is it would be something I couldn't live with.. And after waiting so long for the cam in the first place the last thing I want to when I finally received it is to have to send it straight back again!

Come on guys, those white orbs are unacceptable, no matter how much the camera costs, $600, $1000 or $5000. If only they had mention it at launch or in the user manual then it could be an excuse. The PCC is supposed to face the big dogs but it isn't happening with those flaws... imo....

And hey, if you shoot under perfectly controlled lighting conditions, what do you need DR for?

+1

It's obvious, we went on what BM told us. 'Image a little less resolved but otherwise basically identical to BMCC'. People who put their money down expected that.

I won't buy it with the orbs. I shoot almost exclusively natural light, and nighttime. What use is dynamic range if highlights have none? And hey, if you shoot under perfectly controlled lighting conditions, what do you need DR for?

@shian I understand what you're saying, and I agree. But I don't think it's really a proper comparison considering technology, and our accompanying expectations, are growing exponentially – not in a flat timeline or even a linear rate.

So, this is the beginning, but I think we're not too far from cameras in this price range that should be expected to perform.

@philiplipetz You're a moron. It DOES mean that. Its not called Black Magic Pocket Videographer Casual Halfwit Camera. ______________ IT MAY BE CHEAP.....but ITS A PRO CAMERA...which means its intended for.....wait for it.... Pros.

@Shian You're just THE man.

The level of hysteria over this in just a handful of days is kind of strange.

I imagine most of you wouldn't have bought a DVX100, HVX200, Genesis, F35, or nearly any good CCD based camera for the same price as what a Pocket Cam costs today... with the vertical smear problem and all that every single one of those cameras has/had.

Any bright light in frame creating a vertical line across the entire image is a far worse problem than round highlights... and still each of those cameras have helmed their own motion picture release, with the problem easily spotted throughout the runtime.

Edit: and if you're too new to know what I'm talking about, just google: CCD SMEAR