Matt Grover

Didn't notice the added colour temps!!, That's pretty damn handy, next update manually dialling it in?? ;)

All good on my BMPCC, yet to test the Sigma lenses again yet, but hopefully they've addressed that as they said. Be good if there is a reasonably constant stream of updates coming adding more features as he says in the vid.

Yet to try out the Samyang 8mm, but picked up an Olympus 9mm Fisheye Body-Cap lens the other day, impulse purchase, no where near up to standards of more expensive lenses (this was £89), not too bad for what it is, will be handy for some stuff.

 

https://vimeo.com/94332774

 

(must read how to embed! even though it seems I've embedded a video before!!)

The AJA looks very interesting as well, covers a couple of the ergonomic niggles I have with the URSA, plus better codec selection

The URSA looks pretty good! Some minor niggles with the layout and shame there's no VF option apart from 3rd party, but for what they're trying to do with it, it's pretty impressive, having an EF AND B4 system with the same body?! Be interesting to see how much they'll charge for the sensor blocks as add-ons.

Hey, nice, what lens(es) did you use?

My thoughts on this, haven't noticed this particular issue, although the BMPCC IS funny about what displays you plug it into, for example it doesn't seem to output to any HDMI TV's that I've tried, knowing they accept various resolutions and rates (e.g.: Panasonic Viera and Sony Bravia), but it DID work plugged into a 7" TVLogic monitor. I've been liaising with BMD support on this, but yet to receive a concrete answer.

 

Will test the output-on-record thing with the tellies and see if that makes a difference.

Not really. My goto is a 9.5mm Zeiss super speed on my pocket camera-- but that's beyond most people. Sigma makes an 8~16 zoom which'll cover you nicely for both cameras as far as I know.

 

No, Can't really spare the change on a set of Super Speeds at the mo ;) I've known about the Sigma 8-16 for a while, it's a nice lens, no manual iris though on either Canon or Nikon models I thought, thus problematic for the BMPCC without some crazy active adapter??

 

 

 

10mm Bolex lens, though that leaves some to be desired in sharpness and vignettes a little. Try the new Metabones Speedbooster. It takes the effective crop factor to ~1.7, so approximately APS-C or Super 35mm. It adapts to Nikon lenses, I tested it with a vintage one and it was spectacular. Give you over a stop more light, and we were shooting at 400ISO and f/3.5 (plus the extra light from the booster) using a single lightbulb in the center of a room. I'm assuming adapting it further would be possible using something that'll adapt your current lenses to Nikon.

 

I've looked at the SpeedBoosters, they're certainly interesting, a few hundred quids worth, not just at the moment though. Only thing with the SpeedBoosters that gets confusing is the "more light" side of things, the way I see it, you're not "gaining" any light, you're just not losing as much from the crop (and thus smaller aperture) if you use the SpeedBooster, no?

 

 

C-mount... if using those old lenses prepare yourself to vignet, soft (or softer) image, loss of resolution and luminosity to the edges and quiet impossible to adapt any kind of follow focus.Still, there are some descent lenses out there, but finding the right one is quiet a chalenge. The cosmicar 6,5mm, kowa 6mm are know to be ok wide-angles on the bmpc. I've got a 13mm Som Berthiot and a switar 16mm that have no problems. Take a look at this page: http://www.pekelharing.com/lens-tests/ you can find really plenty of tests on youtube and vimeo from all kind of GH3 and blackmagic users.

 

Apart from my existing Nikon mount primes from my 7D kit that I'm using, I bought a couple of old Canon TV Zooms on ebay, both c-mount, 18-108 f2.5 and 17-102 f2, annoyingly, the former being the better lens, just need to get it serviced and get the crap in it cleaned out. the 17-102 is shockingly bad image wise, both cover the sensor fine with (from what I've seen so far), not a major vignette issue.

 

But could still be doing with a tad wider. Any thoughts on the Lumix 7-14mm anyone? (aside from not being a cine lens) I'm gonna hire one in for a bit sometime soon.

 

 

My goto wide angle on the BMPCC is the Kinoptik Tegea 5.7mm. Love it

 

A quick google and

nice FoV from it, ebay search came up over $1000 for the couple on there, tad over my price range at the mo, but looks really nice!

Had a quick look around, but haven't found the right thread so..

 

What are people doing for the wider end of things on the BMCC & more specifically the BMPCC (which is what I have), the whole 2.6x (?) sensor crop takes a lot of flack online, so for the users out there, a) are any of you finding it that much of an issue? b) What's your goto wide angle lens?

 

Cheers

 

Matt

Cool, thanks for uploading that, gives a better sense of what you're working with. Looking forward to seeing the rig, and of course any more videos you put out there!!

Ok so I REALLY like how this looks! As another post said, would be nice to see some ungraded rushes, also, I'm still not quite grasping the lens side of things..is it just the Lomo lens on the front, or are you using that as a kind of adapter and attaching other lenses to that?? Pics of rig would be interesting to see. Cheers

Adrian, trust me I'd like to have a decent set of Tiffen NDs, but annoyingly they cost quite a lot more ;)

 

Thus far I've been happy with the Formatt ones, I got them new late last year. It wouldn't surprise me if they gave you a colour cast, they are after all more budget range, for me however, it's not been a problem with the cameras and shoots I've used them on.

 

IRNDs are slightly different I think and can be sensor specific, but I'm not totally au fait with them at the mo, just know the basics behind them.

That's not what I'm saying, a polar and ND serve different purposes. What I'm saying is a polar is a worthwhile investment in it's own right, and as you're saying you're going to be doing a lot of sunny daylight exteriors, it would help give some more punch to those images, while also helping you slightly with reducing the light transmission.

 

A polar is not instead of a set of NDs

Also think about your composition, if you're shooting doco then you could well get away with ramping up the shutter speed if you need to. Especially in a standard M/S interview shot. depending on what you've got going on in the background. As a starting point, I think it's worth you considering

A polariser is designed to help with balancing the light hitting the sensor/film, however it also does reduce the light transmission, so you will lose *about* 2 stops with just a polar, roughly the same as a .6ND (2-stops)

If you're gonna be doing a lot of outdoors in sunlight, then yeah a .9 would probably be a good place to start, all depends on what you what you want to achieve with your shots really. Obviously a .9 will help you get a shallower dof in brighter light, may give you issues on duller days tho, (hence the need for other densities).

 

Another option could be to look at a lower ND and a polariser.. a polar is a solid purchase whatever, especially for sunny day work. Keep in mind adding ND to polar can give you unwanted artefacts (for want of the actual work I'm looking for).

 

Actually, I'd say a polar is possibly an even better 1st buy, you've still got your ISO, Aperture and Shutter to control exposure, I does really come down to what and how you want to shoot

You'd have to be very careful with using gels on the lens, any scratches or creases which are easily got on gels, no matter how careful you are with them, will show up on the picture, they'll also pick up a lot more dust and particles due to the nature of the material.

 

I have a set of 4x4 Formatt ND's .3, .6, .9 and they've done me pretty well thus far, could do with a 1.2 in there as well, but will probably make sure I go for an IRND as IR becomes more apparent at that point, so if you can afford to go for IRNDs do it, as Adrian says, Tiffen or Schneider both decent filters, Tiffen was the first place I looked, however budget took over and had to forgo those, but then as I say, the Formatt ones IMO are a decent affordable alternative.

Currently I've got NikonF-MTF and C-MTF adapters for mine (both ebay buys), using a c-mount zoom and my older Nikon Primes, big thing with any EOS glass is the lack of manual iris, can't currently afford or justify an active MTF adapter!

 

I've noticed an odd thing with the internal mic on mine, in that sometimes it's fine, other times it seems to have some crazy auto-gain on it and a LOT of hiss, only had it a couple of times so far and haven't been able to replicate it on proper tests, just crops up randomly, not an issue in the sense that the camera mic is reference audio only, but I'm wondering if it will negatively effect pluraleyesing the footage with Zoom H4 recorded audio.

 

That said, thus far I'm very impressed with the camera!

Hey, 2nd is a definite improvement on the grade front, much better contrast for this type of piece IMHO, looks like the Rokinon lenses have a bit of magenta in them, much like a couple of my old Nikkor lenses. Did you also have a zoom lens on this?

 

So couple of other questions (have recently taken delivery of my BMPCC btw), what EOS adapter are you using? And am I right in thinking that the sound on these are just off the internal mic?? The 2nd one has significantly less bg noise, and is surprisingly good if it's just the internal.

I have a similar concern, but more with the data contacts within the BMPCC lens mount, I'm currently using all manual lenses with it, but don't want to knacker the contacts in case I want to put any Lumix (etc.) glass on it.

Hey, just watched both parts I and II, good examples, have recently taken delivery of my BMPCC and am getting used to how it reacts compared to cameras I'm used to.

 

Couple of things;

 

Be interesting to see more flesh tones in your tests.

 

Also, what sort of values, especially Saturation are you working to in FCPX, all primary or any secondary colour correction in place?

 

Cheers

 

Matt

Wait a minute...

 

The 18 % grey card is not supposed to be zebra highlighted if the exposure is good...

 

I thought u use the zebras to mark the correcly exposed area?? eg. Zebras set @ 70, stripes on the brightest third of the of the face, you've got a well exposed picture.