Duane.....I think you are focusing on the 1080 vs RAW thing...and it is soo much more than that. #1 would be functionality....the C300 is ready to go out of the box (add a card and a lens). The battery that comes with runs 3-4 hours, the cards record much more time, the camera sees in the dark (you'll need 1/4 of the lights you'd normally use), NDs are built in, function buttons abound, XLRs built in, and in post, the codec is basically the equivalent to PRoRes422 and flies into Premier, Final Cut, and even AVID. You will save time & money shooting with this camera and is why the camera is the hottest rental camera in town for over 1 year....and the rental price is holding (it usually drops after 6 months).
On the BM, it is not a functioning camera out of the box...you have to add 1) an audio recording system 2) a battery system 3) a higher level monitor 4) some sort of cage to have #s1, 2, & 3 mounted with the camera, and more...
Now, in comparing the "picture taker" in each camera, the Canon chip is far superior....super 35 sized (vs basically a 16mm size), much better low light(best of all cameras) and very little "grain" at the higher ISOs (noise comes up much faster on BM)......
Also, there is no delivery problem with the Canons while it is still an issue with BM.....
When buying a camera, its most important to get the one that fits your needs. RAW is much like 4K in that it sounds nice, nice to have the option, but does one really need it for the jobs one is working or being hired for.....and do you have lots of time and money because that's what you'll need in post in dealing with either one.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

I understand the argument but I've purchased my last hd camera, no matter how good it is. I'm already working with both raw and compressed 4k so I understand the pros and cons. For what I do, the higher resolution of 4k is worth the trouble. Being that the Canon c300is likely to depreciate at least one BMPC the day it's delivered, I think there's less finacial risk in ordering a bm. As mentioned, the BMPC has a 35mm sensor not 16mm as you stated so its low light performance should be better than the 2.5k version. I'll try one, if it sucks I'll sell it and move on. By that time there should be others to choose from.

Guys with red Epics getting in line to pay $9500 just to upgrade camera sensor, and nobody seen a single frame from it yet. So S35,12 stops, 4K, double format, global shutter for four thousand dollars? - it's impossible go wrong.

Guys with red Epics getting in line to pay $9500 just to upgrade camera sensor, and nobody seen a single frame from it yet. So S35,12 stops, 4K, double format, global shutter for four thousand dollars? - it's impossible go wrong.

Exactly. HD has been a fine format but it's being replaced right now. If you want to be the guy who forks over $14k or more for last decade's technology go for it. I love that BM is pushing the ball forward and as long as they do I'll support them, quirks and all.

The advantage in the BMPC's low price is that you can get your ROI faster. It's a lot less painful to upgrade a $4K camera every year or two than it is for a $14K camera.

As I may have mentioned before, even if one is still delivering in 1080 (as most of us are no doubt) the ability to reframe or stabilize without blowing up the image is, in itself, a resolution gain.

We are entering a age of disposable recording heads. Inexpensive and with limited lifespans. Glass is more expensive and retains its value. Recording heads like the BM personal camera will be obsolete in a few years, even the BMCC and the BMPCC, but who cares? You got your value, and it was for an ever decreasing price of entry.

Come on, $1k for 1080p RAW. Use it and then loose it when 4K heads drop to $1k, and they will. But do not wait. The key is to use it, and not worry about future value. The journey is its own reward.

I don't want to go off topic but since some of us are talking about the viability of 4K in the Home entertainment market I thought this might factor in one's thinking about camera purchase.

http://www.redsharknews.com/technology/item/628-you-can-now-buy-a-50-4k-tv-for-$1299

And the 4K $1299 monitor at Tiger Direct. Who knows what the quality is or whether it's just "spec bait."
Seiki 50 Class 2160p 120Hz LED HDTV - 3840 x 2160, 16:9, 120Hz, 5000:1 Native, 6.5ms, 3x HDMI, VGA (SE50UY04) at TigerDirect.com (http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=7674736)

Duane.....I think you are focusing on the 1080 vs RAW thing...and it is soo much more than that. #1 would be functionality....the C300 is ready to go out of the box (add a card and a lens). The battery that comes with runs 3-4 hours, the cards record much more time, the camera sees in the dark (you'll need 1/4 of the lights you'd normally use), NDs are built in, function buttons abound, XLRs built in, and in post, the codec is basically the equivalent to PRoRes422 and flies into Premier, Final Cut, and even AVID. You will save time & money shooting with this camera and is why the camera is the hottest rental camera in town for over 1 year....and the rental price is holding (it usually drops after 6 months).
On the BM, it is not a functioning camera out of the box...you have to add 1) an audio recording system 2) a battery system 3) a higher level monitor 4) some sort of cage to have #s1, 2, & 3 mounted with the camera, and more...
Now, in comparing the "picture taker" in each camera, the Canon chip is far superior....super 35 sized (vs basically a 16mm size), much better low light(best of all cameras) and very little "grain" at the higher ISOs (noise comes up much faster on BM)......
Also, there is no delivery problem with the Canons while it is still an issue with BM.....
When buying a camera, its most important to get the one that fits your needs. RAW is much like 4K in that it sounds nice, nice to have the option, but does one really need it for the jobs one is working or being hired for.....and do you have lots of time and money because that's what you'll need in post in dealing with either one.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com


I went back and re-read your post to see if I'm missing something. Did you really mean to say there is no audio system or battery in the BMPC? And that it must have external monitors and cages before it can be used? I understand you sell Canons but most here know those aren't accurate statements. BTW, the only difference between XLR and a 1/4" TRS balanced cables are the plugs, otherwise they're identical.

Disclaimer: I own this camera, so my opinion comes from first hand, in field production use.

Simon
Don't mean to jump on you but there is a flaw in your logic... it doesn't matter that they've only been making cameras for 1 year because there are decades of camera building r&d to draw upon. It's like they built a camera without ever having used one. It's one of the most poorly designed cameras I've ever held.

And exactly how did you feel $3000.00 was going to give you the perfect cinema camera? I think too many have become insanely spoiled and entitled about what they should get in a camera for a couple of bucks. Even RED has its faults and a decent size list of them.

Thomas, first, I don't care about the perfect camera, no such thing exists.

Next, implying that I'm naive, spoiled and entitled, is, well... naive. I'm non-partisan, anti-fanboy and unlike most don't give my opinion on something unless I actually own it.

Also, I don't care about the price. $3000... $5000... $15,000... if a camera is poorly designed, it's poorly designed. The places this camera fails are all simple and cheap to fix. Would they add to the price? Sure, a few bucks. But personally I'd rather pay $500 more for a camera that is a lot more functional.

Let me put it this way...
Someone built a Ferrari for $15,000... but they put the gas pedal in front of the passenger and the shifter in the back seat.

"Let me put it this way...
Someone built a Ferrari for $15,000... but they put the gas pedal in front of the passenger and the shifter in the back seat."

That analogy in reference to the BMCC is nonsense.

If you don't like the form factor, that's fine - a matter of personal taste. But to intimate that the BMCC is not a functional piece of equipment is ridiculous. It is very capable of making gorgeous pictures. I have personally used this camera for a couple of months now and find it one of the better cameras I have used because:

1. It can be rigged out with cage, matte box, rails, follow focus, pre-amp, v-lock or Anton-Bauer batteries to make for a very capable tripod rig that makes some awesome footage

2. Or you can leave it stripped down to capture some really nice footage from locations where almost no one asks to see your permit and subjects don't get the jitters being shot by a Red or Alexa rig.

It is clear Dylan, that you don't like the camera and that is fine. But to lead folks into thinking the camera is not functional with that analogy is just not accurate. It IS a very fine tool that records 13 stops of latitude, 12 bit raw as well as ProRes and DNx, all in an inboard recorder that uses many off the shelf SSD drives. Very revolutionary.

Speaking to a distributor who just came back from miptv, she had a few conversations regarding 4k. Just chatting but she mentioned on their end, a producer who has a 4k master may in fact increase the years of sales generated by two to three times.

If you're producing for TV, a 4k camera at 4k$ might make financial sense.

I think that C100 and BMCC 4K can definitely be compared in terms of price (once you kit out the BMCC to match the features in the C100). It mostly seems to come down to two things:
(a) Do you feel you have a genuine need to shoot 4K?
(b) Are you prepared to invest the extra time (and therefore money, if you are charging for your time) into the post workflow with a BMCC? Remember, with a camera like a C100, you can set your look beforehand with a picture profile, then expose it correctly and shoot it. This tends to minimize any post time needed for grading.
.

I think this is a very reasonable point.
My $.02 - it all comes down to what you do with your cameras.

If, as seems to be the case with many (most?) of the original BMC buyers, you're all about indie film making with a future hope for return, then rigging and utilizing the plusses of the BMC make sense 2.5 or 4k.

If you're out in the field producing billable projects everyday or every week then it's a different set of considerations. For instance we were so disappointed in the AVCHD and lack of 60p on the C100 that we nixed it and bought a pair of GH3s to add 60p.
But now that the price is $5500 and we have the slow motion - the C-100 looks a lot more attractive because of it's ability to get such a great in camera look.
We've just signed two deals that will have us in the field shooting 14 promotional films in all kinds of outdoor conditions over the next 7 months, in addition to a few TV campaigns.
As a small company, the first thing I thought was "there's no way I can spend the time CCing all of this work for delivery the way I have the last several projects."

Suddenly, getting a great in camera look and having a super fast, efficient post work flow has huge advantages...maybe even critical ones for pulling it all off.
Despite my frustration with what I see as intentional crippling of their technology, Canon delivers a very solid in-camera look with the C line and very functional camera systems that also make a big difference producing dozens of hours of footage on deadline.

My assessment is this.
The C camera runs circles around the BMC in terms of design, ergonomics and fast production and probably equals the IQ as far as current 1080 deliverables. And delivers right out of the box for editing if you like.

The BMC is great if you want/need to spend a good deal of time in post, have time for the extra workflow issues and are working more on set or with more controlled circumstances. It delivers a beautiful image but it's a pretty basic production tool.

The Canon C camera is a highly evolved, highly efficient production tool that provides a great image.

The 8 bit vs Raw comparison only matters if you want/need to do a lot in post, and even though I've spent more time doing so, I often miss "just shooting the damn thing" and moving on to the next project.

Where did you see that the C100 has the ability to shoot 60fps or slow motion?

I'd add the following unusual observation.
Looking at both the B&H and Adorama sites the Canon C100, C300, C500 are all listed specifically as "Non Returnable." I find that an unusual policy. Given it's specific to these cameras and not other Canon cameras (or other cameras generally) something must be a foot. This can also enter into someone's purchasing decision. It's not clear why this is happening but it's certainly a consideration when one has to consider ROI on their camera purchase.

Where did you see that the C100 has the ability to shoot 60fps or slow motion?

I'm not sure if you're asking me that, but the C100 has neither ability.

I'd add the following unusual observation.
Looking at both the B&H and Adorama sites the Canon C100, C300, C500 are all listed specifically as "Non Returnable." I find that an unusual policy. Given it's specific to these cameras and not other Canon cameras (or other cameras generally) something must be a foot. This can also enter into someone's purchasing decision. It's not clear why this is happening but it's certainly a consideration when one has to consider ROI on their camera purchase.Craig, the C300 is the "Number One" Rented Camera! So B&H doesn't want you to purchase for your project, shoot 5-7 days of footage and then return the camera.

I'm not sure if you're asking me that, but the C100 has neither ability.

I know, that's why I ask.

"But now that the price is $5500 and we have the slow motion - the C-100 looks a lot more attractive because of it's ability to get such a great in camera look."

The GH cams give the slo mo so they can concentrate of pic quality with the C100s. We have used Hero 3 Blacks in narrow mode to get slo mo and time lapse to complement out team's C100 footage.

Disclaimer: I own this camera, so my opinion comes from first hand, in field production use.

Simon
Don't mean to jump on you but there is a flaw in your logic... it doesn't matter that they've only been making cameras for 1 year because there are decades of camera building r&d to draw upon. It's like they built a camera without ever having used one. It's one of the most poorly designed cameras I've ever held.



Thomas, first, I don't care about the perfect camera, no such thing exists.

Next, implying that I'm naive, spoiled and entitled, is, well... naive. I'm non-partisan, anti-fanboy and unlike most don't give my opinion on something unless I actually own it.

Also, I don't care about the price. $3000... $5000... $15,000... if a camera is poorly designed, it's poorly designed. The places this camera fails are all simple and cheap to fix. Would they add to the price? Sure, a few bucks. But personally I'd rather pay $500 more for a camera that is a lot more functional.

Let me put it this way...
Someone built a Ferrari for $15,000... but they put the gas pedal in front of the passenger and the shifter in the back seat.

I was saying we are all a little spoiled when it comes to cameras today, myself included. There are plenty of people who don't consider the camera poorly designed. Maybe it is for you but for others it is not.

Let me put it this way...
Someone built a Ferrari for $15,000... but they put the gas pedal in front of the passenger and the shifter in the back seat.

If I could get a new Ferrari for $15k, even if the gas pedal was in the trunk, I'd have already ordered at least two. So in some ways that is a good analogy for the BMPC.

I know, that's why I ask.

"But now that the price is $5500 and we have the slow motion - the C-100 looks a lot more attractive because of it's ability to get such a great in camera look."

You have to read the whole post Bob <g>. I say how we bought a pair of GH3s for 60p and now that we have slow motion.... I actually mean "we" when I say we...not the royal we.

Craig, the C300 is the "Number One" Rented Camera! So B&H doesn't want you to purchase for your project, shoot 5-7 days of footage and then return the camera.

That's something that does happen. That doesn't mean honest customers should be punished for those who abuse the return policy. Canon should step in an handle this issue with the dealers. I believe in consumer protection especially when the consumer is spending over $5K and possibly over $26K

Although B&H and Adorama have no return, AbelCine doesn't list that on their site.

If I could get a new Ferrari for $15k, even if the gas pedal was in the trunk, I'd have already ordered at least two. So in some ways that is a good analogy for the BMPC.

Indeed. We can't fuss too hard about form factor when the 5D II/III is still one of the most popular things to shoot on. Clearly vast swathes of people aren't too bothered if the price is right (and the picture is good).

It is clear Dylan that you don't like the camera and that is fine. But lead folks into thinking tm camera is not functional with that analogy is just not accurate. It IS a very fine tool that records 13 stops of latitude, 12 bit raw as well as ProRes and DNx, all in an inboard recorder that uses many off the shelf SSD drives. Very revolutionary.

Actually, I love the image and what it can do. I love the price tag. No question it's the most capable camera under $15,000.

But that doesn't change the fact that the form factor is terrible for video. its a great tool, but very awkward to use. And no, you can't actually fix it with cages and add on trinkets. Maybe I am the only guy in the world who thinks its a terrible design or maybe I'm just the only guy with the balls to say it in public against the rabid fanboyism that follows a lot of these cameras.

Edit: I realized Charles Papert was the other guy in this thread who didn't like the design. So there are two of us. If you dont think my opinion is worth anything, you might want to google Charles.

I'm not steering anyone away from it... I'm just calling the facts out and people can interpret make up their own minds.

Indeed. We can't fuss too hard about form factor when the 5D II/III is still one of the most popular things to shoot on. Clearly vast swathes of people aren't too bothered if the price is right (and the picture is good).

The form factor is much worse than dslrs. Note the lack of buttons, dials, etc which allow nearly instant changes to settings on the fly? Thats just the start... Cable placement out the left side of the camera, theres another failure, right in the way of your evf or follow focus or control hand. zero inherent grip means you cant use it without a rig and then that means that none of the controls are actually under your fingertips. And so on...

I think the reason no one else is complaining is because most people dont know any better any more. Am I really the only guy here who sees these as bad/lazy design flaws that could have been done properly from day one for absolutely no extra cost? Or at least been improved on the 4k version?

Anyway, I'll leave it at that . Jim probably has the best summary of the camera on the previous page.

I think the fact that the 4k version is so cheap is that they could just re-use the existing body, so usability was not their first priority but low price was but I do have to agree with Dylan as well about the useless formfactor in it's bare state. It seems that the low price blinds many people from the different flaws the camera's has and they only want to see the good, which is ok, because for many only the output counts and here is where this camera can deliver, at a pricepoint many can afford, but it doesn't mean it's an easy camera to work with.

I also find it worrying how defensive people can get, especially on other BMC minded fora, where if you point out that you need to spend at least double on accessories to get a production ready camera you get attacked as if you kick their child, even if they don't have one, yet :)

I"m very keen on getting the bmc pocket camera and the only thing what interests me is the image it outputs, I probably will hate the lack of real control buttons as well but I only will use it in projects where I have the time to work around those limitations and focus on image quality only and that for a ridiculous cheap price, so I can forgive bmc for not thinking like a real camera operator when they designed this camera :)

...image quality only and that for a ridiculous cheap price

That’s it in a nutshell, even if they put the start/stop button in the trunk.

I still have to see one single image the pocket cam outputs so I"ll pass my final judgment when that happens, Im" not the kind of guy that pre-orders because something is cheap but when I see what it can deliver.

The form factor is much worse than dslrs. Note the lack of buttons, dials, etc which allow nearly instant changes to settings on the fly? Thats just the start... Cable placement out the left side of the camera, theres another failure, right in the way of your evf or follow focus or control hand. zero inherent grip means you cant use it without a rig and then that means that none of the controls are actually under your fingertips. And so on...

I think the reason no one else is complaining is because most people dont know any better any more. Am I really the only guy here who sees these as bad/lazy design flaws that could have been done properly from day one for absolutely no extra cost? Or at least been improved on the 4k version?

Anyway, I'll leave it at that . Jim probably has the best summary of the camera on the previous page.

Touchscreens are not much fun (although isn't the GH2/3 mostly touchscreen driven? I haven't actually had to use it. It seems to be the way things are going). I would dispute that all these things can be fixed for nothing though. Every set of buttons, the dies to mount them on, the boards to run them would add a whole bunch of costs in design and prototyping iterations, manufacturing, you name it. It's more stuff to buy, it's more stuff to build and to get wrong. Yeah Canon and Sony can do this stuff in their sleep. They have massive design and manufacturing infrastructure with decades of experience and well run supply chains pretty much on call. They can do all this at such a scale that costs are low, or offset elsewhere. Blackmagic can't (we see the trouble they've had with their sensor manufacturer, who didn't even make sensors for vision until now). I wager just about everything awkward about it is at least partly a product of that. So no buttons. It's a pity but there it is.

You're right in a way that people don't know any better any more. There's a whole strata of filmmakers that would be lucky to even touch a cage or a follow rig, or if they get one it doesn't quite fit. Their external view finder is an old TV set or computer monitor. They spent all their money on a 5D and some dodgy op shop lenses. The Indie indies. Ex-students leeching of their school's busted old gear. This is an area where pretty much everything doesn't work to some degree and you have to make do (it's an interesting place to be since lighting, camera and art department all actually understand each other for a change. The further up the chain you go the only true hackers on set are down in Art, everyone else's gear is so nice, their jobs so regimented.).

So I think, as much as they'd like seasoned wedding shooters and so forth to buy them as well, they were thinking a bit more grass roots with this one. Both in terms of costs and design.
(I was thinking though that with 4k coming along Kine-finity needs to really get a move on. They look more like video cameras so people should be happier there)

Edit: I realized Charles Papert was the other guy in this thread who didn't like the design. So there are two of us. If you dont think my opinion is worth anything, you might want to google Charles

Can I chime in as well?

My thoughts?

BMD is doing VERY well right now by creating fanboys - their gear is offered at a ridiculously low price but never seems to make it out of beta. Check the BMD Forum available at their website to see JUST HOW MANY issues real world users are having with BMD products across the line. They do a handful of things well and mess up just as many. In fact, every firmware update across the lines breaks as much as it fixes.

I have more invested in BMD products than most independent producers so I feel qualified.

Every set of buttons, the dies to mount them on, the boards to run them would add a whole bunch of costs in design and prototyping iterations, manufacturing, you name it. It's more stuff to buy, it's more stuff to build and to get wrong. Yeah Canon and Sony can do this stuff in their sleep. They have massive design and manufacturing infrastructure with decades of experience and well run supply chains pretty much on call. They can do all this at such a scale that costs are low, or offset elsewhere. Blackmagic can't (we see the trouble they've had with their sensor manufacturer, who didn't even make sensors for vision until now). I wager just about everything awkward about it is at least partly a product of that. So no buttons. It's a pity but there it is.

Valid point on their problems and the additional cost. Stuff like the cable directions, etc, could be fixed free, but a proper control set would have added a few hundred to the cost. IMHO, it would have been worth it.

You know... it's too bad they couldn't just have added a mount for the Red Epic control handle. :)

The form factor is much worse than dslrs. Note the lack of buttons, dials, etc which allow nearly instant changes to settings on the fly?[/QUOTE]

Actually, given the fact that there are so few changes you can make in camera, changing on the fly is not really something one does with this camera. I can understand you may wanti to change ISO on the fly, as an issue, but changing the iris is done with out going into the menu. Shutter speed is usually chosen and forgotten in my work flow, and given that latitude is so wide on the camera, you can pan the camera from bright sunlight into shadow, and not lose detail.

After all that, if you have a separate monitor, you can leave the menu screen up and change settings on the fly, while still framing shoot from the montior screen. See photo attached.

Thats just the start... Cable placement out the left side of the camera, theres another failure, right in the way of your evf or follow focus or control hand. zero inherent grip means you cant use it without a rig and then that means that none of the controls are actually under your fingertips. And so on...

I have yet to run into this as being a problem. Admittedly, I am only three weeks into using the camera, but this left side cable placement is no different that with the Canon 5D Mark II, and there were no issues for me there either.

I think the reason no one else is complaining is because most people dont know any better any more. Am I really the only guy here who sees these as bad/lazy design flaws that could have been done properly from day one for absolutely no extra cost? Or at least been improved on the 4k version?

One of the reasons for keeping the form factor the same is to allow the secondary manufacturers to develop their products to fit across the entire line interchangeably. A solution to 5D issues was provided in time., and one for the shortcomings of this camera be provided too. As a DYI rigger, I am actually quite thankful for the simplicity of this camera, and the four mounting points provided. With simple aluminum stock and bushings, and simple tools in my gargage, I have been able to fashion and mount dual hand grips, a shoulder rig, and loupe set up. See this Youtube video as example.

Rigging a Black Magic Cinema Camera - YouTube

After all that, if you have a separate monitor, you can leave the menu screen up and change settings on the fly, while still framing shoot from the montior screen. See photo attached.


I bet that shot of the fan has some fantastic DR. I don't find the form factor an issue either, every camera has its issues. Seriously, DSLR's shortcomings don't bother me, the BMCC will not either.

Cables can be situated easier than a DSLR IMHO with something like this:

Laird Digital Cinema 2-Channel Stereo Balanced Right Angle 1/4-Inch to XLR Blackmagic 2.5K Cinema Camera Audio Adapter Cable - 3-Foot 1/4in Phone to XLR Cables at Markertek.com (http://www.markertek.com/Cables/Audio-Cables/1-4in-Phone-to-XLR-Cables/Laird-Digital-Cinema/BMD-RASPS-XLF-03.xhtml)

Right angle 1/4" connectors keep the profile low and you can zip tie excess cable to a top handle. Now just get more of them out so the used market will be flooded with them once the 4k cam hits the street so I can score a deal on one. Till then its the pocket cam for me...

One of the reasons for keeping the form factor the same is to allow the secondary manufacturers to develop their products to fit across the entire line interchangeably. A solution to 5D issues was provided in time., and one for the shortcomings of this camera be provided too.

But why design a camera that perpetuates the need for a secondary market that only exists because of the fluke of people needing to shoot video on DSLRs in the first place?

Anyway, this has been beaten to death. It is what it is and none of this will matter when GoPro launches their 8k for $800 camera next year.

at this point, i am sure that the many DSLR users that would step up to this camera already have the rigs and solutions to the form factor, audio, cable etc. and rigs can be had for so much cheaper! i laugh at the big name rigs that are just bits of aluminum selling for thousands of dollars. i understand that 'you get what you pay for' to some extent, but give me a break! i just bought a camera cage and rails for 150 bucks, and turned it in to two solid camera supports. yes, there are design problems, but they are by far outweighed by the benefits, and are expected in a product that is pushing technological and pricing boundaries. i wish BMD nothing but success as innovators should be rewarded, not derided!

Innovators? This is a major for profit corporation.... not Kickstarter kids in their basement.
They have not really innovated anything, they have just copied what is out there smaller and cheaper.

Not much risk in trying one. If the camera doesn't cut it, you can sell it, possibly for more than retail if they're back ordered like the 2.5k.

Even though I ordered one I don't think this is a good all purpose camera. If I shot weddings for example I would probably use something else.

Wow, the Vancouver contingent for DVInfo has really come down hard on Black Magic this week. Seems like there are some issues with this gear for them, so I would expect that they won't be availing themselves of the Black Magic offerings.

Despite that negative outlook, the reason this camera line is so popular in terms of discussion, if nothing else, is its basic feature set of high quality codec, accompanying software, and a decent speed sensor at a great price point. The sensor itself is actually usable for both shallow depth of field shooting, but can be set up too for much deeper depth of field. The new models add to the line. The market will buy it and even though there are certainly issues for each on various levels, the users will adapt. The only question is will those entrenched in something else adapt. The entrenched will be bitter because that is where their money is, but the question is will they adapt.

If that qualifies me as a fan boy, then I am one.

I went back and re-read your post to see if I'm missing something. Did you really mean to say there is no audio system or battery in the BMPC? And that it must have external monitors and cages before it can be used? I understand you sell Canons but most here know those aren't accurate statements. BTW, the only difference between XLR and a 1/4" TRS balanced cables are the plugs, otherwise they're identical.

Duane-
What I'm saying is the internal battery is worthless in a professional environment so you will need either an Anton or IDX system for power. The 1/4" jack is also a non-professional connector and introducing adapters in audio usually means trouble....hiss, pops, etc. Same goes for touch screen monitors...more potential trouble.
The jist of my post was: in real production environments, there will be enough un-expected things or problems that are going to show up anyway. To add to that a camera that has a lot of extra stuff, including adapters, is upping your chances to have more problems....control what you can control, and not worry about the ones you can't so in that sense, the C100 is 100% ready to go.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

BTW- all these reasons that I have posted plus delivery issues, are why we passed on the camera for now...not because we are a Canon dealer.

You're assuming everyone who buys the camera will be shooting 3 hours at a time. I won't and 90 minutes is plenty of battery time. Regarding 1/4" jacks not being "professional", patch bays in even the best recording studios are often 1/4" TRS balanced. The signal is identical to XLR so this is not an issue for me.

My priorities are capture quality and price. That makes the BMPC a pretty easy choice compared to the Canons, or at least it would seem so on paper.

As you said, for your use it's fine....with day long shoots it's not. While 1/4" is fine in the studio, XLR is the standard for production.......and your last line says everything I'm talking about..."on paper"

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

Jim:

It's a sticky wicket using the Canon C series cameras as a benchamrk example of what a "professional" camera should be. They themselves have an odd form factor that does not lend itself well to scaled-up production with bolt-on accessories. A camera should not require an oddball third party cage with mounting points, yet this camera was designed from the ground up to expect one (the Redrock was shown at the product rollout as you know). Instead of adhering to tried and true base-to-lens heights so that standard baseplates could be used, the camera was made arbitrarily tall so that mini rods just barely are accommodated by custom third party bases. And as soon as the camera is built out for production work with outboard battery and whatever accessories, one has to leave an air gap behind the camera to allow access to controls back there, a la DSLR's, which makes the camera longer. And worse of all: in that configuration, where the addition of outboard accessories which would be required for a professional production turn the camera into a shoulder-mounted setup--how does one monitor the image in daylight? No supplied Canon external viewfinder. This particularly trend baffles me. The XL series had them, damn, the Canon F1000s SVHS camcorder I bought in 1989 had one. The solution of using a third party like the Alphatron is not satisfactory. Camera manufacturers should be making systems, that work out of the box, so that they are "100% ready to go", not once you source a viewfinder from one company and a clutch mount from another and a cage from a third and a battery mount from another and so on and so on. A true production camera is, for instance, an Alexa, or the new Sony's, which have proper viewfinders and integrated pro battery solutions and mounting points and can go onto nearly any set out of the box (the Sonys do require a bit more help, true, but the basic form factor is still a lot smarter than the Canons).

I'm not saying the Canons are not good cameras. They are. I've used both the C100 and C300 with an EF lens in a simply handheld setup and they are fine. But they are NOT properly designed for higher end work that requires a big build-out, in my opinion. More so than the BMC, true, but I wouldn't hold them up as a gold standard.

I'd say Jim and Charles covered the LA (Vancouver, Chicago, NY..) perspective well. The BMCs aren't designed as a primary camera for high-end, pro shoots. For small-scale indies, the requirements aren't as strict.

As I see it, each of the BMCs offer unique capabilities at low price points. That's the real draw. Want RAW, cheap? BMC. Want 4K with a global shutter cheap? BMC. Want a really small, S16 1080p camera cheap? BMC.

I'm sure that these will find their way into high-end productions where they meet specific requirements. For instance, a global shutter, 4K crash cam has got to have some appeal. But as a primary camera on a big crew shoot? No - unless the combination of features and price solves an important, specific problem.

Charles-
I'm 100% with you on your post....if you go back to my 1st post and what this whole thread was about is the C100 vs.BM...and all I've been saying is the C100 is more ready to go out of the box than the BM....and something I deal with everyday, the functionality of a given camera and how much more "gak" is needed to make it functional. Are the C series an Alexa, no...although I have been pushing the engineers to make one!

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

Charles-
I'm 100% with you on your post....if you go back to my 1st post and what this whole thread was about is the C100 vs.BM...and all I've been saying is the C100 is more ready to go out of the box than the BM....and something I deal with everyday, the functionality of a given camera and how much more "gak" is needed to make it functional. Are the C series an Alexa, no...although I have been pushing the engineers to make one!

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

Actually it was the C300 vs BMPC. My point was that spending $14k or more for a none 4k camera in 2013 is something that doesn't make sense to me. It may to others, but without a doubt there will be several new 4k cameras coming out this year and next that are likely to put a sizable dent in the value of HD cameras like the C300.

I'm going to start at one end of the spectrum, and that is the one where I met all the folks I have here and at DVX.
The XL line and the DVX were the cameras that these sites were founded on. Cameras like the F55 and frankly even the $14k C300 are a totally different proposition from the cameras we were using then and now.

As Charles said, they were complete packages and with three XLs as our first purchases (before that we always rented $80k Sony SD cameras) we built a thriving professional business. Then I had two $40k Media 100 systems, today I have three new iMacs running $300 FCPX and we produce for high end clients around the country.

There is a huge market - this original place for example - for quality creative and production that simply doesn't require Hollywood production tools. And it's got nothing to do with indie film makers.

Based on this, I think anyone following camera development for the past two years can make one honest assumption: the company that is likely to deliver what this market was expecting to come in the past 3 - 4 years is BM not Canon.

While advanced creative tools like our computers and iPads etc. get better and more affordable, Canon went the complete other direction leaving the XL/DVX base without that logical next generation of camera.

Where's the XL3 with an interchangeable lens and BM quality sensor?
That's what this market has wanted for 5 years.
Where's the basic 60p on any of the cameras under 12k? Panasonic did it on a camera for $1200 and included 50mbs and 72mbs with resolution way better than the 5 line of DSLRs and closer to the C line.

To me these are simple facts and point to a strange direction from where we all were 10 years ago.

In just two years BM has proven to be a company listening, learning and advancing at a clip that simply dwarfs the Canons and Sonys.

They're the company that's likely to up the ergonomics to match the image a lot faster than Canon is to go the other way.

Believe me, Duane. It's between the C100 and the BMD 4K.

I'm considering a purchase roughly around the $5-6K mark and they're the two I've been looking at. The C300 doesn't even come into it.

For me, it comes down to the two main reasons I listed in an earlier post on this thread. And I think that the pros and cons of each have already been well-debated in this thread. Each person has different needs and that will determine which way they go.

Canon went the complete other direction leaving the XL/DVX base without that logical next generation of camera.


Hi Jim.
What is your opinion about the C100 for $5,499? (Or $6,099 with the 24-105mm f/4L lens.)

I've already got 3 cameras that will do 50/60p (if I need a bit of over-cranking), but I don't have a large sensor "video camera" that will deliver an outstanding image.

With the C100, Canon are offering a 4K sensor which gives a tremendous image at a 1080p output. Granted, a Ninja 2 (which I think has come down to something around $600 per a recent report?) would be best for greenscreen work, but I still think it's an outstanding offering in the $5-6K price range.

For the past 8 years, I've been shooting HD with JVC and Sony cameras, so I don't have a vested interest to "defend" Canon, but I personally don't think they've gone in "the complete other direction". Not when you look at the C100.

I do agree that it's been "nobbled" to not compete with the C300, so over-cranking and a higher bitrate codec are missing.

If you need serious over-cranking, the FS700 looks good.

If you need a 4K deliverable or 4K future-proofing, the BMD 4K looks outstanding for its price range.

If you want an outstanding 1080p image from a 4K sensor at 24/25/30p with all of the built-in features of a video camera that you normally "expect", the C100 from Canon is a very solid offering.

Just my two cents.

Believe me, Duane. It's between the C100 and the BMD 4K.

I'm considering a purchase roughly around the $5-6K mark and they're the two I've been looking at. The C300 doesn't even come into it.

For me, it comes down to the two main reasons I listed in an earlier post on this thread. And I think that the pros and cons of each have already been well-debated in this thread. Each person has different needs and that will determine which way they go.

Was referring to the original recommendation of the C100 or C300 on page 6. The C300 never entered my possible list of choices either due to price and lack of 4k. I agree a camera needs to be tailored to your needs. I do (or at least attempt) high quality/ low volume projects so the high bitrate and quirks of the BMPC aren't an issue. I'd also rather have 4k and not need it than need it and not have it.

Wow, the Vancouver contingent for DVInfos really come down hard on Black Magic this week. Seems like there are some issues with this gear for them, so I would expect that they won't be availing themselves of the Black Magic offerings.


Totally the opposite... As i said, I only give opinions on stuff I own. I've had a bmcc for a while now and have put in orders for multiples of both their new cameras.

Canon C300, 1080... $14,000

BMCC, 4k Raw, global shutter...$3,995

I'm not understanding the thinking in suggesting the Canon.

Canon C300: 1080p,
#built in XLRs,
#phenomenal low light ability (so don't need ton of lights and one can immediately shoot without taking lot of time for lighting),
#great battery life,
#robust codec that can easily be graded using a laptop (so less computing power, quick delivery),
#a 64GB CF card goes on and on,
#good viewfinder/LCD and tools like waveform, zebra etc, No moire
#holds good rental value/overall value,
#Lovely files
#readily available

BMCC: 4K resolution, global shutter (so we hope the moire of the previous version is solved).
#Can't shoot outdoors as the battery will run out and you can't replace it. I guess you need some heavy anton bauer kind of system.

#expensive SSDs, carry truckloads of them. (add the cost)
#Not ready to shoot barebones as you need to rig it.
#You can't handhold it without any rigs due to the odd formfactor.
#No XLRs. So you have to use some kind of juicedLink type mixer (suggesting juicedLink due to lower cost).
#You can't change settings on the fly due to the odd design. So this camera can never be like the extension of your arm/body. You have to search and dive into the menu. So clearly you can't shot fast changing scenes.

#Most importantly, we haven't even seen any output from this production 4K camera. This sensor is different from the previous camera. So we only hear that dynamic range will be lower and sensitivity will be lower.

It is strange that just because of some specs and pricing, people are going ga ga over a company which still hasn't been able to deliver the previous camera even after a year.

Blackmagic has tried to divert the attention from their failure to deliver the version 1 camera by announcing two cameras. With such reputation (or lack of it) I am surprised that people are still running to pre-order.

If one is doing this for hobby then throwing 5-6 k for the BMC plus rig and accessories should be ok as any failure will not have any repercussions. Do that in a production environment and you lose your reputation for ever.

I had wanted the BMC version 1, but changed my mind due to the moire. Else, it would have worked along with my C300 in specific projects. There are channels and production houses who are asking me 720 and some for 1080i (not even 1080p). And here people are talking about 4K.

I am sure everybody is an adult here and hence entitled to their opinions and decisions. No point in being fanboys as money goes out from our own wallet. Good luck to everybody.