Other: BlackMagic Cinema camera!!!! 2.5k for 3k...

These guys were the first with video from the floor apparently:


Some others that have come out:

(Only the first minute, nothing new as far as I can tell)

cinema5D's video is pretty good:


(audio out-of-sync, but still good info)

BTW, here is a comparison between the digital Bolex and the BMCC:

http://nikitapavlov.com/blog/digital-bolex-d16-vs-blackmagic-cinema-camera-comparison-table/

Also, I've noticed a lot of these videos are straight up calling the sensor "Four Thirds"... I wonder if that's what BlackMagic is saying too...
 
plasmasmp said:
ZF should mean F mount with Aperture and Exif data right? I figure by them calling it ZF mount instead of G that it based for manual Nikon lens operation.
Click to expand...
I don't know what the talk is about "ZF" mount. There isn't a ZF mount, of course, there's F mount. But the guys on the show floor said specifically that it was ONLY Canon EF mount. Period. And if you look at the body, the tube that is molded out of it is a long, long tube.

Sorry to dash all the hopes of everyone who wants multiple lens mounts, but unless I'm missing something (and I very well could be) this BlackMagic is only and solely an EF mount camera. Which means you will not be using 4/3 or m43 or c-mount or S16 lenses, and you won't be able to use PL primes, and you may not be able to use several (or even many) PL zooms. What you can use on an EF mount camera, is Nikon F-mount lenses; you can get a thin adapter ring. But I don't think you can adapt Nikon G lenses to Canon EF mount bodies, and there's no room for an iris lever ring (like on the Nikon adapters for the FS100 and AF100).

Looking forward to more info, but that's what it looks like to me right now.
 
for the small sensor crop factor
EF tokina 11-16
EF sigma 20mm f1.8
EF canon 28mm f1.8

edit
and if you are rich
24/1.4
 
Barry_Green said:
I don't know what the talk is about "ZF" mount. There isn't a ZF mount, of course, there's F mount. But the guys on the show floor said specifically that it was ONLY Canon EF mount. Period. And if you look at the body, the tube that is molded out of it is a long, long tube.

Sorry to dash all the hopes of everyone who wants multiple lens mounts, but unless I'm missing something (and I very well could be) this BlackMagic is only and solely an EF mount camera. Which means you will not be using 4/3 or m43 or c-mount or S16 lenses, and you won't be able to use PL primes, and you may not be able to use several (or even many) PL zooms. What you can use on an EF mount camera, is Nikon F-mount lenses; you can get a thin adapter ring. But I don't think you can adapt Nikon G lenses to Canon EF mount bodies, and there's no room for an iris lever ring (like on the Nikon adapters for the FS100 and AF100).

Looking forward to more info, but that's what it looks like to me right now.
Click to expand...

hm in the interviews and website they were very specific about being "open" to everything and no limiting the camera to one lens or one codec, etc. hmm
 
Also, I've noticed a lot of these videos are straight up calling the sensor "Four Thirds"... I wonder if that's what BlackMagic is saying too...
Click to expand...
That is exactly what Blackmagic is saying, on the show floor; when I asked the rep on the floor what the sensor size was he said (and I quote) "Four Thirds." But the released specifications show that it isn't Four Thirds at all. I don't know why they're saying Four Thirds; maybe they don't know what else to call it? But yeah, it's not 4/3.
 
Barry_Green said:
I don't know what the talk is about "ZF" mount. There isn't a ZF mount, of course, there's F mount. But the guys on the show floor said specifically that it was ONLY Canon EF mount. Period. And if you look at the body, the tube that is molded out of it is a long, long tube.

Sorry to dash all the hopes of everyone who wants multiple lens mounts, but unless I'm missing something (and I very well could be) this BlackMagic is only and solely an EF mount camera. .
Click to expand...

I got that form this spec sheet: http://personal-view.com/talks/uploads/FileUpload/67/d7f3e5e42cf82966e439148a2f6a02.jpg

I don't know the original source, I thought it came from the Press Release. It says ZF and EF.

Also at :http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/blackmagiccinemacamera/

[h=2]EF Compatible Lens Mount[/h]With Blackmagic Cinema Camera you can use the most amazing optics from the world’s leading lens crafters such as Canon, Zeiss and many more. Blackmagic Cinema Camera is compatible with EF and ZF mount lenses, so you can use the lenses you already own!
 
eheath said:
hm in the interviews and website they were very specific about being "open" to everything and no limiting the camera to one lens or one codec, etc. hmm
Click to expand...
Maybe, and I hope that the models on the floor were just prototypes and that the molded case with built-in lens tube were not indicitave of the final production model. I shall keep hope alive, despite what appears to be the glaring evidence of the existing models and the published specs. Perhaps, hopefully, "everything is subject to change"? :)
 
sunburst said:
thanks,
I didnt really look at the specs too carefully on it. The idea of a Bolex didnt float my boat off the bat. I noticed Phillip
Bloom seemed to rave about it. Im way not as big a camera buff as the top dudes here. I tend to follow the best opinions on these sites - hence I own a 7D. But I AM in the market for a new camera -- so this BMD news is phenom - where do I pre Order?!
Click to expand...

Have a look here: http://www.blackmagic-design.com/uk/products/blackmagiccinemacamera/howtobuy/
Give one of the companies on that list a call or email-it's what i've done already.
 
Barry_Green said:
I don't know what the talk is about "ZF" mount. There isn't a ZF mount, of course, there's F mount. But the guys on the show floor said specifically that it was ONLY Canon EF mount. Period. And if you look at the body, the tube that is molded out of it is a long, long tube.

Sorry to dash all the hopes of everyone who wants multiple lens mounts, but unless I'm missing something (and I very well could be) this BlackMagic is only and solely an EF mount camera. Which means you will not be using 4/3 or m43 or c-mount or S16 lenses, and you won't be able to use PL primes, and you may not be able to use several (or even many) PL zooms. What you can use on an EF mount camera, is Nikon F-mount lenses; you can get a thin adapter ring. But I don't think you can adapt Nikon G lenses to Canon EF mount bodies, and there's no room for an iris lever ring (like on the Nikon adapters for the FS100 and AF100).

Looking forward to more info, but that's what it looks like to me right now.
Click to expand...

As a M43 user I would love to see these lenses used as well but I can see the point of them targeting the EF lens crowd. There is an insane amount of EF lens users out there. Maybe they are not true cinematic lenses but there are a lot of them out there and BM offered an almost evil upgrade path for Canon users which is a pretty large market. If they had to pick only one mount I guess they picked the one that would bring in more sales and shake up the industry the most in terms of user base. I hope they add new mounts before July as I would hate to dump my collection of M43 lenses and FD lenses. It sucks that all my Canon friends have the upper hand again. Ugh.
 
But then, after thinking about it for a little while, I started to hit on a few things that make me confident in my assessment that there's no free lunch. As I looked at it, I started to get pretty annoyed that it won't work FOR ME. For lots of you, maybe, but with just a minor design change it could have been perfect, but it isn't, and that's annoying because I want it to be perfect. The first thing that irked me to no end is: Canon EF mount? Seriously? I know it's great news for all of you with Canon lenses, but man, that's lousy news for those of us with PL lenses. You cannot adapt PL prime lenses to an EF body. So yeah, forget my $30,000 worth of Compact Primes, they just won't fit. Who makes a "cinema camera" that can't use cinema lenses? Grrr. But I should be able to use my ZFs, so not all is lost. Then there's the sensor size, I'm curious how people are really going to react to it being smaller than the GH2 and AF100. So many people insist that "S35 is the standard" and "full frame is magical", and this unit's sensor is about halfway between S16 and m43. Still a decent sized sensor, and I have no problem with it, but after a year of badgering about how the AF100's sensor is "too small" (even though it's huge, 4x bigger than a 2/3" camera) now this new BM comes out and it's a decent amount smaller still. So take that for what it's worth. But then the next thing that makes me grind my teeth a little is that they made it with a non-interchangeable and non-adaptable lens mount so all my m43 glass (which would easily cover the BM's smaller sensor) cannot possibly be used. And neither can my S16 glass. Why? Why make a fixed mount that juts two inches out of the body, which is all basically wasted space? Sigh. And the sensor's in an odd size, being halfway between S16 and m43. If it was S16 size, we could use S16 glass, but it's bigger than S16, so no S16 lenses will work. Won't make any difference to a lot of you who don't have S16 glass, but it's annoying to have a delightful 17-70 T2.2 Angenieux cinema zoom that can't be used, but it's soooo close.
Click to expand...

It's always fun to see what you're thinking Barry. Thanks for sharing. Simply put, Barry is allowed to be human. These are all gripes that are specific to you and I don't know how else you're supposed to see the world. Fair enough.

As for me....I'm enjoying my free lunch! lol

  • No PL glass for me, so no problem. Yep, I have EOS glass. Nothing excessive, but I'll be glad to use it for sure.
  • Not a MAC guy either, but, I'll use the work-arounds that people come up with, or build a "Hackintosh" lol.
  • As for the sensor, this guy named "Barry Green" convinced me that M4/3rds is PLENTY BIG ENOUGH. (You should read some of his posts....they are rather educational.) So, this should work in most if not all circumstances.
  • I only own 1 M4/3rds lens, so I don't have any heartburn there....but I'm just willing to bet that before it's all said and done, there will be a M4/3rds lens work-around, lol.
  • I've been talking myself out of buying a 11-16 Tokina for long enough, (for my photography...I shoot Canon, lol).....and now I will shoot 12bit RAW on two lenses for now (to start), Tokina 11-16, and the Tamron 17-50: 27-100mm F2.8 from two lenses (appx?) Sounds like a yummy free lunch.


I'm obviously kidding. I couldn't respect anyone more than Barry Green.

I'm certain that this camera will NOT be perfect and will NOT fit everyone's existing glass collection, hardware configuration, shooting style, budget constraints, etc....but it is CERTAINLY the biggest thing to hit "Dodge" in a VERY LONG TIME.

Congrats to us all!!!! Mad love to DVXUsers everywhere!

ps....I'm glad I cancelled my DBolex too, Barry. Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Thomas Smet said:
As a M43 user I would love to see these lenses used as well but I can see the point of them targeting the EF lens crowd. There is an insane amount of EF lens users out there. Maybe they are not true cinematic lenses but there are a lot of them out there and BM offered an almost evil upgrade path for Canon users which is a pretty large market. If they had to pick only one mount I guess they picked the one that would bring in more sales and shake up the industry the most in terms of user base.
Click to expand...
Oh, I totally agree. They probably made the wisest business decision from their perspective, and I don't begrudge them that. I just wish that they could have designed it with an interchangeable mount so that everyone could be happy.

Still, I've got my set of ZFs, so I can make it work, I just think it's a little odd to represent it as a "cinema camera" and not allow the use of genuine cinema lenses. But I also fully recognize that people in the market for a $2999 raw camera aren't likely to be using $20,000 lenses on it, they're much more likely to be upgrading from a DSLR, and most of those (for video use) are Canon, so ... it's a totally logical decision, just a personally inconvenient one. But you can't win 'em all!
 
HHL said:
It's always fun to see what you're thinking Barry. Thanks for sharing. Simply put, Barry is allowed to be human. These are all gripes that are specific to you and I don't know how else you're supposed to see the world. Fair enough.
Click to expand...
Glad to see that came through. I totally recognize that my particular frustrations are MY frustrations and while there may be some that share them, there are lots of folks (like you) who won't be bothered at all and will in fact embrace it specifically for those design choices.

It's all choices, you can't please everyone. Even so, I can probably make it work fine, and I'm just grumbling. Considering the price, I have no right to grumble... :thumbsup:

ps....I'm glad I cancelled my DBolex too, Barry. Cheers!
Click to expand...
You did??? I'm shocked. I thought you were sooooooooooooooo sold! I kind of was too, up until I got the email where they said they didn't know if putting an OLPF in or not was the right thing to do. At that point it was like -- whoa -- you guys are way, way too premature with this, so I stepped out. Never thought you would though.

Okay, so here's the weird thing -- in the last month we've seen the announcements of the Digital Bolex (which took off just about as much as the Blackmagic) and then the FS700 (which everyone had to have) and now the BlackMagic (which you've just proclaimed as, and I quote, "CERTAINLY the biggest thing to hit "Dodge" in a VERY LONG TIME.") And that's all in the space of about a month... not to mention that I had already put a deposit down on the C300, only to see the announcement of an FS700 and a C500... that deposit is now on hold, obviously.

I'm not ready to proclaim the BM as the biggest thing quite yet, I think we've got to digest some of this and -- who knows what we'll see announced in the next month? But undoubtedly, today was BlackMagic's day, they definitely won the most-exciting-announcement award hands down.
 
I would be very surprised if a solution doesn't hits the market to solve the lens compatibility issue given how popular this product will end up being.
 
People are clamoring for s35 like they could just pop the larger sensor in there. But they don't seem to consider that the data throughput quadruples, correct? So it's not as simple as just putting a larger sensor in there and calling it good. The rest of the guts would need to be upgraded as well. That would obviously kill their price point.

As for the "EF Only" thing, I surmise this also had to do with the lens control protocols. From the specs, this thing fully controls IZF on all EOS lenses, so maybe that played a part in them shunning other lens mounts. Having electronic control over the lens is MASSIVE.
 
While I really like the BM, I think I am going with the FS700. The only thing keeping me from a pre-order is I want to see the new cinegamma settings and see if I can tame the highlight handling more to my liking. Other than that, it hits more points for me than the BM. That said, again, this is an AWESOME camera in specs so far, and I really look forward to seeing where they go with this even in future models. To have a start like this and a price point like this, my hat is off to them.
 
Gary Stone said:
People are clamoring for s35 like they could just pop the larger sensor in there. But they don't seem to consider that the data throughput quadruples, correct? So it's not as simple as just putting a larger sensor in there and calling it good. The rest of the guts would need to be upgraded as well. That would obviously kill their price point.

As for the "EF Only" thing, I surmise this also had to do with the lens control protocols. From the specs, this thing fully controls IZF on all EOS lenses, so maybe that played a part in them shunning other lens mounts. Having electronic control over the lens is MASSIVE.
Click to expand...

No, data throughput is all relative to the pixel count. So if they kept the same pixel count and used a larger sensor, the data throughput would be the same AND possibly better in low light (not all pixels are created equal).

Now, given it's larger, the data has further to go, and the wells are larger, I'd say power consumption would be higher and heat more of an issue as well, but again, that isn't an issue of processing power, but cooling and current draw.
 
Rick Burnett said:
No, data throughput is all relative to the pixel count. So if they kept the same pixel count and used a larger sensor, the data throughput would be the same AND possibly better in low light (not all pixels are created equal).

Now, given it's larger, the data has further to go, and the wells are larger, I'd say power consumption would be higher and heat more of an issue as well, but again, that isn't an issue of processing power, but cooling and current draw.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. Thanks for the info!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top