Black Magic PocketHD and 4K production camera

pulpfiction007 said:
I love the specs/footage and really no one could ask for more at $995. I've been on the preorder list since day 1...the ONLY thing that concerns me at all is the fact the M 4/3 BMCC has still not been delivered at all, and the response from Black Magic about that issue (on their user forum) does not inspire confidence.
Click to expand...

Lots of people have received their BMCCs. Hell, there are 2 on eBay right now.
 
I think it'll be between the Panasonic 12-35/2.8 and the 12/1.6 SLRMagic and 25/0.95 SLRMagic combo.

The SLRmagic pair might cost slightly more together, yet will offer a lot of lowlight flexibility and of course DOF for those that want that, or would trade it for the OIS and range.
 
noirist said:
The new Sigma 18-35 f1.8 is promising, esp. with the MFT speedbooster.
Click to expand...
Will that really work since the 18-35 f1.8 is APS-C, isn't the MFT Speed booster for full frame -> micro four. Or do they have one ready for APS-C -> micro four?
 
Last edited:
David G. Smith said:
It looks like, IMHO, that the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm F 2.8 lens is going to be the "Go To" lens for the BMC Pocket camera. John Brawley mentions that in his blog. At about $1200.00 it might be the very best bang for the buck in regards to this camera.
Click to expand...

The Oly Zuiko for 4/3 standard are some pretty awesome lenses, so are the M.Zuiko for m4/3. They make a 14-35mm f2, but it is $2300. Plus you would need the 43 to m43 adapter for like $150.
 
High1ander said:
Will that really work since the 18-35 f1.8 is APS-C, isn't the MFT Speed booster for full frame -> micro four. Or do they have one ready for APS-C -> micro four?
Click to expand...
APS-C sensor is 23.7mm wide. 23.7mm * 0.71 speedbooster = 16.83mm wide. The BMPCC sensor is 12.48mm wide. So it should be possible to speedboost APS-C lenses comfortably on the BMPCC without vignetting.
 
noirist said:
APS-C sensor is 23.7mm wide. 23.7mm * 0.71 speedbooster = 16.83mm wide. The BMPCC sensor is 12.48mm wide. So it should be possible to speedboost APS-C lenses comfortably on the BMPCC without vignetting.
Click to expand...

Sort of defeats the purpose of having a pocket cam in the first place though and you will lose electronic lens controls. May as well just put a PL adapter on and use real S16mm glass.
 
Razz16mm said:
Sort of defeats the purpose of having a pocket cam in the first place though and you will lose electronic lens controls. May as well just put a PL adapter on and use real S16mm glass.
Click to expand...
The Zeiss T 1.2 s-16 mm primes will defenitely be a strange but interesting solution - checked yesterday a set with a PL/MTF adapter, even the 9.5 seems perfectly okay and will not touch the sensor. Problem may be that such lenses are nearly bigger and heavier than the camera itself and may need some kind of a bonsai-rig for handling.

I see a breed of - semi-pro/pro - gnome-cams coming. Not necessarily very beautiful but mighty little machines.... :-)
 
Last edited:
I gotta look at it this way . . .
First of all I have confidence in BM (perhaps more than some but not unfounded).
It wasn't so many years ago that I drove 300 miles round trip and was delighted to part with $1250 just to have two 4Gb P2 cards for my "early adopter HVX200 . . .
Given what little I've seen, on a pre-production camera, I don't consider my having placed a pre-order the first day anyone was taking them to be "high risk."
Not that I have money to throw away but really, what's the worst case scenario?
Oh sure (I almost forgot), it might not deliver "late July" . . .
But I can't get my panties in a wad over that because I have tools with which to earn an income, and I can certainly rent when I need something different.
My only real dilemma is will I want the new 4k cam when it's out or do I wait to see if BM will stun everyone by going with the active m43 mount on the original BMCC?
Not looking for argument . . . your guess is as good as mine.
Exciting times we live in . . . glad someone picked up the ball and is running with it.
You go BlackMagic!
 
carlmart said:
There are not that many, and I'm not sure about the quality they deliver. The majority are Panasonic lenses, some made by Leica, others not. Second are Olympus lenses, which I don't know who makes them. There are some Voigtlander primes, the most expensive of the bunch.

What I wonder is if there are some tests or reviews around comparing lenses for this mount and for the others, like Canons or Nikons, that might be used with adapters. The problem with the latter is that they will double their focal length, at least, for the Pocket, so they won't be much useful below 25mm, which is already stretching our quest for image quality.

So I wonder what to pick.
Click to expand...


I don't believe Leica make any lenses for Panasonic. They merely help with the design and then licence their name to appear on panasonic lenses and the first time they've ever allowed the "summilux" name to appear on non leica made lenses. I'm 99% sure that Olympus and Panasonic both make their own lenses.

Perhaps you're showing your 135 bias with regards to the quality of lenses. At this kind of resolution levels the camera has I think most of the native m4/3 lenses will hold their own against the 135 equivalents. Why unbalance a small camera by hanging larger lenses than you need to off the front.

Olympus make some lovely optics, and the pannys aren't terrible. Then of course there's Schneider Xenons, Zeiss CP's...all available in m4/3 native.

jb
 
John Brawley said:
I don't believe Leica make any lenses for Panasonic. They merely help with the design and then licence their name to appear on panasonic lenses and the first time they've ever allowed the "summilux" name to appear on non leica made lenses. I'm 99% sure that Olympus and Panasonic both make their own lenses.
Click to expand...
I guess so :-)
 
John Brawley said:
Perhaps you're showing your 135 bias with regards to the quality of lenses. At this kind of resolution levels the camera has I think most of the native m4/3 lenses will hold their own against the 135 equivalents. Why unbalance a small camera by hanging larger lenses than you need to off the front.

Olympus make some lovely optics, and the pannys aren't terrible. Then of course there's Schneider Xenons, Zeiss CP's...all available in m4/3 native.
Click to expand...

Please let me state that I wouldn't like to hang a large lens from this camera at all if I can avoid it. That's why I'm looking at alternatives.
 
carlmart said:
Please let me state that I wouldn't like to hang a large lens from this camera at all if I can avoid it. That's why I'm looking at alternatives.
Click to expand...

There is an alternative: At times you can hang a smaller and lighter camera (GH3 / Pocket cam) onto a large lens - while you can attach the lens to a tripod.... done it with some old monsters like the Zeiss Jena Sonnar 180 / f 2.8 or the Sigma 170 - 500 Zoom .... ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top