Bmpcc sold at 50% discount, is it still worth buying?

[Larry Secrest]

Nice. Very nice raw footage.
Just wondering, did you even consider the NX1 instead?

[Jim Andrada]

Let me add my congrats for taking the plunge. I have a BMCC and 2 BMPCC's - it's love/hate all the way.but in the end it's all about the image.

[Larry Secrest]

So Noa,

I'd be very interested to know your new thoughts about that BMPCC!

[Noa Put]

Went out today to shoot some more raw in a Japanese garden, I"m still in a experimental phase so it was just to test out and try to find the best workflow. I put a 12mm f2.0 on the camera and a variable nd filter, I"m going to get a set of fixed ND filter as I have noticed that my current filter does not evenly darken the image if you close it down too much, once you go too far you get that "cross" in the image. I did a few shots at f2.0 but at iso 800 you need a very dark filter to compensate.

I had a loupe with me for focusing and framing purposes, it doesn't fit the screen from the bmpcc as I bought it a few years back for another camera but it helped a lot to see better what I was doing.

I found that shooting with this camera is not easy which is mainly because of the badly lit screen, I could use my loupe but if I had the camera closer to the ground I had to move to that level as well to frame my shot. Autofocussing is very slow, even in very good sunlight and you certainly need to double check using peaking which works quite well.

Battery drains very fast but I got 2 very cheap extra batteries so I can shoot long enough for my purpose.

Then the editing part for raw, Oh boy... Spend the whole day trying to figure out how to do this, my pc is too underpowered for Davinci and it looks very complicated, I tried colorcorrecting in photoshop raw and lightroom but that was a very timeconsuming and frustrating process and then I found a tutorial how to do this in after effects and that is much faster, only the export part takes long but that I could run overnight. So I"m happy to have found a workflow that doesn't take away my enthusiasm for working with this camera.

It's so much fun to see a dark room light up and a strong backlight tone down and reveal all that detail once you start adjusting the parameters, skies which look totally blown out with no detail magically reveal every single cloud and harsh highlights and dark shadows can effortlessly and equally be balanced in the same shot, it's amazing that I"m editing frikkin uncompressed raw with a 500 euro camera :)

Here are a few shots I made, I tried something different in every shot so it is not consistent but it was not intended to be, just some trial and error. That shot inside that house with the backlight windows was very dark where I was standing, I added the before and after shot in the film so you can see how much I was able to recover in the shadows and highlights, there was some moire visible in that shot from the carpet and I noticed some as well on a tile roof but nothing that was distracting.

I"m glad I bought it, I "m sure it will frustrate me at times and test my patience but maybe when I go out and shoot something for fun the following weeks it hopefully will be worth it. :)

password: test (there is also no sound)

Private Video on Vimeo

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Larry Secrest

Just wondering, did you even consider the NX1 instead?

No, I already have a gh3 and gh4, don't need another dslr + I"m very sure the NX1 can 't do what the pocket cam can do in raw.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

I"m going to get a set of fixed ND filter as I have noticed that my current filter does not evenly darken the image if you close it down too much, once you go too far you get that "cross" in the image.

I highly recommend the Hoya ProNDs. That's what I use (I have a set in 58 and 82mm because that made the most sense for the lenses I own and adapt the others with step-down rings). Have 2, 4, and 6 stops, but I think with the sensitivity of cameras these days (especially if you're interested in shooting with a more fully open aperture) that 4, 6, and 8 might be a good set to start (16, 64 and 200).

[Jim Andrada]

Hi Noa

Looking good!!!

I looked at a couple of the other videos and noticed you're using a Nebula 4000. How do you like it? I just got one a couple of weeks back and so far it's doing OK - I still need more practice though!

[Noa Put]

I had the Nebula for a few days and then returned it which I talked about here: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-...ml#post1884776

New Nebula clones or even a improved nebula v2 will come out the coming months so I"ll wait to see what that gives, I certainly want one to pair with my gh4 but also bmpcc. It's not that the current Nebula is bad, it just didn't work for me.

[Craig Seeman]

I use a Genus Eclipse Vari ND. I shoot with Panasonic Lumix 12-35 f2.8 and the Vari ND allows me to keep it at 2.8 in good light. I use that lens when I need stabilization. On tripod I use Sigma 18-35 at f1.8 with Metabones Speedbooster. Makes the sensor close to APS-C as far as Filed of View is concerned.

Most of the time Raw is overkill. Shooting ProRes (of various flavors) in log might allows you way more room to grade than a compressed codec. It's good enough for most circumstances.

To keep it simple I grade in FCPX. I just started using the Color Finale plugin which gives curves. With SliceX plugin I can even track "power windows" like Resolve.

I get about 50 minutes or so from my Blackmagic branded batteries. My Nikon battery lasts a few minutes more.

There's really no point to use autofocus for this camera. If I'm run and gunish I use the 12-35 and set it to f5.6 or so (depends on lighting conditions) and do an equivalent of a focus to infinity (Panny lenses don't have an infinity setting like good Nikon and Canon type lenses do). Then I just use the vari ND as lighting changes so maintain f.5.6 and deep depth of field.

I use a Zacuto Z Finder made specifically for the Pocket Camera. The point of contact also helps with camera stability.

[Noa Put]

I use a Genus Eclipse Vari ND

I have one here as well but it has a crack in it because I dropped it :) but it's still usable eventhough it doesn't turn that easily anymore, I plan on getting some fixed nd's anyway, they are more cumbersome to use as you need to choose one based on the f-stop you choose but I won't be using this camera for run and gun anyway.

Most of the time Raw is overkill

I only shot raw so far so still need to see if it's worth just shooting prores only, must say that I find colorcorrecting raw in after effects much easier then doing it directly in Edius but will try the following weeks to see how that works out.

There's really no point to use autofocus for this camera

Is it too unreliable to use? I have used it only on wider landscapes so it shouldn't be confused when I let the camera prefocus but I use the peaking as well just to be sure.

I use a Zacuto Z Finder

I probably will be getting that one as well, it doesn't make the camera exactly pocket-able anymore but it's a must have accessory for this camera.

[Larry Secrest]

Noa,
I completely agree. The NX1 can't do what the BMPCC can do in raw.
If you'd even compare the footage of the two side by side, you'd probably feel sorry for the GH4 and the NX1.
But I don't think that's the way to look at it.
Not trying to convince you here, since you already have the BMPCC and a GH4 but most people who are not interested in video acquisition and not video or film professionals will NOT be able to discern between anything shot with a GH4 and a BMPCC. They don't try to, and they don't care and guess what, they might not actually be able to tell what they're looking for. If an F1 pilot takes you on a spin on a track for a couple of rounds, will you be able to tell you're in a Ferrari or in a Porches?

I don't know anybody, I mean ANYBODY, who watches Games of Thrones, House of Cards, and other shows trying to see how many stops of DR the filmmakers achieved, or whether some blacks are crushed, or if the trees we can see outside through the windows of the house are in focus and clear. The audience is looking at the talent, some kind of humans they've never seen anything alike in real life, hopefully there is a story that is interesting and that's it. The only people I've seen worrying about the kind of stuff people worry when they compare cams on YouTube are people who are only running tests, people who have no script, no story to tell, nothing to say. So yes, in that case, when you film a pretty girl just walking somewhere, preferably on a beach with sailing boats in the background, there's nothing else to do but comparing stuff that is totally irrelevant as soon as you are above a certain threshold. In other words, as soon as you know how to use a GH4 or a NX1, have time to create beautiful shots and don't expect to fix it in post by pushing codecs that can't be pushed anyway, you have everything you need. Story, actors, lighting and time. The extra headaches brought by cams such as the BMC with their stupid screens or lack of, bad batteries, etc is really not worth the trouble to create an image your audience won't notice. Yes, other filmmakers will, so what?
But, hey, what do I know.
L.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Larry Secrest

I don't know anybody, I mean ANYBODY, who watches Games of Thrones, House of Cards, and other shows trying to see how many stops of DR the filmmakers achieved, or whether some blacks are crushed, or if the trees we can see outside through the windows of the house are in focus and clear.

No, the audience at large doesn't know how many stops of DR they are seeing, or what stops is, or what DR is.

However, they will notice the rest as part of the overall image, even if they can't put their finger on what is wrong. They will just know that something is not as good as it used to be.

[Noa Put]

You are right Larry, if I"m out just trying to capture whatever comes along and if I want to leave in the morning and have something ready to upload at night, I'd take my gh4 or any other camera of mine with me without a second thought, all my personal films have been done in that way, they usually require very little work in post an look great out of the box. I use all my camera's for paid work and here I do like that ease of use and fast workflow as well.

The Bmpcc however is the first camera I have ever bought to be used only for my own pleasure and only to experiment with it's higher DR and raw capabilities. It's, unlike my other camera's, not a camera to only please other people with. When I was colorcorrecting the raw footage in after effects it looked exactly the same as if I was correcting a photo in raw and that freedom to push the highlights and shadows in post I find very intriguing. When I was correcting that indoor shot I couldn't believe my eyes how I was able to balance the in- and outdoor exposure of something that originally looked very under- and overexposed.

When I go out and shoot I also don't have a script or a story to tell, I just try to capture something beautiful, I don't really care what other people think of it, it's something I like to do and if I share it online and others like it then fine, if they don't, that's fine as well. I do have some plans to shoot a short documentary so that will be my first and I want to use the Bmpcc for it, no matter how difficult it might be to use. Since I plan to take all the time I need to shoot it I"m sure the difference between this and my other camera's will be worth all the extra headaches :) Or maybe not, and then I can still sell the camera with a minimum loss. We"ll see.

[Larry Secrest]

Noa,
I didn't want to sound like a grinch. You're right. Having fun creating beautiful footage is actually good enough and could be a goal in itself.

Gary,
Most of the time what the audience notice is poor lighting and framing, unless you're using something crazy like the Sony AX 100 that is sharp to the point that is ridiculous.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Larry Secrest

Most of the time what the audience notice is poor lighting and framing

And I would consider DR to be an element of that lighting part.