Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I had posted a thread about purchasing another DSLR but I would like to stick to cameras specifically designed for filmmaking.

 

Anyway, Ive been looking around searching for a product that suits my needs. I stumbled across the Blackmagic mini (studio and cinema) and it piqued my interest as a hobbyist...with a hobbyists budget.

 

Just a few questions:

 

1) what is the difference between the two (studio and cinema)

2) are they any good? Specifically for short films and stuff. Do they achieve the cinematic look, are they good in low light, etc.

3) if I were to get one, would I be able to use the lenses I already have? I have two Rokinon Cine lenses with ef mounts for my Canon....and I sure would like to keep them.

 

Additional question: any idea how they stack up against the new PCC?

 

This upgrade will be the last for quite some time so I want to get it right and not have regrets.

 

Once again, any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was watching a review for the mini 4K studio and the man said it was suited for broadcast where the other was better suited for field environment.

 

When using these terms are they referring to the image?

Reality tv show vs. film look, for example?

 

Or are they referring to the actual setting of the environment in which youre filming?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mini4K Studio has no way to record internally, so you need to shoot it out to some kind of deck/broadcast, for actual film work, the new pocket 4K would be the way to go once it comes out---especially as it has a newer sensor which hopefully has better performance then their previous 4K sensors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean the new 4k pocket solves pretty much all the problems AND is a complete package. I wouldn't get near the other cameras at this point in time, they all have too many issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd still consider the Ursa Mini 4.6K Pro if I had the money to get into the package, or the need, neither of which I do.

 

They'll be updating it soon... the double ISO imager deal is critical these days. It also needs image processing so you can shoot with the full imager at 2k for instance and not crop if need be. I'm gonna nab the new 4k pocket and see what it's like before doing anything else. I'm sad I won't be able to use my S16 glass anymore with it tho. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy just don't get it. The "cinematic look" (if such a thing exists) is not about money and the latest camera. It's about lighting and deep framing, who cares what lens or camera do you use to capture that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I totally get it. I certainly do.

 

Yes, it comes down to framing, composition, lighting, proper sound, etc.

 

But the camera one uses absolutely is part of the equation no doubt. Im personally not out looking for the latest and greatest, most expensive gadgets.

 

1) a $10,000.00 camera in the hands of an amateur is pretty much worthless

2) expensive cameras, lenses, software, etc. dont suit my purpose. Im not completely delusional and out of touch.

 

But if Im able to upgrade Im absolutely going to. Within my means. I have THE lower end camera for its respective class. And yes it definitely shows.

 

I get it. Im right there with you.

 

Just because one CAN make ok stuff with a 200.00 DSLR doesnt mean they SHOULD if they have the means to buy something better...just because. As stated earlier, I am not a still photographer. I read something recently comparing it to tools. You can drive a nail with a hammer or a wrench. A wrench will do the job just fine. But if youre building a birdhouse youre not going to go to the hardware store and buy a wrench to nail the thing together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy just don't get it. The "cinematic look" (if such a thing exists) is not about money and the latest camera. It's about lighting and deep framing, who cares what lens or camera do you use to capture that?

 

Yes deep focus does make a difference, but honestly the imager, color science and capture format mean a lot. A cinematic look is also softer and more pleasing to the eye, something not very many low-end cameras can deliver, even with softer glass.

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.



  • Ritter Battery



    Abel Cine



    Metropolis Post



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    CineLab



    Paralinx LLC



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Glidecam



    Visual Products



    Wooden Camera



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Tai Audio



    Serious Gear


×
×
  • Create New...