Mtyson, you have some good arguments, but here are my thoughts
Was big enough to shoot the biggest film of all time...Avatar. $2.8 billion at the box office. Shot with a Sony CinAlta 2/3" sensor 1080p/24p cinema camera. If it's good enough for James Cameron....it's good enough for me.
Well, if you have the same crew as James Cameron and the same ammount of technical resources, then you are good to go!
However, if you are going to use it for amateur shooting, dont expect doing "Avatar" level stuff. When you shoot a blockbuster you dont have to deal with hard lighting situations. You have lights, reflectors, you can shoot during the day and transform it into night etc. Summarizing, you can create artificially the perfect lighting situations.
The real deal is when an amateur has to shoot during REAL low light situations. Thats the point of a pocket camera. If you have time to plan your shots, then you have time to use a full size gear.
Its easier for a blockbuster director to use a small chip compared to a normal person that is shooting not staged and spontaneous stuff.
But if you usually do blockbusters like Avatar, then forget everything I just said.
Having played with the RAW DNGs it's a resounding YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSS! There are no words to describe how amazing and wonderful it is, and how much latitude there is to play around with. It's pretty much the holy grail. Anyone who has worked with RAW will tell you. 13-stops is HUGE with video...HUUUUUUUUUGE! I don't think I can stress this enough. Although, if you don't know how to grade RAW well then...maybe not as much. lol. I'm well past the learning curve though. Of course there is the ProRes option for those who don't want to mess with RAW and it's great as well.
I've seen some comparisons with the GH3, GH2, 5DMKIII, FS100 etc and it really is something, but we cannot let the excitement outshine the other limitations. When you watch the footage side-by-side you can clearly see the difference. If you see the footage separately you can also cause a great impression with cameras with less DR. For enthusiats it will be something, but for the audience it wont separate worlds. Not to mention that when you post process you usually blow out some blacks, whites and other colors to create an atmosphere, unless you are doing a documentary. Im not saying its not a great feature, but I dont think its the holy grail either, specially if you are losing some basic stuff. Whats the point of buying a Ferrari with a great engine, but with no seats, wheels, doors etc? They are giving a great feature, but they are taking away basic features that we will probably need more than the 13 stops of DR.
The low light is good, but not fantastic. It's not on the 5D Mark III level, but in RAW you can bring up exposure 2-3 stops in post. It's Native 800 ISO. The amount of shadow detail and highlight detail you can recover is amazing. It uses the same sensor as the original 2.5k BMCC that is $3,000. Low light is the same as it and the BMCC compared well against the Red Epic in low light video test. The guy doing the low light test actually said it was more acceptable at 1600 ISO than the Epic in the low light shooting he was doing with the BMCC, Epic and Alexa.
Same sensor? Its going to be produced by other company, isnt it? And its cropped, so the performance wont be the same.
Invest in some SLR magic hyperprimes. 12mm T1.6. 25mm F0.95. You'll get your shallow DOF and bokeh. lol. Also, the Metabones Speedbooster coming out for MFT will increase low light by a whole stop and basically make it as if it has a 29% larger sensor by reducing the focal length of the lenses.
Yeah, right. So you will spend 1k in the camera body. Then you will have to buy a metabones SB + a fast wide angle + some fast primes and a macro? a telephoto?
So its 1k body + 3-5k in lenses. With that price you can buy the 4k camera with the bigger sensor and cheaper lenses.
Even spending that much, with such a small sensor, to be able to achieve a nice bokeh you will have to use old tricks like using zoom, getting close to the subject and far from the background etc. Thats acceptable if you have time. If its your pocket camera, you have to be able to do that fast, out of the pocket. And you wont be able to do that. If you are using it for small productions, with time and accessories, then yes, I agree with that solution. But if you are doing that, you should buy a full size camera, like the BMCC.
If you buy the 1k body + some normal lenses you will probably have average performance + the limitations of the camera. No pictures, no shallow DOF, no bokehs, bad at low light, low frame rate etc. You will be amazed when post processing the video, but your family wont see the difference.
If you want to go pro buying expensive lenses, there is no point on buying the pocket blackmagic will all of its limitations. You are better of with another camera body.
I've seen good enough low light examples. The pixels are decently sized, close to that of the 5D mark III, I recall and I've seen shallow DOF, just not completely way overdone shallow dof like with the Fulll Frame crazy where someone's nose is out of focus. BLEH!
Can you link me to them? I've only seen bad examples. I wish I could see how it performs at 800-1600 ISO. How much detail and noise you have.
And you cant live without DOF nowadays. I dont like it overdone either, but having everything in focus all the time wont get you the wow factor in your video - unless you are doing videos only for yourself to watch. People will probably care more for the shallow DOF than for the wide dinamyc range.
Overpriced??? rolleyes.gif You're essentially getting a PROFESSIONAL portable cinema camera nearly identical to their $3,000 model
Nearly identical to the BMCC? Where its nearly identical? For me they are pretty much different.
it's overpriced at only $995? $995 is absolutely REVOLUTIONARY and unheard of with these feature. There's no camera outside of BlackMagic under $10,000 doing what this camera does. The next step up is the $16,000 Red Scarlet.
Its not a 1k camera. If you want to use it as your unique camera, you will have to spend 3 times that value. Event spending that much, you will probably need another camera for extreme situations.
Here's some RAW DNG grades I graded from an online RAW DNGs given out, first shot using just a single candlelight with the BlackMagic Cinema Camera using the same sensor as the pocket cinema camera, followed by a two more low light grades and then others I graded:
The first 3 examples are far from good. I've seen the originals in some blog. Its really great the ammount of detail you can recover. In the park shot. In the originals, you couldnt see the tree in the left. In post you can make it appear, but that costs a lot. I would never use that image in a video. An APS-C or a full frame could do A LOT better in those situations.
And again, it is NOT the same sensor of the BMCC.
I've seen the video of the girl playing pool. Its a great video, but you can do similar stuff with "normal" cameras with big sensors. You will lose some details in the outside parts of the windows (highlights) etc, but if you are not doing a side-by-side, people wont notice the difference. I wonder how it will perform against a DSLR using the HDR video hack.
Anyway, its a great feature, but having it and not having all the rest will make it a good camera? I dont think so. If you are doing it just for technical pleasure, maybe. But if you are doing videos for people to see, then you are probably just wasting money.
This camera looks like just a gimmick for you to use now and then, and then lay it on your office.
A normal person would need a new hard drive and a new workstation to deal with the video files. It would spend hours post processing and the final result, for the audience, would be just a "nice" looking video. If it had a 120fps 1080p option or a great hability to do sDOF it would be another history, but being able to retain more details in the windows of the background is not worth all the features you lose.
I just dont get the point of this camera. If you want to go pro and spend a lot of money in a camera and lenses, you are better of with the 4k camera. If you want something pocketable and for amateur stuff, having 13 stops of dynamic range and 12-bit, but bad low light performance, no sDOF, no bokehs, low frame rates, big file sizes etc - makes no sense.Its not a good camera for pro's, and its not a good camera for amateurs!
Thats the best way to describe that camera.
Its a great first step though. Now it wont take long until Sony and Panasonic start making smaller cameras with better compressions and wider DR's. In my opinion the Blackmagic will be a black sheep