BMD 6K Pocket Cinema Camera

haha...oh, I could have easily bought one, but it's not for me though.

But 5 years ago I'd be up all night reading and thinking about it.
 
NorBro said:
Because 10,000,000 others use the lenses.

So it's either make a camera for 10 people, or 10 million.
Click to expand...

Its just a reallly bad engineering choice. Having all that space between the rear element and chip compromises everything. They would be better with canon R or whatever it is. Id go MFT myself.

Of course if the AF is really great that might be a different thing.
 
I mean...it's been like 30 years, lol.

But the RF mount should be the future; just need time to transition people, which could take a while for Canon to do that.
 
Well, in terms of lens options it would have the most in the world with the EF mount, but maybe just not the ones you're personally interested in.

There are no other choices.

- BM is not borrowing 'Variable Scan Mapping' technology from JVC
- PL makes no money for anyone besides ARRI
- Sony is not letting them use the E-mount
- Camera was probably finished way before the RF mount was announced
- Nikon...no.

The EF mount is always the most logical choice no matter how you/we feel about it.
 
Grug said:
Why an EF mount?! WHY?!

These things are no good to me if I can't pop normal lenses on them :/
Click to expand...

Totally agreed.

Nothing with a fixed EF mount should call itself a cinema camera.
 
Make a dual ISO ‘Sensor in a Box’ with ProRes Raw, dual SDI, swappable lens mount, & mini V-Mount battery plate, then take my money.
 
Mainly because the same people putting EF lens mounts on cameras, are also the same kind of people that generally make the sensor in a box.

Most people are very much on the same page when it comes to ergos and features.
 
Bern Caughey said:
Make a dual ISO ‘Sensor in a Box’ with ProRes Raw, dual SDI, swappable lens mount, & mini V-Mount battery plate, then take my money.
Click to expand...

I am on board. Still have to get more specific, because i can think of ways that most of the companies would mess that up.
 
morgan_moore said:
Its just a reallly bad engineering choice. Having all that space between the rear element and chip compromises everything. They would be better with canon R or whatever it is. Id go MFT myself.

Of course if the AF is really great that might be a different thing.
Click to expand...


I’m actually surprised why they don’t just leave it up to 3rd party. No mount. Just screw holes and specs. Have third parties on board before launch.
 
Per usual it's all about $$$ and nothing else.

You fix an EF mount on your camera or offer one for it (or make a separate model with it) if you would like to make more money.

As I say at least once a week, PL is only for the 1%. It would be no problem if the mount had affordable options, but those lenses are too expensive for most people.

It's best to just take a look at the industry. We saw ARRI offer an EF mount for the AMIRA and the ALEXA Mini, and RED was smart enough to jump in right away after probably realizing PL-only cameras were not going to work for a new company (think AJA CION...an absolutely brutal decision), and then Blackmagic, Panasonic, Kinefinity and Z CAM all joined.

Everyone who has a cinema camera and is still in business has an EF mount option besides Sony...and they are Canon's direct competition (more than anyone else).
 
NorBro said:
Well, in terms of lens options it would have the most in the world with the EF mount, but maybe just not the ones you're personally interested in.



The EF mount is always the most logical choice no matter how you/we feel about it.
Click to expand...

You missed MFT - short FFD, open system S35 covered.
Accepts canon, nikon PL and many others.

There are very few decent canon lenses once you do 'cinema' which requires a focus puller and hard stops and a matte box. Most canon lenses lack hards stops and many zooms telescope so dont work with a matte box.
Even the ubiquoutous 24-105 only becomes useful with speedbooster.

This is a 'cinema' camera right?

If the camera had ND and really good AF then canon could make sense. It could be a great event camera (I hesitate to say ENG because of the lack of audio etc)
 
NorBro said:
Per usual it's all about $$$ and nothing else.

You fix an EF mount on your camera or offer one for it (or make a separate model with it) if you would like to make more money.

As I say at least once a week, PL is only for the 1%. It would be no problem if the mount had affordable options, but those lenses are too expensive for most people.

It's best to just take a look at the industry. We saw ARRI offer an EF mount for the AMIRA and the ALEXA Mini, and RED was smart enough to jump in right away after probably realizing PL-only cameras were not going to work for a new company (think AJA CION...an absolutely brutal decision), and then Blackmagic, Panasonic, Kinefinity and Z CAM all joined.

Everyone who has a cinema camera and is still in business has an EF mount option besides Sony...and they are Canon's direct competition (more than anyone else).
Click to expand...

Well, sorta. Sony doesn’t make an EF mount themselves, but they’re not stupid. You can fit an EF adapter on pretty much any of their FZ or E mount cameras*. They even used to bundle the Optitek EF adapter in a package with F55/5, at least here in the US.


*I think most of us can agree that Canon glass is used on Sony Cine cameras, like Fs7 & F55/5(and from my observations the A7 series when shooting video), by orders of magnitude more than Sony glass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top