Jump to content

$10K Camera Kit Budget - Seeking Advice


Darmon Moore

Recommended Posts

Thanks again for the info. I guess it's not only resolution. If you had softer borders it means it might change the character of a lens. having said that, I do agree with you 100%, making the BMCC for example match Super35 depth of field. So when are they going to get this MFT to EF mount Speed Booster, so we could check it out with the Contax lenses?! :D

 

We have used it with CP.2 Nikon mount lenses. The guys who rented the lenses swapped their PL mount to Nikon for us. I personally have a set of ZF/ZF.2 with Nikon mounts and I think it's a better one than EF just because they are easier to adapt to anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Oron, that was a very interesting post you put there. I didn't really look at it that way, thank you :)

 

Now I have considered all the BMCC cameras on the same level, it just comes down to what would be the right one.

 

 

In relation to the 4k and 2.5k version. If I were to go for these, my hunch is to move towards the 2.5k version for the plain fact

that the raw is uncompressed, where as the 4k is compressed. I don't need 4k, that is much to big for the market (vimeo etc) I am going to be practicing in.

 

Don't get me wrong, down scaling the 4k image looks beautiful, but again, I think 4k is too large for me at the moment. Plus when they bring out the 'raw' from the 4k there is no way I want to deal with those files sizes :)

 

for the 2.5k version I would go with the MFT with a metabones, bringing it closer to the Super 35mm sensor size.

 

 

 

Darmon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Oron, that was a very interesting post you put there. I didn't really look at it that way, thank you :)

 

Now I have considered all the BMCC cameras on the same level, it just comes down to what would be the right one.

 

 

In relation to the 4k and 2.5k version. If I were to go for these, my hunch is to move towards the 2.5k version for the plain fact

that the raw is uncompressed, where as the 4k is compressed. I don't need 4k, that is much to big for the market (vimeo etc) I am going to be practicing in.

 

Don't get me wrong, down scaling the 4k image looks beautiful, but again, I think 4k is too large for me at the moment. Plus when they bring out the 'raw' from the 4k there is no way I want to deal with those files sizes :)

 

for the 2.5k version I would go with the MFT with a metabones, bringing it closer to the Super 35mm sensor size.

 

 

 

Darmon.

Hi Darmon,

 

Happy to help. 2.5K MFT is a great choice, I prefer the 4K not because it's 4K, but because it's got much less Moire and Aliasing (actually it hardly got any from what I've seen) plus you don't have the rolling shutter effect because of the global shutter.

 

Now, I don't know about you, but all those artifacts could drive me crazy when filming.

 

As for Raw...I'm not sure why you wouldn't want compressed raw? I prefer RED compression system over Blackmagic or Sony for instance. I'm sure you know we're talking here 500GB per one hour of 2.5K Raw, as opposed to say almost 5 hours of ProRes 422 HQ 1080P or about 3.5 hours of RED 4K 7:1 compression.

 

But as I said it's a great choice nonetheless, when you have a bigger shoot, you could always rent an Epic or Alexa.

 

Regarding lenses, GL Optics are now offering a Cine version of the Sigma 18-35mm with over 300º focus rotation and a proper aperture ring etc. For only 3500$ it looks like a great investment, much better than any camera IMHO...http://www.glcinemod.com/english.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Darmon,

 

Happy to help. 2.5K MFT is a great choice, I prefer the 4K not because it's 4K, but because it's got much less Moire and Aliasing (actually it hardly got any from what I've seen) plus you don't have the rolling shutter effect because of the global shutter.

 

Now, I don't know about you, but all those artifacts could drive me crazy when filming.

 

As for Raw...I'm not sure why you wouldn't want compressed raw? I prefer RED compression system over Blackmagic or Sony for instance. I'm sure you know we're talking here 500GB per one hour of 2.5K Raw, as opposed to say almost 5 hours of ProRes 422 HQ 1080P or about 3.5 hours of RED 4K 7:1 compression.

 

But as I said it's a great choice nonetheless, when you have a bigger shoot, you could always rent an Epic or Alexa.

 

Regarding lenses, GL Optics are now offering a Cine version of the Sigma 18-35mm with over 300º focus rotation and a proper aperture ring etc. For only 3500$ it looks like a great investment, much better than any camera IMHO...http://www.glcinemod.com/english.html

 

 

Ok fair call, Aliasing, Moire and rolling shutter are beyond a pain!

 

Man those lenses are gorgeous, but with my budget I couldn't see myself affording any of those soon :(

 

 

How do you feel the 4k uncompressed and or ProRes HQ, holds up against the 2.5k uncompressed raw?

 

 

 

Darmon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, you said you wanted to practise, and as someone that started out on Super16 Film, I feel like I was much better off to start on Super 35 cameras as the use of lenses and F stops is somewhat different and when you get to a professional shoot you want to feel natural at picking up the right lenses/f stop combo, this is why you practise no? It took me a while to get all the different conversions in my head after I started using all the Super35 cameras. But maybe it's just me...

 

You also said Narrative Drama, and again, I feel super35 sensor is better suited for most narrative work except some certain films which you prefer the handheld super16 look("The wrestler" is one example), which I'm not sure the pocket can provide anyway. I know you can get the Speedbooster for the pocket, but I wouldn't want to put a piece of glass between my lens and sensor.

 

Well Super16 isn't only ever used handheld of course although it's been popular for that lately on films like Black Swan and the Wrestler for a little bit of that kind of look.

 

I actually really like the Super16 sized sensor of the Blackmagic pocket as it helps you have a deeper depth of field and gives you less worry over focus when not working with a full crew.

 

As to trying to do different conversions in your head, I think all that kind of thing is a bit daft. It's not that difficult to get used to the lenses you are most likely to work with in different formats. I mean what about if you are shooting on 2perf or Anamorphic 35mm?

Trying to do conversions of this kind is a bit of a modern phenomenon and is more trouble that it is worth.

 

Freya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I would go with the Pocket than BMCC. Freya posted some of the reasons that I agree with. Besides a down sampled 2K DCP from 2.5K RAW I wouldn't know why people would choose BMCC over BMPCC.

 

For the price difference you can get the dedicated BMPCC Metabones for free and end with a very similar FOV, plus 1/3 f-stop more and sorry if I disagree with the OP but for me compressed RAW is a plus compared to the uncompressed one. Don't forget that we're talking about visually lossless compressed RAW here.

 

Besides all that BMPCC records to SD cards whereas BMCC records to SSDs only.

 

Anyway… I don't know what type of work the OP does but I've done my part at TV commercials on the BMCC and more than 90% of them were shot at 1080P ProRes. Some of these commercials end up being projected on the big screen at film theatres before the movie begins and I can say they hold pretty pretty well.

 

Nonetheless… I guess size does really matter for some people!

Edited by Alexandre de Tolan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well Super16 isn't only ever used handheld of course although it's been popular for that lately on films like Black Swan and the Wrestler for a little bit of that kind of look.

 

I actually really like the Super16 sized sensor of the Blackmagic pocket as it helps you have a deeper depth of field and gives you less worry over focus when not working with a full crew.

 

As to trying to do different conversions in your head, I think all that kind of thing is a bit daft. It's not that difficult to get used to the lenses you are most likely to work with in different formats. I mean what about if you are shooting on 2perf or Anamorphic 35mm?

Trying to do conversions of this kind is a bit of a modern phenomenon and is more trouble that it is worth.

 

Freya

Hi Freya,

 

I really think it's all a matter of personal opinion. I feel that for me, for most part, 80% of the time when I would like a super35 size sensor and I prefer the get it "out of the box", Not using adapters etc. Again this is just my personal take. your example on Anamorphic/2 pref is Valid, but honestly it's so rare to use this formats. Last time I've checked Panavision for Anamorphic lenses, they said they are booked for the next 8 months or so, lol.

 

The Pocket is a great choice for many, I might get one as well at some point, and which ever camera the OP will get, he will learn and evolve as essentially all those Blackmagic cameras are aimed for Filmmaking/Cinema.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I would go with the Pocket than BMCC. Freya posted some of the reasons that I agree with. Besides a down sampled 2K DCP from 2.5K RAW I wouldn't know why people would choose BMCC over BMPCC.

 

For the price difference you can get the dedicated BMPCC Metabones for free and end with a very similar FOV, plus 1/3 f-stop more and sorry if I disagree with the OP but for me compressed RAW is a plus compared to the uncompressed one. Don't forget that we're talking about visually lossless compressed RAW here.

 

Besides all that BMPCC records to SD cards whereas BMCC records to SSDs only.

 

Anyway… I don't know what type of work the OP does but I've done my part at TV commercials on the BMCC and more than 90% of them were shot at 1080P ProRes. Some of these commercials end up being projected on the big screen at film theatres before the movie begins and I can say they hold pretty pretty well.

 

Nonetheless… I guess size does really matter for some people!

Tottaly agree about 1080P, for the next 2 years at least, 1080P will still rules, Documentries, commercials, TV dramas and even some films, will all still be shot 1080P. SD cards are also a very good point and I totally agree about compressed raw.

 

As for the Metaboons, they are out of stock for a while now...so if the OP finds one, please let us know from where :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I don't really see the need for a metabones if one lenses the pocket properly. Rokinon has a good "range" of wide lenses which'd work on it, the 8/14/16 for example, which could grow to other systems eventually. Or, just pick up a Tonika 11~16 and get it cinemodded and you're basically covered for most shooting. Rarely do I need to go wider than a 12mm on the pocket; and after 16mm on a Tonika, you can get into some nice primes for stills-- though I am no fan of most stills lenses, some of the older "vintage" glass really is beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...