Jump to content




Photo

BMPCC PL mount?


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Joshua Cleland

Joshua Cleland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Student
  • Stratford, Canada

Posted 17 February 2015 - 06:23 PM

Hey guys, I was lucky enough to pickup the BMPCC on the Summer sale last year. As a student filmmaker and aspiring cinematographer, I love the camera so far. Its DR its stunning and I'm able to get an image somewhat close to S16 film. What I'm curious about is whether it's worth it to invest in a PL mount down the road for cine lenses. 

 

Cinema lenses can cost so much to personally own, though I have seen some deals online different places. Is it really worth the upgrade and will it make a huge difference in image quality ? Would it be smarter to save my money for renting out a higher quality cinema camera/package entirely for projects? I see a lot of guys going down the PL road and I'm just wondering...

 

 

 


  • 0




#2 Giorgio Taricco

Giorgio Taricco
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Other
  • Toino Italy

Posted 17 February 2015 - 07:18 PM

Image circle on the Bmpcc is bigger than S16, so aside the adapter you need to look for few S16 lenses or 35mm lenses to cover the sensor size, these lenses are very expensive.

 

Giorgio


  • 0

#3 Kenny N Suleimanagich

Kenny N Suleimanagich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 846 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 17 February 2015 - 08:39 PM

The Pocket camera takes S16 lenses as that is the sensor size. The bigger cameras have larger sensors. 

 

I can’t say I have any regrets fully going PL. 


  • 0

#4 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 6771 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 18 February 2015 - 12:42 PM

I have a PL for my own pocket, which is nice. I splurged and went with a shimmable version as well. It pretty much so lives on my camera but this is only because I often throw it into other shows which are on PL lenses. Also helpful i had a set of S16mm PL lenses in the first place.

So a lot of it comes down to how you use the camera. Maybe a set of the Veydra primes would be a better investment.


  • 0

#5 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2373 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 18 February 2015 - 01:39 PM

Just an FYI, I looked into the Veydra's and they aren't very fast, F2.2. If they were cheap, it would be a different story, but they're not even cheap! I too will be joining the PL bandwagon soon, once I have something bigger to shoot.
  • 0

#6 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 6771 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 18 February 2015 - 01:41 PM

T2.2 isn't bad. Hell Cooke Panchros are T2.8s, S4s T2. Unless you're using Masterprimes or Superspeeds most of your PL lenses will be in the same ballpark. And even then you rarely will want to be shooting below a 2.8 or so is the general consensus.
Though of note I tend to personally be around a 2/2.8 on S16mm and a 2.8/4/5.6 on 35mm but that's me.


  • 0

#7 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2373 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 18 February 2015 - 05:36 PM

I guess 2.2 isn't bad, but even the Rokinon's I have are 1.5 and they're cheap glass. I used Zeiss Super Speed's on most of my films, it's what the rental houses have. I'm one of those guys who shoots with the lens all the way open to try to achieve shallow depth of field on these small format cameras. With 35mm, it's a different world, but with S16, it's one of those things I always strive to do in order to make the film look more "filmic".
  • 0

#8 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2373 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 18 February 2015 - 05:38 PM

Ohh BTW, we should get together sometime and share notes. I have a few other cinematography friends who are starting to dig the pocket as well. :)
  • 0

#9 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 6771 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 18 February 2015 - 09:09 PM

Most deff Tyler, would like that greatly.

 

Gotta hand it to the rokinons too btw; they're a lot of lens for the buck. I keep meaning to throw the 16 and the 8 on the Bm one of these days. I think they'd make a great set, if only they had a 12 (or a better 14).


  • 0

#10 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2373 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 18 February 2015 - 11:29 PM

Supposedly, they're extending the lens selection soon and adding a "cinema" zoom this year. We may see some great stuff at NAB this year. I would LOVE a little cinema zoom, ya know 25 - 70? Something not so crazy, just enough to give some movement to the shot.

I'll get in touch via PM when I have some time and my other buddies are around. You'd like them as some of them are industry professionals who have LOTS of fun toys! :)
  • 1

#11 Joshua Cleland

Joshua Cleland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Student
  • Stratford, Canada

Posted 19 February 2015 - 03:14 PM

Thanks for the input guys! Tyler I own a Rokinon 35mm and I think its pretty great for the price! I've heard them being compared to some Zeiss glass. Adrian, I notice on your website you own a set of OCT-19 Lomos. How do you like your primes? The Lomo anamorphic square fronts look beautiful. I love that sort of 80s film look you get with them, do you find you get a similar look with the primes? Of course without the anamorphic qualities. 


  • 0

#12 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 6771 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 20 February 2015 - 01:18 PM

Sounds good Tyler.

As for the Lomos, Joshua. I like them; but it will depend a lot on which Lomo you get, and i don't just mean lens design either. As with any vintage optic the care and upkeep will dictate it's performance in a lot of ways; also who made it when.

Mine are alright, though my main gripe is the markings in Meters, the un-uniform lenght of the lenses and on some, the utter lack of geared rings. Still; I like them for the gentleness they impart.

I keep toying with really PL-ing them; and having them really re-worked into a "pro" level package, but then again the costs involved in that are sightly prohibitive for what is really just an indulgence. There's certainly no lack of good glass in LA; and when all else fails I find myself often drawn to filters and other optical solutions to get a "feeling."

Then again, many of the projects I'm working on these days shy away, sadly, from such ideas.

I would say if you can find a few good, cheap lomos on ebay (much harder now than it used to be where you'd get an OCT-19 lens for a few hundred bucks!) they're well worth picking up and having around. Especially as MFT systems proliferate, you could go dumb-adapter to put them on the camera, or spend a few hundred more to convert to PL.


  • 1


Visual Products

Pro 8mm

Rig Wheels Passport

Metropolis Post

CineTape

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Zylight

Tai Audio

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Zylight

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Abel Cine

The Slider

Glidecam

Visual Products

CineTape

Metropolis Post

Pro 8mm