rob norton
Veteran
What's wrong with the c200 monitor? It's rock solid.
4k bmpcc
- Thread starter starcentral
- Start date
What's wrong with the c200 monitor? It's rock solid.
Wow that really is a laughably unbelievable endorsement against a fixed 5". Gimme a break.
John Brawley
Well-known member
They’ll forgive it once they actually realise that a 10 or 12 bit production friendly file suddenly means their works leaps ahead a few notches.
Also, you need the touchscreen cause that’s what’s driving the menus of the camera when you want to change settings (other than the obvious mid shot ones)
Treat it like it’s just an interface screen and get an external monitor if you want to whine about it. And if you really need to in a pinch it can also work as the framing monitor. No ones holding a gun to your head though.
Many complained about the first BMCC camera having the same issue. Yet it was spectacularly successful at more than twice the price. In every way this is a better camera for half the price.
JB
Samuel H
Major Contributor
This.
If lack of swivel screen is a dealbreaker for you, it's fine that you complain: you want them to hear your frustration and hopefully listen to it. But please understand: lots of people think it's just fine as it is, and they'll buy the camera, and they'll be extremely happy with it. Not sure yet but I think I'll be among those.
Funny back in 2008 when the d90 and 5d2 came out people bitched at that still/motion convergence and companies like Zacuto and red rock micro made killing on their senseless frankenrigs- in fact Zacuto was built based on this disappointment with the form factor. Today, presumably the same pros defend this form factor for video camera to the death. I guess this market segment can endure a lot as long as it's cheap, cheap, cheap. The twist here is that it would not have to be much more done right. It's an example of a marketing driven product. It makes a lot of sense marketing wise , but, unfortunately, not much sense otherwise... IMO of course...
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
I was one of the nincompoops that invested a lot of wasted money into those accessories, including 35mm adapters (before the 5D Mark II).
Back then, photographers never wanted any monitors being able to swivel out and break during their heavy field use, so the videographers were in the minority here (if anyone did complain).
Personally, I don't see an issue with the screen, but there are other things that drive me nuts about cameras so I can understand the passion.
Back then, photographers never wanted any monitors being able to swivel out and break during their heavy field use, so the videographers were in the minority here (if anyone did complain).
Personally, I don't see an issue with the screen, but there are other things that drive me nuts about cameras so I can understand the passion.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
What we know is it sucks for you. You however do not speak for every user. We totally understand the camera doesn't work for you. There is nothing wrong with that. You have a need for an articulating screen and thats a very valid need for a camera. Thats why Panasonic has invested so much into that feature for many years. Even my GH1 had it. That doesn't mean the camera is badly designed or defective however. It may not fit your needs but it will fit the needs of a crap load of other users.
I use a 5" Ninja Blade and that thing is also mounted on rails behind my camera in a static position. I find nothing wrong with using it that way and 99% of the time thats where my head is.
You can also easily and very affordably add a wide range of external monitors for as low as $199 for a 1920x1080 5" display.
I recently did a shoot where I attempted to use the 3.5" GH4 screen facing forward from a distance and it was worthless. Tried the same thing with the 5" Blade on top the camera and it was equally useless. I ended up using the Blade on a long HDMI cable so I could keep it close. 5" is a monitor size that still needs to be viewed up close for critical focus. Thats why it really makes more sense directly in front of my face. I'm not saying there are not valid use cases for swinging that screen around but this is really such a non issue. The amount of options we now have for really good lightweight monitors makes complaining about this one thing kind of silly. I understand you want it but it isn't there. You either move on or keep being negative about the situation. It will never change however. You can keep harping on it but nothing will change. The Pocket will come out in September and a massive amount of people will buy it and enjoy using it. The camera will not suddenly grow an articulated screen. Its just not going to happen so why continue to harp on something that cannot change?
Last edited:
combatentropy
Veteran
I think for the Blackmagic Pocket 3.
So there are two camps here:
1. Those who might buy it but would like to voice suggestions for next time. Who knows who will hear us? Maybe we are just voices in the darkness. However, it's becoming a flatter world. Mitch Goss works for Panasonic, and he is a member here. There are people who work at camera stores here. I've seen their sales posts. Maybe they can relay the overall consensus to camera companies whenever they have their ear. Will it make much of a diffference? Who knows? It's just a little vote, cast into the abyss.
2. Those who might buy it but for some reason don't like the suggestions. Why? Do you think I will look down on you if you buy it? I won't!
Now if camp 2 let camp 1 have their say, without comment, then I think it would end. But that's not what happens. Camp 2 --- for reasons I still don't understand --- argue against camp 1. "It's not a big deal." "It would be too expensive." "It's not physically possible." "You are spoiled and entitled."
Now camp 1, who might have been content to let their voices be heard and let the thread continue in other directions, now feel they can't just let camp 2's insults lie there. Now they have to defend themselves. After all, someone from a camera company might be listening! So now camp 1 replies to camp 2. And it now it goes back and forth, back and forth, because after each reply, the other camp feels partly insulted, or that the truth was partly misrepresented, or some such.
Now camp 2 complains that camp 1 won't stop complaining. Why won't they leave it alone? Why can't they mention their suggestion and move on? Answer: Because you won't stop replying.
Advice for camp 2: let the suggestions be heard, even if you don't think it's possible this time around. That's not really the point. Just let it be heard, and maybe it will die.
If someone keeps saying the same thing, without provocation, then that's another story. But so far the only repetition I've seen is after provocations.
alaskacameradude
Veteran
I would say this. There is a fine line between 'harping on' and 'being negative' and letting your
wants, needs or opinions being known. For example, when the first BM Ursa Mini 4.6k cinema camera
came out, there were several people (including me) who just may have been accused of 'being negative'
because we let our opinions be known, one big opinion being that we thought it need built in ND filters.
There were plenty of others who told us 'it's a cinema camera, put a matte box on it or use screw in filters
and quit complaining about it because for the price, it's amazing!' Or 'I love it as is, if you don't like it, just
don't buy it.' And other comments like that. And then a funny thing happened.....along came the Ursa Mini
PRO 4.6K. With some of the features some of us had been asking for.....like built in ND filters. Would those
have even happened if everyone would have just 'quit complaining' and decided it was great as it was?
On the other hand, I get your point, it can be annoying and unrealistic to hear people talk about how they
basically want more and more features, for less and less cost. You are not going to get a 8K Alexa for a GH5
price. These companies DO need to make a profit at this business or they can't keep improving and making
better products. So a fine line as I said. It's the balancing on this fine line, that is difficult.
combatentropy
Veteran
EXAMPLES:
Good:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Thank you for your suggestion."
(I feel I have been heard and respected)
Good:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
(crickets)
Camp 2: "Hey, anybody know where I can get a good deal on standard-to-mini-XLR adapter cables?"
(Okay, so you're not interested. I get it. No harm, no foul.)
Bad:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Well you're a big fat moron!"
(makes light of another person)
Bad:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
(crickets)
Camp 2: "Hey, anybody know where I can get a good deal on standard-to-mini-XLR adapter cables?"
Camp 1: "Hey, I said I wish the camera had a flip-out screen!"
(needless repetition without provocation or new information)
Good:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Well, I don't think that's possible, because E = mc^2"
Camp 1: "Yeah, but A = pi * r^2"
(actual reasoning back and forth)
Bad:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Well, I don't think that's possible, because E = mc^2"
Camp 1: "Yeah, but A = pi * r^2"
Camp 2: "Oh why don't you just leave it alone!"
(because you kept it going)
Good:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Thank you for your suggestion."
(I feel I have been heard and respected)
Good:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
(crickets)
Camp 2: "Hey, anybody know where I can get a good deal on standard-to-mini-XLR adapter cables?"
(Okay, so you're not interested. I get it. No harm, no foul.)
Bad:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Well you're a big fat moron!"
(makes light of another person)
Bad:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
(crickets)
Camp 2: "Hey, anybody know where I can get a good deal on standard-to-mini-XLR adapter cables?"
Camp 1: "Hey, I said I wish the camera had a flip-out screen!"
(needless repetition without provocation or new information)
Good:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Well, I don't think that's possible, because E = mc^2"
Camp 1: "Yeah, but A = pi * r^2"
(actual reasoning back and forth)
Bad:
Camp 1: "I wish the camera had a flip-out screen."
Camp 2: "Well, I don't think that's possible, because E = mc^2"
Camp 1: "Yeah, but A = pi * r^2"
Camp 2: "Oh why don't you just leave it alone!"
(because you kept it going)
Last edited:
I agree wholeheartedly. However, unfortunately, in the world of perceptions(as opposed to the world of facts) what is intended as "thank you for your suggestion" may be interpreted at the other end as "you are a big fat moron"
I think we see some of it here. I just try to remember that his is a public forum seen by a lot of people and personal, character, non technical emotional comments are a slippery slope and should be avoided at all costs. Like any public place. I'm sure the mods will help us with that as well..
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Yes I get that but there are channels and means to request features and then there is a user forum that has nothing to do with BMD. The inclusion of ND filters on the URSA Pro likely has a lot more to do with focus groups and people in the inner circle making the suggestion to add ND filters. These massive negative conversions are likely never seen by BMD. I wouldn't want to siphon through all this just to see what people want. BMD also doesn't live in a bubble. They know what people want without reading 81 pages of people saying the camera sucks without it. They don't suddenly get to page 8 and be like well that was the 1000th post about the ND filter I guess we better add it. I'm sure they have known from day 1 building cameras that eventually people would want ND filters.
We don't always know the reason why a feature wasn't added. When BMD started building cameras they didn't have the infrastructure to produce glass of any kind. They knew their craft when it came to getting video into and out of a camera and how to process that video and plop it into a file. BMD doesn't build lenses or filters and had to wait to be able to support such a feature. I'm almost positive they didn't just sit on it until they read the 1000th angry post on a user forum. Thats not how we studied the needs of a market when I worked in the marketing department of a manufacturing company. We instead brought in subject matter experts to find out what their needs were. We also talked to sales people to get what input they were hearing and finally a good chunk of our input came from trade shows. BMD likely does the same thing. They get a ton of input at trade shows, from sales people, distributors and some film makers as a focus group to learn the needs. I would never in a million years read through all of this to figure out what features to add to the next camera.
There is also a correct way to request a new feature but criticizing a camera and calling it a missed opportunity isn't it. Thats just a very negative attitude to have and it distracts users from having a positive and productive conversation about what the camera actually does have and what it can do.
Its really a glass half full or half empty situation. Some see it as half empty and will cling to that fact that it isn't exactly what they want. Others view it as glass half full and thats ok too. People are happy about the camera and want to discuss the positives of the camera and what it can do for them.
I myself have my own concerns about the camera but they are my own concerns. I brought them up in the past and I will leave it at that. BMD may or may not address some of those concerns in the future but these discussions are highly unlikely to be what guides their hand. We are all just screaming in the vacuum of space at this point.
But by all means if people wish to continue to be negative then I'm not going to stop them. I said my part and thats it. I don't agree with the negativity and think it is childish and not very productive but then again I'm older and tend to see the world as half full and tend to enjoy the amazing tools we have at our disposal today.
My final suggestion to people that want the perfect camera is don't wait until a new camera is in production to ask for new features. If you want a Pocket 3 with articulating screen then start asking BMD for it today. Send them an email, call their sales numbers, start a petition of signatures and send it to them. Chatting on a forum does nothing and at this stage nothing can be done anymore. The design is locked and loaded and hitting the assembly line. Now that we know what they can do with the Pocket 4k we should be requesting new features for the Pocket 3 right now before that design gets locked in as well. It takes a long time to design, test and build a new camera. BMD is likely already starting to work on the Pocket 3 in terms of feature planning and initial design considerations. Catch them via official channels while there is still a chance.
I'm in camp 3!
Internal ND is difficult because of the short flange distance. There is a lot you can do in an EF (44mm) flange distance, even more in a B4 distance, and potentially a lot in a PL distance. But in the short (less than 20mm) of a micro 4/3 mount there just isn't much room for the mechanism. You could probably design an m43 to EF adapter that has a filter wheel inside, would be slightly different length because of the glass that's introduced, but things might fit.
Internal ND is difficult because of the short flange distance. There is a lot you can do in an EF (44mm) flange distance, even more in a B4 distance, and potentially a lot in a PL distance. But in the short (less than 20mm) of a micro 4/3 mount there just isn't much room for the mechanism. You could probably design an m43 to EF adapter that has a filter wheel inside, would be slightly different length because of the glass that's introduced, but things might fit.
John Brawley
Well-known member
I think the problem is that people say things like (Paraphrasing) "It's unusable" and "you can't use the camera in daylight" or "Useless outdoors"
So when you can show a corollary of those points, you get into a discussion about the CURRENT iteration, not a future version of the camera. That's where the impasse is.
JB
Greg Smith
Veteran
My AF100 (from way back in 2011) has an MFT mount and internal NDs, so it is certainly possible.
- Greg
leteeci
Well-known member
I had BMPCC and now BMMCC.. I like BMPCC because of the build in LCD.. is flipout LCD easier to work with? Of course it is..but I can understand BM why not include among other features.. it is extra cost and it is easier to break..so, those individuals whi would like to have it will buy additional LCD and mount it like they want.. I am very suprised and happy what BM included on the new pocket.. Life is not Crismass, and there is no wishlist
alaskacameradude
Veteran
Sony FS700, and Sony FS7/5 as well as Panasonic AF100 and JVC GY-LS300 are
just a few examples of cameras that have short flange distances and yet have
somehow managed to add internal NDs in.