New from Black Magic Design - 4K Cinema Camera

[Craig Seeman]

The advantage of 4K goes beyond display. It gives you the ability to stabilize the image in software without worrying about the loss of resolution on blow up. Another key advantage is the ability to either reframe a shot or add motion by moving 4K within a 1080 frame. Imagine for the "small office" shooter that couldn't possible work with two (or more) cameras at a location to be able to cut from close up to medium to wider shot from one camera.

[Thomas Smet]

Originally Posted by Darren Levine

im wondering again about the choice of the EF mount, while it does make much more sense now, im wondering why they didn't opt for the EOS M mount. My guess is just simplicity to not have to retool, but for those with PL glass, the issue still remains, i imagine they might do an MFT mount for this as well, maybe not....

M43 mount too small for a super 35mm sensor. Physically impossible without odd artifacts. That's why you will never see M43 lenses adapted to Canon or Nikon cameras. You can go the opposite direction because other lenses are designed for larger sensors which is why you get a crop factor. If the lens is already too small you get an image that is a tiny circle of image surrounded by black.

M43 works on the first BMCC because the sensor is actually a bit smaller than a M43 sensor so the M43 lenses easily cover the sensor. Same thing for the BMPC. The sensor is much smaller so the lenses work great albiet much longer than one would hope.

[Tom Roper]

That's a good niche application (Craig) of 4k cams targeting HD end use. UltraHD flat panels are coming ready or not. I think we have to expect that once production is switched over, there is no going back. But distributors and to a lesser extent content creators, the adoption will lag the tv's themselves, so (I) expect a rehash of the marketing hype that upscaling makes all your current content look better as well. Some people still don't think Blu-ray looks all that much better, while others aren't aware that they are not viewing HD content on their hdtv's. So it's true yes, that I remain a bit pessimistic about the future demand for 4k, tempered by observations that people seem more motivated by mobility and convenience, and less rooted in home theater and large flatscreens that would amply demonstrate the superiority of 4k viewing.

[Craig Seeman]

Tom, I'd agree that I can't see any fast move to 4K. In fact HDTVs didn't really accelerate until SD TV disappeared. I really can't see much use of 4K in the home. Looking at current market conditions, first the price of 4K TVs must drop and that's going be be a couple of years. Then they really have to stop production of HDTV as a less expensive alternative.

Then you have to consider that, based on the metrics I've seen, people tend to replace their TVs every five years... and in a down economy I wouldn't be surprised if that's even longer. You'd be getting pretty close to the end of this decade for 4K to dominate.... if ever. There's really no big market motive. Consider this fun fact too, if you scour the post on DVInfo and other forums you still see people screaming about making DVDs! People still haven't left SD behind. As you note, most people have no idea that much of what they watch on their HDTVs is simply SD 16:9 blown up.

But as I note I can see real value in 4K for image manipulation. I did this in the early days of HD as well. There's other things going for the new BMPC4K as well though. Global Shutter is big. It's just not even approachable in this price range on a large sensor camera. The close to S35 sensor is going to help with shallow DOF in some tighter confines. The codec allows for some radical changes when you have less than ideal lighting or simply playing with creating a look.

While I had issues with the BMCC, the BMPC4K addresses them and the 4K is just some added gravy.

[Ryan Jones]

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

M43 mount too small for a super 35mm sensor. Physically impossible without odd artifacts. That's why you will never see M43 lenses adapted to Canon or Nikon cameras. You can go the opposite direction because other lenses are designed for larger sensors which is why you get a crop factor. If the lens is already too small you get an image that is a tiny circle of image surrounded by black.

M43 works on the first BMCC because the sensor is actually a bit smaller than a M43 sensor so the M43 lenses easily cover the sensor. Same thing for the BMPC. The sensor is much smaller so the lenses work great albiet much longer than one would hope.

Lens choice is going to be interesting. I haven't got any MFT lenses yet, and trying to pick some without even having a camera to test on will be interesting. Are there any other cameras out already with a similar size sensor to compare? Lenses which look great on GH2s will give a very different look on the Super 16 sensor.

[Tom Roper]

Well said Craig, I totally agree. Also agree the global shutter is an important advancement at this price. You have pointed out good reasons for the BMPC.

[Duane Adam]

I've been working with 4k for a couple of months and even when displayed on a 1080 display the difference vs HD is not small. The difference between raw vs jpeg/mov/mp4 etc is enormous so being able to shoot 4k raw for $4k is a no brainer. Throw in global shutter and the ability to use good lenses... I had to think about it for at least 10 seconds before placing my order.

[Tom Roper]

Hi Duane,
The C300 and C100 also capture from a 4k sensor, and downsample to 1080HD. Viewing on an native 1080HD panel is still HD, no getting around Nyquist laws, 1080 LW/PH is the rule.

Not arguing value here, or global shutters and good lenses and raw workflows. But the 4k down sampled difference on an HD monitor would have to be small, or at least achievable with HD with similar raw workflows.

[Duane Adam]

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

Hi Duane,
The C300 and C100 also capture from a 4k sensor, and downsample to 1080HD. Viewing on an native 1080HD panel is still HD, no getting around Nyquist laws, 1080 LW/PH is the rule.

Not arguing value here, or global shutters and good lenses and raw workflows. But the 4k down sampled difference on an HD monitor would have to be small, or at least achievable with HD with similar raw workflows.

From here on I'm doing 4k projects and down sampling only until 4k displays become more common. Then I'll be able to go back and render 4k masters when needed. Can't do that if the original footage is HD.

I don't know what to say about HD vs 4k viewed on a 1080 monitor other than I can see the difference from across the room. In fact I can't believe how archaic my ex1r footage looks which to me is now unusable.

[Jos Svendsen]

Totally agree on the "4K pop". In fact it is nearly a 3D experience. I believe that has something to do with micro contrast, as I read an article concerning the Leica "pop", and the conclusion was that the Leica optics and sensors had better micro contrast than many others and that was the reason why pictures taken with an Leica had this special look.

To my eye this applies to 4K as well. So it is a combination of optics and sensor. I have tested the 4K JVC-cam. Nice camera, but the optic and sensor did not give any 4K pop outside the sweet spot. The combination of a not fantastic optic and 8 megapixel crammed into a 1/3 " sensor was not optimal. When the noise reduction kicked in - which it did quite quickly as the 8 megapixel on the sensor did give very low sensitivity - then the image did get smeared = no 4K pop.

I my book this means that 4K cams need a big sensor and proper optics. This makes me think that the 4K BMDCC should have absolutely fantastic 4K pop with Leica M-optics.

[Thomas Smet]

I have such a feeling of déjà vu right now. So many of the same conversations when we moved from SD to HD. In fact I bet we could search on here find old arguments and change SD to HD and HD to 4k. No need to think or type.

[Craig Seeman]

Although three things have changed since the SD to HD discussions: The economy (worse for many I think), the codecs (better for both recording and delivery) and the growth of mobile (small screen).

[Bruce Schultz]

Anyone have any thoughts about using the Metabones Speed Booster with the BMPC camera?

from DP Review:

"What is the Speed Booster?

As we reported recently, the Speed Booster is an adapter that allows for a full frame lens to be mounted on APS-C or Micro Four Thirds mirrorless cameras. There are two reasons why this is very big news, and both revolve around the optics inside the adapter. Firstly, Metabones claims that by reducing the image magnification, the Speed Booster produces roughly a 1.09x focal length multiplier, promising a nearly full frame field of view on APS-C. The second claim, as its name implies, is that the Speed Booster increases the lens's speed by a stop, turning an F2.8 full frame lens into an F2.0 optic that allows for low light shooting at a lower ISO sensitivity."

First Impressions: Metabones Speed Booster: Digital Photography Review

There has been much talk on the BMCC forum about using this device on the original BMCC M4/3 camera, interested in opinions of whether it might work on the BMPC camera to allow more variety in lenses, f/stop, and full frame look.

[Duane Adam]

Originally Posted by Jos Svendsen

Totally agree on the "4K pop". In fact it is nearly a 3D experience. I believe that has something to do with micro contrast, as I read an article concerning the Leica "pop", and the conclusion was that the Leica optics and sensors had better micro contrast than many others and that was the reason why pictures taken with an Leica had this special look.

To my eye this applies to 4K as well. So it is a combination of optics and sensor. I have tested the 4K JVC-cam. Nice camera, but the optic and sensor did not give any 4K pop outside the sweet spot. The combination of a not fantastic optic and 8 megapixel crammed into a 1/3 " sensor was not optimal. When the noise reduction kicked in - which it did quite quickly as the 8 megapixel on the sensor did give very low sensitivity - then the image did get smeared = no 4K pop.

I my book this means that 4K cams need a big sensor and proper optics. This makes me think that the 4K BMDCC should have absolutely fantastic 4K pop with Leica M-optics.

We've discussed this elsewhere so I'll only say I've shot about a dozen sessions with the JVC 4k which have all been outdoor interviews or scenery. At zero gain, 60fps and an 8x filter the camera looks pretty sweet. I tried one indoor interview but it doesn't do well with low light. The BMCC should solve that with the 35mm sensor and the ability to use good lenses. The JVC has a decent balanced audio stage, hope the BMCC will too. BTW the JVC has a 1/2" sensor not 1/3".

[Philip Lipetz]

Originally Posted by Jos Svendsen

Totally agree on the "4K pop". In fact it is nearly a 3D experience. I believe that has something to do with micro contrast, as I read an article concerning the Leica "pop", and the conclusion was that the Leica optics and sensors had better micro contrast than many others and that was the reason why pictures taken with an Leica had this special look.

To my eye this applies to 4K as well. So it is a combination of optics and sensor. I have tested the 4K JVC-cam. Nice camera, but the optic and sensor did not give any 4K pop outside the sweet spot. The combination of a not fantastic optic and 8 megapixel crammed into a 1/3 " sensor was not optimal. When the noise reduction kicked in - which it did quite quickly as the 8 megapixel on the sensor did give very low sensitivity - then the image did get smeared = no 4K pop.

I my book this means that 4K cams need a big sensor and proper optics. This makes me think that the 4K BMDCC should have absolutely fantastic 4K pop with Leica M-optics.

Try the Canon C100/300 for 4k down sampled to 1080p POP.