Jump to content


Photo

Bmpcc - First tests disappointed - please help


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Thomas Loeschnigg

Thomas Loeschnigg

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Austria

Posted 02 August 2017 - 07:52 AM

Hi!

 

I have a new bmpcc and do not know what to think about this camera. I bought the camera because of the many good youtube videos. The colors of prores hq are very special.

 

But now on the first test i am a little bit disappointed.

I also own the sony rx-100 v and the gh5. In my first tests, there is not so much difference.

 

What do you all mean? Are the colors really so great out of the camera? Or its the grading in post?

I don't now if I should keep the camera. How was your beginning with the camera?

 

Thanks!

Thomas

 


  • 0


#2 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3528 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 August 2017 - 12:51 PM

Well, it's a $1000 camera. If you have a $2000 GH5, then you wouldn't need a pocket camera. The GH5 is 10 bit 4:2:2 as well, so there really is no reason to own a pocket.

I love the pocket because it's so simple, the menu's are simple, the operation is simple, it's such a EASY camera to run compared to the GH5, which is overly complicated because it also doubles as an expresso machine. LOL :P
  • 0

#3 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1088 posts
  • Director
  • Og from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 02 August 2017 - 04:02 PM

I believe the GH5 is without a doubt worth the extra cash. From a consensus view; probably because it does 10bit 4k with far better low light performance than the GH4.

 

 

 

From my view; it has real physical buttons that let you change the sensor settings without hopping into a menu away from the camera's view.

 

Also yes, you do need to run it through resolve to color it. Otherwise, the footage will always look flat and de-saturated


Edited by Macks Fiiod, 02 August 2017 - 04:03 PM.

  • 0

#4 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7075 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 02 August 2017 - 04:21 PM

Any camera is only as good as what you're shooting and whose working with it. The Pocket is great, when thrown in with all the other things you need to make a cinematic image, from lenses, to lights, to post, and production design.


  • 0

#5 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1707 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 02 August 2017 - 09:16 PM

I use to own a BMPCC, then owned a GH4 (process of selling), now own a GH5. My experience with the BMPCC was a little, ehh, lackluster. I mean, the image it could produce was fine (but not really any better than a GH4 with 10-bit 4:2:2 into an Atomos). For pixel-peepers there might well be a stop or two more dynamic range on the pocket than most DSLR-type cameras, but then you also have the tradeoff of being stuck in 1080p, which is not even a DCP format. If you make a film you want to take to a festival, your going to have to jinx the output to 2048 wide, or sidebox the 2048, which looks weird to me.

 

The great thing about the GH5 is that it shoots 10-bit 4:2:2 in Cinema 4k format. Even if you don't need 4k, downsampling the 4k to 2k reduced artifacts and image noise by 4x, resulting in a clean, sharp 2k image which you can push higher in ISO since the noise is going to be reduced when shrinking the frame.

 

Dynamic range is still an issue on the GH line of cameras, with my test of the GH5 with VLOG reaching 12 stops (only 1 stop less than the pocket). Some people don't like Panasonic colors, and think Blackmagic has a better color science; which is all up to personal opinion, and after post work probably amounts to nil. But the GH4 has a larger sensor, which means more ability to play with DOF. Plus, native M43 lenses are native, unlike with the pocket, where you have a crop factor for pretty much every type of lens except for a true Super16mm film lens (2-8x the cost of the camera). The pocket is a lot simpler than the GH line of cameras, having very few menu options - but it's not like you HAVE to use all the menu options on the GH5. Once the camera is set to C4k and VLOG profile, I don't need to really touch the menus at all. ISO and shutter speed are adjustable via button, and I have shortcut buttons active for most things like white balance set.

 

Ultimately, its down to what you want out of your camera. Any of these cameras can produce perfectly fine quality images, and can  mostly be matched in post. The reality of the matter is, a GH5 will not produce an image much different from an Arri Alexa. The real reason cameras like the Alexa are made is for the tough riggers of a film set, and a dedicated professional workflow.

 

PS) The rack focus setting on the GH5 is amazing. If you are doing a steady shot with two actors you want to bring in and out of focus, you can nail perfect focus pulls every time. Other than that, the autofocus on the GH5 sucks, so it's pretty much manual focus only if you want quality results. 


Edited by Landon D. Parks, 02 August 2017 - 09:27 PM.

  • 0

#6 Brenton Lee

Brenton Lee
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 98 posts
  • Student
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 03 August 2017 - 01:58 AM

"It's good for what it is".


  • 0

#7 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3528 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 03 August 2017 - 11:38 AM

Ohh and for people who have Super 16 cameras, the pocket allows them to re-use that wonderful old school glass. That's partially why I haven't bothered buying anything else, I have over $30k worth of S16 glass that works great for a camera the size of two iphones.
  • 0

#8 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2022 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 03 August 2017 - 01:05 PM

Ohh and for people who have Super 16 cameras, the pocket allows them to re-use that wonderful old school glass. That's partially why I haven't bothered buying anything else, I have over $30k worth of S16 glass that works great for a camera the size of two iphones.

 

Yep. I have a PL adapter on the BMPCC and use my Zeiss 12-120 zoom on it from my S16 SR2. Basically the BMPCC is a decent sensor for my S16 glass.

 

Like all Blackmagic cameras it's all about the post. It's designed so you spend time in Resolve getting it to look like what you want. The generally low contrast image out of the "film" mode is nice to work with...but you're still dealing with an HD image; not 4k.

 

Depth of field is a consideration as well. If you're used to DSLRs and large sensors the BMPCC is an adjustment. It is certainly a good and inexpensive tool to have at your disposal. My only issue with it is it's unnatural consumption of batteries. External power is a must.


  • 0

#9 Jon O'Brien

Jon O'Brien
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Other
  • Brisbane

Posted 08 August 2017 - 11:55 PM

Does anyone know how the Sony a7s compares with the BMPCC? Maybe there's no comparison for serious filmmakers (I've no idea at this stage). I found this footage and to me it looks great. Yes, it's using an anamorphic lens but it made me sit up and take notice, which I usually only do with film. Taken with an a7s:

 


  • 0

#10 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7075 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 08 August 2017 - 11:58 PM

the 8 bit on the Sonys is a real limiting factor-- but the ability of low light and depth of field control it offers you blows the pocket away (and easier to find wide lenses for).

Of the two; the pocket is often more of an insert camera on bigger shows where you need it's small size and ability to work with the color-workflow of say an alexa, whereas the sony's are fine for smaller lower budget web and narrative, or in such situations you're using Slog cameras or need superior low light performance.

In the end it comes down to who is behind the camera.

 

Also, if you need higher than HD resolution, you're kinda only in Sony territory.


  • 0

#11 Jon O'Brien

Jon O'Brien
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Other
  • Brisbane

Posted 09 August 2017 - 12:19 AM

Thank you. Could the a7s potentially be used as main camera for a cinema release documentary film? eg. is the image quality high enough? Sure, ideally something better could be selected, but .... I may sound pretentious but my curiosity sometimes gets the better of me.


  • 0

#12 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1737 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 09 August 2017 - 01:18 AM

I guess you could use it.. people use iPhones .. but for ease of use/TC /Audio etc and to have 10 bit..in HD anyway I believe .. then you could go for an Fs5.. also very small form factor and not much more exp..  as pointed out I think the 8 bit is a limiting factor for grading.. and you wouldn't want to really shoot Log 8 bit.. and it is of course a very good stills camera, that can shoot video.. which will always have its short comings..  if its your A camera.. I,d always go for a camera designed to shoot video.. 


  • 0

#13 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1088 posts
  • Director
  • Og from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 09 August 2017 - 03:25 AM

Don't forget the newly cheaper F3


  • 0

#14 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1737 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 09 August 2017 - 06:08 AM

But you have to go to external recorder for over 35Mbps dont you..  could be wrong ? 


  • 0

#15 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1088 posts
  • Director
  • Og from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 09 August 2017 - 06:56 AM

Correct. To me, not a huge issue. This guy seems to be out for image quality as opposed to portability.


  • 0

#16 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2022 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 09 August 2017 - 04:22 PM

Does anyone know how the Sony a7s compares with the BMPCC? Maybe there's no comparison for serious filmmakers (I've no idea at this stage). I found this footage and to me it looks great. Yes, it's using an anamorphic lens but it made me sit up and take notice, which I usually only do with film. Taken with an a7s:

 

 

Jon, what you're probably liking on that footage is the depth of field. BMPCC footage would not look like that with the same focal length lenses. As far as "quality"... you can achieve excellent quality on the BMPCC, especially with the RAW setting but you have to know your way around Resolve to get the most out of it.


  • 0

#17 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7075 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 09 August 2017 - 04:35 PM

you can use anything as an a camera. A feature which I got some talk about; good and bad i'm sure, we used gopros as the a-camera along with some canon xa20s (i think? been awhile)-- but that was part and parcel of the style of the show, akin to how Tangerine used the iPhone and Cloverfield the HVX200 and ViperFilmStream or the Hobbit with the Epics (I think it was Epics).

To paraphrase Jurassic Park, the question isn't whether or not you could, it's whether or not you should. There is no real work for EVERY situation camera, and I get that's not what you're really asking, but you need to start to formulate, think, the mindset of picking the appropriate tools for the job at hand given the limiting factors you're faced with as well as personal preferences.
Now, you're looking at documentary; and in that world I wouldn't be thinking of a pocket or an a7 as a main camera as you're limited on both ergonomics and battery. The best would be something like an FS7 (in my mind as I particularly like that camera's deisgn) or any other good quality video camera which can give you long record and run times on batteries, not to mention the ability to shoot good-enough audio without having a bunch of breakout boxes. It also won't overheat! (an issue for vDSLRs and in the pocket inasmuch as you can get hot pixels if it's been on for too long).

But that advice is only as good as what my idea of the realities of your doc are. Many docs have been lensed on lesser cameras, and greater, but they were arrived at after careful consideration of the nature of their particular production.

Lets take a hypothetical doc I might do on boarder crossings.

 

In that case I might be looking into using a A7s (at night) as well as some kind of camera (probably sony) which offers IR or Night Shooting (so as not to give away positions etc) and possibly a FS5 or FS7 as the main, daytime, run and gun/interview camera.

 

Now if i'm about to do a doc on say retro fashion in Paris which will be mostly beauty shooting in well lit studios, I might want to pick up an Amira or an Alexa Mini (Probably an Amira) for it's great color rendition, slow motion, and "cinematic" feel paired with some "vintage" lenses.

 

Image quality is also not a great rubric on which to judge a film as something like Iraq In Fragments, from 2006, was nominated for best documentary, looks damned good, and was recorded SD on the DVX100 series of cameras to MiniDV Tape. I can betcha that image quality, while an aspect, wasn't the primary motivation to use DVX cameras.


  • 0

#18 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7075 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 09 August 2017 - 04:38 PM

Also, tangental; but one of the books i've read in my time which really made me change the way in which I think about film has been Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I personally find the Metaphysics of Quality quite interesting to apply to the projects on which I work. 


  • 0

#19 Jon O'Brien

Jon O'Brien
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Other
  • Brisbane

Posted 09 August 2017 - 08:06 PM

That's some excellent information everybody, especially Adrian. I will indeed check out Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I'm interested in it. The company I work for occasionally makes 90 minute films for DVD. Some are shown one or two nights at cinemas in the US so that's why I ask about that. If we made something here it would be mostly daylight exteriors, a lot of shots in natural settings, some wide landscape shots, and some sit down interviews 'in the office', maybe with green screen. I would like to use a camera that I'd be interested to use for my own films. I'd like to use anamorphic for my own work which I've now worked out I can afford. So if I used a Sony f3 with similar lenses I could get shots looking just like the anamorphic ones I posted above shot on a mirrorless pocket camera? I appreciate that it's who's behind the camera, plus it's that particular lens. The issue about overheating is an important one, so small pocket cameras lose out there.

 

I'm very interested in a camera with sensor the same size as or as close as possible to 4-perf 35. Call me a traditionalist I guess.


  • 0

#20 Jon O'Brien

Jon O'Brien
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Other
  • Brisbane

Posted 09 August 2017 - 08:14 PM

Sorry if I've derailed this thread. I didn't want to start a new one. It's all relevant to the original poster's question, though, as he did ask about Sony and BM pocket cameras. Plus I researched a lot on the BMPCC.


Edited by Jon O'Brien, 09 August 2017 - 08:19 PM.

  • 0


Visual Products

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Technodolly

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio