Blackmagic Pocket 6K Pro Stabilization Final Test

thefilmaddict

thefilmaddict

Veteran
I did another stabilization test for the purpose of handholding the pocket 6k pro and getting results that aren't shaky. This test looks at each shot in the following 4 ways: with no stabilization, with lens stabilization, with gyro stabilization and with lens and perspective stabilization combined. Please watch this test and let me know which one looks the best to you...




https://youtu.be/-lOPit4P0DQ
 
I've got to make a choice, since I will only be able to travel with the camera, a battery and a lens. Here's what I've seen from this test (and please tell me if you see something different)...

1. Shooting without stabilization is a bit shaky with that camera. I don't love it. I think the shakiness will be distracting.

2. Gyro stabilization works pretty darn well, which is good for using a cinema lens. The downside is, it crops the image a bit, so that could be a problem at times, but will probably be fine most of the time.

3. Using lens stabilization definitely helps. To me, it's not quite as good as Gyro stabilization, but at least it doesn't crop anything as far as I can tell. The bad thing is, I would have to use a photo lens with built in IS. They are fine, but I prefer the look of a cine lens.

4. The method where I mixed lens stabilization with resole stabilization isn't reliable. The resolve stabilization sometimes caused weird things to happen in the shot.

If you were shooting part of a doc with minimal gear, which method would you use?
 
Unless the documentary is filled with a bunch of handheld static shots, this is really the wrong camera for a traditional documentary project.

The gyro stabilization will likely be the best option to use with a cine lens but you may find that none of them will ever be free of any artifacts, weirdness at any random time.
 
That would be best, especially if you slow it down, but the camera is too light for muscle strength to matter much.

It's best when the cameras are heavier with a fast RS b/c then the stabilization looks more natural and you don't get as many of those wonky jitters. But those are not really travel-friendly cameras.
 
Steady handheld shots are something I know about. I'll give you my opinions but what I would suggest for you is to take along the camera you want, not the one you feel forced to take. I have the Pocket 6K and also the Ursa 12k and I can tell you that for air travel, the 6K isn't really any easier than the 12K. Once you break down the 12K from the lens and viewfinder, it stows easily under a seat in a smaller backpack, the attached v-mount easily passes TSA checkpoints with an extra battery, you may even be able to charge it with D-tap but in any case you can put the charger inside checked baggage.

You should consider that back in the day the Washington Press Corps seldom had zoom lenses either, Lebowitz didn't either until more recently, the one lens indespensable was the "normal" length, 50mm for FF or 35mm for S-35 (U12K). A 35mm focal length on the U12K will look great everywhere because it's the way your eyes see the world, and you're in luck because it's sharp, fast, small, lightweight, inexpensive and *stabilized*, Canon EF-35mm f/2.0 IS. That one prime lens can work everywhere for anything in any light.

The U12K is ISO invariant, there is no gain. It has the exact same DR at any ISO, all that changes is the distribution of stops of latitude above and below middle gray. Choosing ISO is thus about understanding where you need your stops of latitude, more in the highlights (3200), or more in the shadows (400). Slightly more noise will be evident at high ISO settings not because of added gain but because the noise floor changes depending on the ISO setting. In considering those factors, my opinion is that the U12K is as good or nearly so as the dual gain P6K, without compromising DR. The P6K loses DR in the high gain mode. You can look at the linked YouTube and tell me, shot at night, 12K, 60 FPS, 3200 ISO, 180 degree shutter, f/2.0-5.6. Most of the shots were at f/3.5. I could have made them brighter but this is the way my naked eyes showed the scene to me. All the range and color of the lights was retained because ISO 3200 maintains 8 stops of latitude above middle gray.

So how does any of that apply to stabilization? First of all, shooting the U12K from the shoulder is steadier than the P6K from a handhold. Neither camera has IBIS but neither are there concerns about corner warping. OIS is natural and preferable. OIS works counter to gyro stabilization so you can't use them together. The gyro is not aware that the lens OIS is doing its own thing. You have to choose. 45 degree and faster shutter angles are a compromise forced on you by choosing Gyro stabilization. With OIS only, regular stabilization in Resolve remains compatible without artifacts so long as you choose "Translation" and skip Perspective or Similarity; you maintain control over the amount of cropping. In other words, my opinion on gyro stabilization is that it's no better than OIS+Translation under your control of smoothness, strength and cropping. There are plenty of other reasons that call for cropping besides stabilization, correcting a tilted horizon, removing a distracting object. But from my video below, you can't know what was cropped and what wasn't, along with Translation stabilization + OIS used in some shots but not others, all shot from the shoulder.

Lastly, for anything you can't do with a U12K or P6K Pro, there is the iPhone 4K which is more than adequate for many situations with none of the fuss.


​​​​​​​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top