Digital Bolex has stopped making cameras!

U

ultramaze

Active member
So sad to see them go. Digital Bolex was one of my favorite cameras to work with and shoot on. A truly remarkable image and amazing feat to be able to pull off. My hat off to Elle and the DB team for being able to make this happen. Time to get a hold of one and keep it under lock and key! :) I will always consider the camera when the project calls for it. Love the image and love what they have done.

https://www.digitalbolex.com/thank-you/
 
It's too bad that small manufacturers can so easily be pushed to the brink by, for example, "the discontinuation of a part, a materials shortage, or rising cost to manufacture when facilities close or require large minimum orders to continue production."

I think Joe and Elle and I have a lot of the same ideals. Elle says, "What happens if the sensor you've been waiting for to make your next camera simply doesn't exist?" I know, right? My best guess is that they were looking for a 4K S35 sensor with global shutter. Still, I think the Sony IMX174 sensor would have been a nice upgrade: 16mm, global shutter, 12 stops, and at least 120 frames per second at full resolution --- but it's CMOS instead of CCD, so I would think easier to implement and drawing less electricity.
 
Sad. Not shocked though.

They were so insistent that 4K wasn't the way to go, I remember reading multiple articles Joe would argue about 4K being years and years away when it was really right on top of releasing a niche camera. Obviously trying to protect his project, but just came off the wrong way to many I think. Hopefully they can find a way to get things rolling again.

Heck they're still trying to argue it in their good bye letter.
 
Well, I didn't buy one, but not because it was just 2K. 2K is all right with me.

I thought it was very, very good. But it wasn't quite there. In fact, I am not sure I want Joe or Elle to read this, because I know they broke their backs making it. But for me I think I might have bought it if it was a little smaller, had a little higher frame rates, and was a little cheaper. I'm thinking something the shape and size of, say, the Sony PXW-X70 with the lens sawed off, for $2,000, and 60p, while retaining global shutter and decent dynamic range. I'm sure they did it for the best price they could, I guess with that CCD in there and the low volumes. Maybe some day the parts will be cheap enough.
 
Last edited:
I don't think they had a chance once Blackmagic swooped in and started releasing cameras. Digital Bolex was the first announced affordable raw camera but by the time they finally started shipping, the BMPCC existed at less than half the price and with similar specs. I wanted to get a D16, but it was so hard to justify the cost when you could get 90% of the features for a grand.
 
What a pity. I didn't like their final product (not enough DR) but it was a very brave move and, unlike many such projects, they actually delivered.
 
electricjib said:
.... They were so insistent that 4K wasn't the way to go, I remember reading multiple articles Joe would argue about 4K being years and years away when it was really right on top of releasing a niche camera. Obviously trying to protect his project, but just came off the wrong way to many I think...
Click to expand...
Joe was arguing with me! (on a different site)

The DB really got killed by the GH4 first (a huge seller), then by the Cinema Cam and the Pocket Cam, NX1, A7s and, finally, by A7sII and A6300. To me, theirs was a lost cause from the start. The only way for an independent to survive is not to butt heads with the "meat of the market" occupied by the Japanese conglomerates. Jannard took the high end niche and he, obviously, had one heck of a financial backer - himself! There may have been a chance for Digital Bolex if it wasn't a Digital Bolex but something like KineFinity but with some money behind them.

It's like with cars. You can hand build Koenigsegg for the super-rich but the Civics and the Tercels will always have to come from the big boys.

Elvis Deane said:
I don't think they had a chance once Blackmagic swooped in and started releasing cameras. Digital Bolex was the first announced affordable raw camera but by the time they finally started shipping, the BMPCC existed at less than half the price and with similar specs. I wanted to get a D16, but it was so hard to justify the cost when you could get 90% of the features for a grand.
Click to expand...
Black Magic is the next on the list. FS5 (w/external recorder) is already delivering a 4K Raw for roughly the same amount as URSA 4.6K Mini but without URSA's numerous "quirks". The low end/sub-$10,000 4K was a tempting niche for a couple of years. It is now being filled up by the major camera manufacturers. BMD could go above that - into 6K/8K - but that market won't be big for a while and Sony, Canon and Panasonic are likely to be there soon anyway. And then there'll be no real reason to want BMD.
 
Last edited:
DLD said:
Joe was arguing with me! (on a different site)

The DB really got killed by the GH4 first (a huge seller), then by the Cinema Cam and the Pocket Cam, NX1, A7s and, finally, by A7sII and A6300. To me, theirs was a lost cause from the start. The only way for an independent to survive is not to butt heads with the "meat of the market" occupied by the Japanese conglomerates. Jannard took the high end niche and he, obviously, had one heck of a financial backer - himself! There may have been a chance for Digital Bolex if it wasn't a Digital Bolex but something like KineFinity but with some money behind them.

It's like with cars. You can hand build Koenigsegg for the super-rich but the Civics and the Tercels will always have to come from the big boys.

Black Magic is the next on the list. FS5 (w/external recorder) is already delivering a 4K Raw for roughly the same amount as URSA 4.6K Mini but without URSA's numerous "quirks". The low end/sub-$10,000 4K was a tempting niche for a couple of years. It is now being filled up by the major camera manufacturers. BMD could go above that - into 6K/8K - but that market won't be big for a while and Sony, Canon and Panasonic are likely to be there soon anyway. And then there'll be no real reason to want BMD.
Click to expand...

Thats my point. You can't argue with the clients. It was in articles all over the place, even shutting down they're still arguing it.

I tried the DB, and honestly their footage, and post processing was way more complex and difficult than just editing 4K .r3d files natively in PP. They tried so hard to argue the value of 2K (cough their camera) to keep sales up. It came off with more than one or two potential buyers as arrogant.

I get the point of supporting companies, but it helps when the company is open minded.
 
Tech is a rough business. By the time you announce, you're already obsolete. If DB had released earlier they might have had a chance. Too bad they didn't make it.
Much respect for trying and fighting the fight.
 
NorBro said:
BMD will never stop making cameras...they aren't going anywhere.
Click to expand...
They have had a very hard time with their quality control. Their specs were way ahead of the market and that's what allowed to ship a lot of units while the Japanese seemed to be barely catching up. Now, the specs/performance/value is similar while the quality control isn't.

From the look of things, PhotoKina will have a lot of announcements that could have been made at the NAB. Canon just dropped $4,000 off C300 MKII (as a promotion, they say, from $16,000 down to $12,000). There's a new 4K Fuji hybrid, going for the GH4 and A6300 niche. Rumors of the higher end cameras also abound. Within a couple of months, the need to have any BMD product will be gone.*

* Technically speaking, Canon can release a much bandied about C200 (or, C100 MKII, as it were) as a stripped down version of C300 MKII and pretty much destroy the URSA Mini niche at any moment. And the Pocket cam niche will be eaten up by A6300, Fuji XT2 and GH5. And that's it for BMD.
 
electricjib said:
Thats my point. You can't argue with the clients. It was in articles all over the place, even shutting down they're still arguing it.

I tried the DB, and honestly their footage, and post processing was way more complex and difficult than just editing 4K .r3d files natively in PP. They tried so hard to argue the value of 2K (cough their camera) to keep sales up. It came off with more than one or two potential buyers as arrogant.

I get the point of supporting companies, but it helps when the company is open minded.
Click to expand...

The D16 is aimed at creative independent film makers, not the fad driven commercial production market. It filled a niche market need not being addressed by the big camera makers for in depth image quality at a modest price. Nothing shooting compressed 8 bit AVC video can begin to touch it for the money. The only cameras in Sony's line that can are the F55 and F65.
There is a lot more to IQ than just resolution. I would rather have flawless 2k with none of the common digital video artifacts than 4k with them.
Yes the D16 does take a very different skill set compared to common video cameras with automated functions. But it is at the same time very simple if one has at least a basic understanding of photographic fundamentals that are independent of the technology used, like how to use a light meter, use Adams zone exposure techniques, understand basic lighting and color theory. It is as close to a pure simple photographic instrument as one will find in the digital age.
I only have to concern myself with what is happening in front of my D16. What the light is doing, composition, focus, movement. I don't have to think about luts, log exposures, white balance, in camera menu settings at all beyond picking the initial ISO setting to match scene conditions. I shoot it as I would a film camera. That is what it was designed to replace.
The D16 is nearly completely free of common compressed digital video artifacts. Aliasing, chroma moire, rolling shutter jello, fixed pattern noise, banding, chroma bleed on saturated warm colors.
It has an extremely wide very refined color gamut that far exceeds REC709, DCI-P3, even Adobe RGB. It captures fully time coherent frames with exceptional motion quality. It has an honest usable 12 stop dynamic range when shot at 200-400 ISO, comparable to the Red MX generation sensors. At the lower end of the DR scale it degrades gracefully into a very fine grained random noise while still maintaining color and texture into deep shadows.
I will keep using mine until it dies or until something equally affordable that can match or exceed its IQ in depth comes along. In the two years I have had mine, nothing has. It is a beautiful handy well balanced little camera that is a pure joy to shoot.

A few image samples:

25893716885_2e1d739229_o.jpg
24303048843_d0d8654d9a_o.jpg
17262609766_b0351767dd_o.jpg
17007448278_4bddeedac5_o.jpg
16636390280_18750ce8cf_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
Razz16mm said:
The D16 is aimed at creative independent film makers, not the fad driven commercial production market. It filled a niche market need not being addressed by the big camera makers for in depth image quality at a modest price. Nothing shooting compressed 8 bit AVC video can begin to touch it for the money. The only cameras in Sony's line that can are the F55 and F65.
There is a lot more to IQ than just resolution. I would rather have flawless 2k with none of the common digital video artifacts than 4k with them.
Yes the D16 does take a very different skill set compared to common video cameras with automated functions. But it is at the same time very simple if one has at least a basic understanding of photographic fundamentals that are independent of the technology used, like how to use a light meter, use Adams zone exposure techniques, understand basic lighting and color theory. It is as close to a pure simple photographic instrument as one will find in the digital age.
I only have to concern myself with what is happening in front of my D16. What the light is doing, composition, focus, movement. I don't have to think about luts, log exposures, white balance, in camera menu settings at all beyond picking the initial ISO setting to match scene conditions. I shoot it as I would a film camera. That is what it was designed to replace.
The D16 is nearly completely free of common compressed digital video artifacts. Aliasing, chroma moire, rolling shutter jello, fixed pattern noise, banding, chroma bleed on saturated warm colors.
It has an extremely wide very refined color gamut that far exceeds REC709, DCI-P3, even Adobe RGB. It captures fully time coherent frames with exceptional motion quality. It has an honest usable 12 stop dynamic range when shot at 200-400 ISO, comparable to the Red MX generation sensors. At the lower end of the DR scale it degrades gracefully into a very fine grained random noise while still maintaining color and texture into deep shadows.
I will keep using mine until it dies or until something equally affordable that can match or exceed its IQ in depth comes along. In the two years I have had mine, nothing has. It is a beautiful handy well balanced little camera that is a pure joy to shoot.

A few image samples:
Click to expand...

Please understand I have nothing against the D16 camera, or DB. It was just the mindset that was put out in articles and other places online. I didn't personally find the images appealing I saw. Some stuff looked awesome. But you put enough cameras out it'll get in some proper hands eventually.
 
electricjib said:
Please understand I have nothing against the D16 camera, or DB. It was just the mindset that was put out in articles and other places online. I didn't personally find the images appealing I saw. Some stuff looked awesome. But you put enough cameras out it'll get in some proper hands eventually.
Click to expand...

It was always going to be a niche market camera by intent, like the Ikonoskop before it at twice the price. Even niche markets have their limits when it comes to product cost. Unfortunately this is an expensive camera to make, production costs were apparently taking a spike upwards for the next run making its market appeal at a higher price questionable in a 4k market. They are not going bankrupt like Ikonskop did. They made a business decision to end production now. Ienso is the technical company that designed and manufactured the camera, one among many such projects they contract for different clients. We are all discussing ways of crowd funding presales for upgrades and potential new designs down the road. But there is no comparable open market 4k sensor at the moment.
 
I've owned many (too many) BM cameras. The company needs improvement everywhere; no doubt.

But it's not all about the specs on paper. Image is king, and a variety of cameras with great-looking specs, features, ergonomics, etc. may have a mediocre image.

DLD said:
They have had a very hard time with their quality control. Their specs were way ahead of the market and that's what allowed to ship a lot of units while the Japanese seemed to be barely catching up. Now, the specs/performance/value is similar while the quality control isn't.

From the look of things, PhotoKina will have a lot of announcements that could have been made at the NAB. Canon just dropped $4,000 off C300 MKII (as a promotion, they say, from $16,000 down to $12,000). There's a new 4K Fuji hybrid, going for the GH4 and A6300 niche. Rumors of the higher end cameras also abound. Within a couple of months, the need to have any BMD product will be gone.*

* Technically speaking, Canon can release a much bandied about C200 (or, C100 MKII, as it were) as a stripped down version of C300 MKII and pretty much destroy the URSA Mini niche at any moment. And the Pocket cam niche will be eaten up by A6300, Fuji XT2 and GH5. And that's it for BMD.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top