Justin Oakley Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Oakley Posted May 19, 2018 Author Share Posted May 19, 2018 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted May 19, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted May 19, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted May 21, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted May 21, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adrian Sierkowski Posted May 21, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted May 21, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted May 21, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted May 21, 2018 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. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomo Girolamo Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Oakley Posted May 21, 2018 Author Share Posted May 21, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted May 21, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted May 21, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now