Jump to content
Philippe Orlando

Is there anything better than the BMCC

Recommended Posts

The JVC line of cameras are an interesting study. I've not seen anything from them that screams amazing, or out of the ordinary. Personally though, those cameras are just more noise in a sea of better options. If you're looking to spend roughly $3,000, one of the entry level URSA cameras is likely a better option for controlled environments - since you actually get the ability to record RAW and 10-bit ProRes without an external recorder, and you get Blackmagics cinematic-looking images compared to the rather 'video' looking JVC images.

 

I have never worked with JVC cameras before though, so I can't say for sure.

Edited by Landon D. Parks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JVC has always been a bit of an odd duck-- but personally I think their whole market is much more the ENG/EFP area and Docu/Reality-- where they're a more affordable sony/panasonic/canon. Not that they're bad, per say, I have fond memories of the GY700 (i think that was the model) they're just not something you'd particularly encounter in narrative, commercial, or MV environments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who needs low light? Film has been maxed out at 500 ISO + 1 stop or two forever? Yet, there are plenty of super beautiful low-light scenes in movies going back to the days of 125iso. So do we really need high-ISO? No absolutely not and I shoot A LOT in low-light and it always comes out great. So IDK... I for one would rather have a good cinematic camera then low-light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually, high ISO's are not chosen when shooting a film. Of course, this is starting to change now that more people shooting films have access to the high ISO settings. Higher ISO settings are more handy for run-and-gun and gorilla-style setups, documentaries, or ENG.

Edited by Landon D. Parks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually, high ISO's are not chosen when shooting a film. Of course, this is starting to change now that more people shooting films have access to the high ISO settings. Higher ISO settings are more handy for run-and-gun and gorilla-style setups, documentaries, or ENG.

 

 

It's all an excuse for not lighting. People have been shooting run and gun gorilla style films forever without lights or minimal lighting. Today with LED panels being small, bright and adjustable color temp, there is no excuse.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey buddy the 2.5k is called the baby Alexa for a reason. You will absolutely love that camera, its a beast and dont worry about the form factor etc, none of that stuff matters to a filmmaker whos willing to tell stories and not make any excuses as to why they wont make something. I own that camera as well as an Alexa classic and I tell you there is nothing easy to handle with the Alexas form factor, its huge and you need a ton of stuff to move around freely but guess what? Who cares!!!!!!! What kind of excuse is form factor. Im glad you asked this question on this form and Im telling you the 2.5k is beautiful so are all the other cameras you mentioned. Nothing at that price point will compare to the 2.5k at all. the pocket has the same exact image but not the same resolution which simply means the 2.5k will provide more detail is all. The pocket was only made to accompany the 2.5k and was created to use in tighter spots and shots that would be impossible with other cameras. Dont believe that 2.5k is dead or that 4K is better. Just run with it, its a great camera to learn cinematography, screw all the FPN talk and shoot at any ISO that your scene requires. Techy people will be the only ones crying over this stuff meanwhile our audience is crying over our storytelling go for it now!!!!!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I mean finding them in general. IF you can find one, most are probably in good shape. As for what could be wrong with a used camera - any number of things could be wrong with it, at least in theory - it is a piece of electronic equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd avoid the BMCC EF like the plague (because... EF mount! Ugh)

BMCC MFT is nice at that price, but I'd rather go for the BMMCC (Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera) as it has an identical image but in a smaller form factor and gives you 60fps slow motion.

BMD URSA 4.6K Pro is the best from BMD, and is well under $10K
But if we're focused on the BMCC perhaps you budget is much lower or you'd just have mentioned the URSA Mini Pro already?

Now if we start considering outside the BMD range, it can become quite "subjective" your choices (even though there are many more GOOD choices out there). And can all depend on your priorities and tastes.

Tonnes of options (from a bit under $10K, to waaaay under $10K), just to mention a very small selection:
Panasonic EVA1 / GH5 / GH5S
Sony FS7 / F5 / F55 / F65 (yeah I saw once a secondhand F65 go for just under $10K, CRAZY!)
Kinefinity Terra 4K or 6K
Arri Alexa Classic
RED ONE / RED SCARLET MX / RED EPIC MX / etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BMCC was a marvellous and maddening machine. The picture (kept within its limits) is remarkably good - I used it as a B-camera to the Sony F3 on my first feature some years back, and it was incredible how closely it could match to the $20,000 F3.

 

Ergonomically, it's mostly a nightmare (except for crashcam-type setups, where its all-in-one style is perfect), but for a primary camera, it requires a lot of rigging to make it usable.

 

The rolling shutter isn't great, and it doesn't like being pushed more than about half a stop beyond it's 800 ISO rating. But if you have no money, and can find one with all the necessary rigging gack included - then it's certainly capable of delivering images that you can use.

Today you can buy a Sony PMW-F3 for around the same price as a BMCC. Which is almost quite unbelievable!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's an issue money. I might consider the GH5s, once I can see more footage of it. I'm aware of the Ursa 4.6K and I've looked at some used RED ONE too. Nothing is as cheap than a BMCC MFT that can be found now for around $ 1000 on ebay and the image quality of the URSA 4.6 and from those older RED is marginally better than what a BMCC can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Panasonic GH5 / GH5S doesn't appeal to you and you really want to keep your budget around $2K or under then I seriously reckon you should go for a Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera or a Sony PMW-F3 (or maybe the Sony FS700, but you'd have to be very lucky to get that with an Atomos Shogun and not end up pushing the budget too far past $2K).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big two: 60fps (sweet sexy slow motion!) + smaller size & weight (important if rigging, say an overhead shot or onto a car. Also very important if using with a gimbal)

 

 

The expansion port is also interesting, if you want to use the Micro on a drone, or another handy use I've seen people design shoulder rigs so you've got more control of the Micro from the grip handle.

But everything else is just gravy on top after those big first two points. I'd even be willing to pay a premium for them over the BMCC! (but you don't need to, as they're around the same price now. But if the BMMCC went on half price sale like the BMPCC did the I'd snap up a Micro in a heart beat!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my eyes the two best cameras from BMD are:

URSA Mini 4.6K Pro (the non-Pro version is not that much cheaper, but the Pro is so much better
Micro Cinema Camera (is like the peak of development of the BMCC => BMPCC => BMMCC series)

As we can ignore anything with the 4K sensor (welllll.... if I saw the URSA Mini 4K at a crazy low price like US$1.5K secondhand or lower then maybe I couldn't say no!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But don't you think that we're losing something with the Micro Cinema Camera and the BMPCC compared to the BMCC that is 2.5K? Don't you think that the added resolution is worth getting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only a small difference in resolution between 2.5K and 1080

And if you're not shooting in raw (95% of the time I am not, and I presume any one buying an ultra low budget camera is also not, especially if say they're doing a long project like a feature film or a web series) then there is basically ZERO difference between the ProRes HQ of the BMPCC , BMCC , and BMMCC (maybe some careful A/B testing can find some hairs to split)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, I shouldn't be in hair splitting at by budget level and I just looked a a picture comparing the different format using rectangles, yes, the difference between 1080 and 2.5K is almost trivial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Visual Products



    CineLab



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Ritter Battery



    Wooden Camera



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    G-Force Grips



    Metropolis Post



    Paralinx LLC



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Serious Gear



    FJS International



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Just Cinema Gear



    Glidecam



    Abel Cine



    Tai Audio


×
×
  • Create New...