Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but it seems that the resolution difference between BM camera and GH13 or Gh2 is not too much.
My Panasonic GH13 records at 1920x1080
BM specs:
Sensor Resolution: 2592 x 2192
Raw Resolution: 12-bit RAW files recorded at 2432 x 1366
Shooting Resolutions 2.5K RAW at 2432 x 1366, compressed at 1920 x 1080
Just saw both the FS700 and black magic at Broadcast Asia. Both are interesting cameras, initial impressions: FS700 seems to have retained the image quality of its predecessor, but skin tone looks better. It's signature Sony. The Black Magic is more an unknown quantity, saw the images live on a full HD monitor, fairly flat imagery, which is great for colour grading. But one can only say so much about a showroom test. Has anyone taken it for a walk in the park? Would love to see it being stretched in all the different conditions, just to see if the 13 stops are functional, especially when you pan from outdoors to indoors. For US$2995, it looks quite decent. Thinking of ordering one already
@Macalincag Don't forget that even the much vaunted FS700 only shoots 240fps for 8 seconds. It's not continuous acquisition as it is with 60p. Are we sure that the sensor can't write to a buffer for 8 seconds?
Their reply email just came in:
Hello, Thank you for your kind words. I have not been made aware of any plans on making a 4/3rds version. I will forward this to our product manager as a feature request. Thank you for your suggestion.
All the best, Eric Pestana Support Representative Blackmagicdesign
LOL
About thousand people did similar thing before. They already answered that have no plans to make other mounts for this camera. May be in next cameras models it'll change.
but it's really a poor line of defense for 5Dm3 against a camera that shoots with 13 stops of dinamic range, 2.5k, RAW etc, which is totally in a different league altogether.
It is just different camera. It is not camera for the masses. 5Dm3 and Canon entry video oriented offers are mass cameras.
ok, I get it (I mean I knew it), but it's really a poor line of defense for 5Dm3 against a camera that shoots with 13 stops of dinamic range, 2.5k, RAW etc, which is totally in a different league altogether.
Still, the BM sensor being smaller than GH2's and with a crop factor of 2.4, I think BM has made a huge mistake by not putting a m4/3 mount. I mean with m4/3 you can always go up to ZF, PL mounts etc (or any other mount), but you cannot go down from ZF to m4/3. That's my main beef with these cameras.
@kronstadt, people care about the sensor size because it affects things like what lenses will work on the camera, the crop factor they'll have, as well as things like low-light capability and (most of all) apparent depth of field.
Found out about BM camera yesterday and joining this thread today.
Yes, this is a camera to drool over... especially the 13 stops for dynamic range (by the way, how many stops does GH2 have? I remember GH1 has 10 or 11, or am I wrong). I definitely want to have it - many nice bells and whistles that I'd want to see in the camera that I shoot with. But you wait till they release their first firmware update and I'm sure @Vitaliy_Kiselev will make it even better ;)
Is BM's image 4:4:4 ?
The market for this kind of camera who can afford a $3000 just for the body is huge, but I'm sure many who cant afford t will be sticking with GH2, which (correct me if I'm wrong) is the next best thing right now at this price range.
Just from reading the specs of BM, I thought I'd do a pros and cons and why I'll be choosing GH2 as my next camera:
Conclusion: if I had $10,000-$15,000 spare cash, I'd definitely buy the BM camera ($3000 for the body and the rest for the lenses, SSDs, high-end computer, storage HDDs, batteries, accessories and etcetories -- I'm sure Zacuto has already began designing overpriced junk to mount on this excellent camera). This is definitely a Canon S300 and 5Dm3 killer (in terms of video) and a serious blow to Red Epic. But for everybody else, like myself, GH13 and hacked GH2 is still a camera of choice when making shorts and planning a feature shoot.
There's still one point that I don't understand though: this camera is shooting in 2.5K, so why does it still matter that it's not "full sensor" (apparently that's the new point of defense for the Canon boys). I don;t get it. Can someone please clarify what's the significance of the sensor size here, if the camera is shooting 2.5K RAW or ProRes anyway?
Looking around found this B4 to EF adapter.
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/250965944814?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
There is also a PL to EF that is fitted the same way.
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/260885516105?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
It's cecio7 .. he has a good reputation .. I do not have any of his product as yet.
Four images are of the B4 adapter .. the fifth image is the only image I can find of BMDCC with no lens
It looks very promising to me.
Right. Doing it that way will be as if the camera did output Cineform raw; same end result, but an extra step. But it really isn't all that bad (especially if they do make a utility) because you can transcode to Cineform raw straight from the SSD and outputting to the PC, then wiping the SSD, ridding you of heavy DNGs, if that's your thing.
Imagine 120fps though. That's 600MB/sec. lmao.
I don't think copying over thunderbolt will be faster than transcoding to Cineform on fast pc. If cineform doesn't have a utility by then, I'm just going to use my little utility http://eyepatchfilms.com/?p=903 and transcode the footage to cineform raw. DNG is way to huge to deal with storing and making backups.
EDIT: I don't think I'll ever use Prores with this camera. You lose too many settings available with RAW. The realtime in camera debayering can't be as good as the settings you get with cineform, along with no hardcoded white balance and ISO settings.
What if you dump off 120fps DNGs via thunderbolt to a Macbook Pro with 2x SSD in RAID 0 (swapping the optical drive)? Oh snap. Fast enough.
120 fps at 2.4K won't happen. SSD speed limit is reason.
Uncompressed RAW is perfect workflow for this low res. camera. SSD is cheap, and can compress to Cineform RAW on a big drive faster than you can copy the same RAW movie to the same hard drive!!! This is because the compression reduced the data rate, and that is the copy speed limiter.
Those complaining about the price, gimme a break. It's dirt cheap even compared to the 8 bit crap.
Uncompressed RAW just seems extremely impractical for most workflows that fall within the price bracket of this camera... >100MBps? It's hard enough keeping up with RED downloads at ~36MBps. I tend to think that while uncompressed CinemaDNG is a nice option, most people might as well forget about it since 99.9% of the time this camera will only be used for recording directly to prores.
Month & half isn't long at all. Hope they iron out everything.
They plan to ship only very small amount on July 30 :-)
Jem about this camera (from their event)
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!