Personal View site logo
2K BlackMagic Pocket Cinema Camera, active m43, $995
  • 4493 Replies sorted by
  • crisvplcrisvpl

    I still can not decide for wich ir cut filter+nd fader to use. Nobody knows what does the protective glass on the sensor of bmpcc...? Does it cut ir? Somebody wrote that bmcc it is suitable for 700 spectrum. Wich circular mount ir cut filter to use? As for nd fader I want the genus eclipse 77mm wich seems to have 82mm in front. I suppose that ir cut filter come first so it is necesary to have a mount thread in front. Thanks for any sugestion...

  • vicharrisvicharris

    Different strokes

  • brianlbrianl

    Just to sum up, IMO no one should try to compare the BMPCC to GH. GH's are ridiculously versatile and loaded with light meters, frame rate option, still capabilities, HACKS, and all sorts of cool stuff. Pocketcam is the opposite. It's like a 40 yearold Arri 16. It does one thing and it does it well. If I had to own one cam, probably wouldn't be the BMPCC.

  • jleojleo

    Rodney Charters, ASC, CSC Brings Blackmagic to Dallas

    http://library.creativecow.net/kaufman_debra/Behind-the-Lens-Rodney-Charters/1

    image

    IMG_3603-Version2.jpg
    1000 x 1333 - 297K
  • vicharrisvicharris

    @last_SHIFT Yep, and they're using the 20mm and 35-120 or whatever it is. Think maybe the 14-140 is somewhere in there too but not sure.

  • last_SHIFTlast_SHIFT

    Never mind, just ask Linda Gray

    image

    Linda_Gray_Zacuto_Pocket_Cam.jpg
    720 x 960 - 109K
  • last_SHIFTlast_SHIFT

    @vicharris

    What lens are they using on Dallas?

  • No_SuRReNDeRNo_SuRReNDeR

    Well I am about to put this thing to the test for sure. Shooting a short film western/horror 5k budget in Oklahoma this week. I am shooting RAW and will be trying to cycle between my 3 64gb cards. I I have 1 lens with OIS in case I do need to strip it down from the rig but Ill be use a mixture of glass and hopefully a BMPCC speedbooster that was promised to me on loan. ---- We shall see how this turns out ... fingers x'ed-

  • _gl_gl

    That first page isn't the biggest problem. Try the 'Uses' tab (direct link below).

    Everybody (myself included before it launched) expected it to be a pretty workable consumer cam, as well as a 'cinema' cam. You can blame people for not doing research, but the real issue is and was BM's marketing:

    http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicpocketcinemacamera/uses

    "Personal Use: Shoot your family in digital film

    The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera is a fantastic camera for personal use, especially when you want to achieve quality beyond the level of traditional video camcorders. Film a family wedding, a child’s first steps or a holiday travelogue. If you’re a keen photographer interested in cinematography you may already own MFT lenses or have other lenses that can be adapted to the camera. Operating the camera is simple and within minutes of opening the box you’ll be filming your first projects!"

  • vicharrisvicharris

    Even though mine has turned into a full blown rig, it's funny to see it being used daily in a primetime show like Dallas with nothing but a lens. No external monitor, no huge battery, just the bare ass bones. But I do agree that page is silly. No way you're using that thing in the desert without a loupe or monitor.

  • 3Kids3Kids

    @cantsin

    Anyone knowing what he's doing can use them as advertised, I don't see the problem. Are there better options out there, sure :-)

  • cantsincantsin

    @stylz click the link under those statements. (Here it is again.)

  • StylzStylz

    @cantsin I don't remember reading that anywhere, not to say they didn't say that. If someone read that, then didn't do their research, didn't see all the comments from first users(or beta users even) about the screen and audio ect....then bought the camera thinking those statements where somehow true....well they are just foolish.

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    I still don't think that professionals already doing each of these activities, @cantsin, or some combination of them, would at all be surprised that the camera needs support to be most effective or even useful for anything out of the box besides perhaps shooting the cake ceremony at a family birthday party. All kinds of specialized, complicated products play for Joe Six Pack's dollar.

    Think of all the poor saps out there spending hundreds of dollars for something like MS Word over the decades, to only write letters or school papers, or buying all of the MS Office suite because of the feeling they "need" it. Adobe has sold likely thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or more of Photoshop copies to people at consumer computer stores in the past who might have used it once or twice and never again, or as a glorified image viewer.

    Sometime in 2001 or 2002 one of my favorite channels to just have on the television in the background or if I couldn't find anything else to watch was ZDTV/TechTV and I couldn't believe it when up comes this late night ad for Maya with this cheesy mad scientist character. For the low low price of $2K you too could buy software that big Hollywood movies were made with (yeah, and millions of dollars in custom tools and a brain trust of technical directors to actually make Maya useful for more than flying logos or student projects).

    The folks who actually know what they're getting into ultimately benefit from the lower prices that are partially attributable to even more folks buying who don't really know what they're getting into.

  • brianlbrianl

    @vicharris maybe it's common knowledge but another big camera company does the same thing -- uses footage shot with another brand. I won't mention their name but I instead will put their name in a complex word puzzle that most here can't unscramble: "ProGo".

  • vicharrisvicharris

    @cantsin I'm pretty sure BM isn't the first company to do this. I was part of a campaign from one of the biggest names in electronics and cameras that actually shot footage with another camera and claimed it was from their latest and greatest. Actually two different cameras. Think that's a little worse ;)

  • cantsincantsin

    @stylz @BurnetRhoades @vicharris All that said, Blackmagic is to blame for misleading advertising of the camera: "perfect for documentaries, independent films, photo journalism, music festivals, ENG, protest marches and even war zones". This helped attracting the crowd that is now upset.

  • vicharrisvicharris

    BTW, here's my latest project I'm working on with a before and after with this camera. This is doing 60MPH on the PCH in an AudioR8. Not much room but this is exactly why I own the 12-35. OIS baby!

    Screen Shot 2014-03-31 at 10.50.40 AM.png
    1007 x 566 - 726K
    Screen Shot 2014-04-02 at 9.30.49 PM.png
    1080 x 604 - 942K
  • vicharrisvicharris

    @brianl Agreed. I know I've made tons of shitty images with my BM cameras. It's taken me sometime and much research to finally get a good image. Since shooting is not my main source of income, I've been able to really research and test by trial and error, how to work with these cameras.

    On a funny note, someone pointed me to that thread which I've removed myself from and they are all still berating me. It's too funny. I guess I'm the fool for thinking there's a difference :) I guess in the end it's just the users trying to justify why all their images suck and are blaming it on the camera. I stopped that long ago when I saw what came out of the GH2 when you lit properly!

  • brianlbrianl

    @vicharris One thing I've observed in these forums is that people have the ability to shoot horrible footage with virtually ANY camera. Some of the RED footage in particular is just dreadful. It's not the RED of course, it's the human element.

  • vicharrisvicharris

    @cantsin I can't tell you how many threads I've seen of people bitching about image quality and these cameras. There's literally a thread over where some guy wants to know why he can't get images as good as an Arri out of his camera. He posted some examples and it was just a cluster. I actually got flamed for trying to tell him there's a difference between a $100,000 camera package and $3,000 and the need for actually lighting a scene. It was amazing. I just can't believe the complete ignorance of people with cameras. I'm amazed they remember to breathe sometimes!

  • jrdjrd

    @Renovatio

    It's too early to tell for sure, but if you play around with the GH4 clips available, I think you'll find that the codec "breaks" very quickly: the footage either clips drastically (as in one of the grades they were arguing about in the GH4 thread) or looks unnatural and (forgive me) plastic, when you push it a bit or try to alter its mood.

    And how much of the apparent clarity is sharpness, which will eventually put your teeth on edge, and how much is actual resolution? Best to keep an open mind, but I think the Pocket still delivers the best image for the money, if your interest is dramatic cinema. If not, there might be better choices, offering much more convenience and ease.

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    You might want to elaborate on that.

  • bandwbandw

    plus 1000 canstin

    and they still keep comparing HD vs RAW ))))

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    +1 cantsin

Add a Comment