GH3 GH3 or Black Magic Camera?

Ryan-Guy said:
This... is ideal and would make the camera MUCH MUCH more practical for other types of gigs besides cinema. I'm buying it becuase I'm moving into commercials and gigs that will allow me the on-set set-up and post time, however if the majority of my work were more corporate stuff or weddings, run-n-gun docs, etc, the GH3/mkIII/c100/fs1-700/ would all be my choices over the BMC.
Click to expand...

I came to the conclusion long ago that nearly everything ergonomically and functionally "inept" about a camera can be fixed with a few dollars, but whatever image is coming out of it--short of adding on an external recorder, is what you're stuck with no matter how much you shine it in post.

I've seen some pretty decent looking GH3 stuff, none of it exists online unfortunately (I'm sure some new stuff will pop up before thanksgiving/release date time) but none of it is anywhere near Blackmagic IQ. Heck, I haven't seen anything from any camera under C300 (I don't like the F3 image personally) that gets to this level.

So I'm an odd voice here xD in the end as long as people know WHY they're choosing their tool then they're all good.
 
For tight-budget corporate work, I'd absolutely take the BMC - having a ProRes/DNxHD shoot-to-edit workflow saves so much time in post, it's a no-brainer.
 
Grug said:
For tight-budget corporate work, I'd absolutely take the BMC - having a ProRes/DNxHD shoot-to-edit workflow saves so much time in post, it's a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

I thought so too. Some people don't need to transcode since they're on premiere or vegas I suppose, but I'm still FCP, the idea of not having to convert anything, going right to the edit...
 
Kholi said:
I thought so too. Some people don't need to transcode since they're on premiere or vegas I suppose, but I'm still FCP, the idea of not having to convert anything, going right to the edit...
Click to expand...

Isn't the GH3 going to make .mov files? Did I miss something on this?
 
Grug said:
For tight-budget corporate work, I'd absolutely take the BMC - having a ProRes/DNxHD shoot-to-edit workflow saves so much time in post, it's a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

Kholi said:
I thought so too. Some people don't need to transcode since they're on premiere or vegas I suppose, but I'm still FCP, the idea of not having to convert anything, going right to the edit...
Click to expand...

Exactly. That feature is great for FCP users, but many of us haven't really been dealing with this workflow limitation. Therefore, I wouldn't consider the BMCC a better option for that reason alone. Thankfully, there ARE plenty of other legitimate reasons to chose it. In the right situation.
 
Last edited:
P13 said:
It's no such thing, having passive 4/3 is a limitation as that puts a load of lenses out of use straight away, including some especially good Olympus ones. Not having dual media means you're putting anything you record "at risk" as SSDs and any form of media can fail, true the BMC isn't alone in this, but it's an issue for someone like myself coming from Canon camcorders where having a ready made backup is standard practice. Having to depend on 3rd party power options is a compromise and a work around. These work arounds you sometimes expect with SLRs but you don't expect with professional camcorders, my point is simply it doesn't tick all the boxes of either option and I'm sure these issues will be resolved in a future model. For me the BMC right now is on an uneasy middleground.

I use mainly manual glass, Voigtländer & SLR Magic, but being forced to only have that option is a limitation, with my GH2, at least I can put it on a small rig, I have a loupe and follow focus and so working with manual glass isn't such an issue, but the BMC doesn't have a form factor that fits this use comfortably especially with power and an EVF hanging off, I can see it being a problem, it's most certainly an expensive extra cost to resolve properly.
Click to expand...

You're still doing it. You're still conflating your preferences to be universal requirements, and saying kick-*ss BMCC features are somehow "limitations".

For example, most cameras designed for use with removable lenses have only 1 built-in lens mount option, and obviously only 1 sensor size. Is a C300 "limited" because you can't use most C-mount lenses on it, or probably any lens designed for a 16mm film cam?

A camera might be unusually flexible in a certain way, such as RED's relatively expensive interchangeable lens mount, but that's a plus in RED's favor, not a "limitation" of other cameras. No one thinks of a C300 as being "limited" because it can't mount certain lenses never intended for use with it.

As for dual media, can we count on more than one hand video cameras that shoot >2.5K 12-bit uncompressed RAW video and which can record to built-in dual media? On 1 or 2 fingers? Any? I don't know the answer, but in a way, that's the point: Recording 2.5K 12-bit uncompressed RAW video to dual media, if it exists, is exceedingly rare. Calling this a "limitation" of the BMCC is mistaken. Quite the opposite: It's a bloody miracle the BMCC records 2.5K 12-bit uncompressed RAW at all, and that BMD is selling the thing for only $3K, including an industrial-strength software bundle.

True, it would be fantabulous if BMD enabled a capability to record the BMCC's uncompressed RAW video at full res & full color depth to dual media for safety. I get that. It would be awesome. But to say because it doesn't have that exceeding rare capability, that it's a kind of "limitation" is a bit much.

It's worth mentioning that the BMCC does allow you to record totally clean, bogg-standard 1080p 10-bit 4:2:2 (w. log or Rec.709 gamma) video out its HD-SDI port to an external recorder, independent of the camera's internal recording format settings. Sure, it's not 2.5K 12-bit uncompressed RAW video, but you can record that gorgeous 1080p on anything you want as a backup. That's worth something, right?

As for external power: Most users of pro video cameras rely on 3rd party external power solutions, because the OEM solutions are insanely over-priced or under-featured. Sure, there are exceptions, but the kinds of power systems I mentioned in my previous post are the norm, not some kind of weird "limitation". Plus, the BMCC features a built-in, fully automatic uninterruptible 90-minute battery power "backup" system (including built-in recharging). The latter being a capability that other pro video cameras require relatively expensive 3rd party solutions to provide. And yet again, you think the BMCC has some kind of "limitation" concerning battery power?

As I say in my blog post, people who say kick-*ss BMCC features are "limitations" simply haven't thought it through.

Of course, at no point have I said the BMCC is perfect for every application. Far from it. No camera is. But I don't go around saying, for example, a 5DM3 is somehow "limited" because it doesn't record RAW video, etc.

The BMCC is just about perfectly implemented for the tasks for which it was designed, and importantly, at its price point. Sure, I hope BMD adds a few minor tweaks via future firmware updates (which BMD has already started doing with the v.1.1 firmware update), but as-is it's about perfect for its primary purpose, includes an awesome software bundle, and sells for an industry-shaking price.

If only we could get our hands on the damn thing. ;-)

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
GH3 or BMC ?
Neither
I hate to be a killjoy but once 'some' camera maker finally gets the form-factor/feature set formula right , everything that came before will seem like a , ahem, 'no brainer' Beta.
I sense the tide moving in the direction some of us were hoping for when all the hype about Scarlet first surfaced, but the GH3 is still very much a transitional ( 'hybrid' is too polite) machine. BMC is an interesting angle on selling SSD drives but has some obvious Usability issues IMHO.
For me it comes down to the sensor. S35 is the magic sensor size for me and unfortunately, good cameras that deliver that are not priced inn the GH3/BMC bracket.
My druthers would be to pick up a couple of matched GH2 bods and the two new Lumix zooms , make some money and wait.
 
Zephyrnoid said:
... S35 is the magic sensor size for me and unfortunately, good cameras that deliver that are not priced inn the GH3/BMC bracket. ...
Click to expand...

I agree.

My guess is that BMD and other companies are aiming for NAB 2014 to announce* BMCC-like video cameras that are "S35-ish, 4K-ish, 12-bit-ish, 13-stop-ish, uncompressed-ish @ $4K-ish".

I'll actually be very surprised if cams like that aren't announced at NAB 2014. Mark your calendars. :-)

*And hoping to ship them within 90-days of the announcement; "hoping" being the operative word. ;-)
 
Sensor size has NOTHING to do with this.... I shot 5d, 7d, GH2, etc..... At the end of the Day you just buy wider/longer lenses. I've seen image quality from the Smaller sensor BMCCC that NO dslr can match, Fact. The closest I can think is GH2 with high 176mb Hack, but even then the camera in not 100% stable at those rates.
I don't care what sensor size I shoot, only thing that matters is Image quality and the cost associated.

BMCC is an awesome camera, I don't think it's form factor though works for the kind of work I do though and that's why GH2 is still king for many many jobs where you need nice quality and putting the camera in a tight spot.
 
Peter J. DeCrescenzo said:
As for external power: Most users of pro video cameras rely on 3rd party external power solutions
Click to expand...

Ummm...I'm curious what your definition of "pro video camera" is on this one. Until the BMCC came around, I've never heard of a camera that requires an external power solution. (Keeping mind that Anton Bower batteries connect directly to the camera, so would not be considered 'external' as such.)

That you can't replace the BMCC's internal battery, or attach one to the camera itself for handheld work, is very much a new and limiting design at this price point.
 
Jim Simon said:
Ummm...I'm curious what your definition of "pro video camera" is on this one. Until the BMCC came around, I've never heard of a camera that requires an external power solution. (Keeping mind that Anton Bower batteries connect directly to the camera, so would not be considered 'external' as such.) ...
Click to expand...

I've been using AB gold-mount (and v-lock) batteries for more than 15 years, and I've always thought of them as external batteries. They obviously don't tuck inside the camera body itself, as is the case with most consumer & prosumer camcorders.

Jim Simon said:
.... That you can't replace the BMCC's internal battery, or attach one to the camera itself for handheld work, is very much a new and limiting design at this price point.
Click to expand...

The BMCC's internal battery power feature is what it is, and myself and many others think it's a truly clever and useful feature.

As I've mentioned more than once, there are also numerous external battery solutions for use with the BMCC, with new ones announced almost weekly, including small units (Hawk-Woods, Ikan, etc.) that attach directly to the top or the bottom of the camera ... eerily similar to how AB or v-lock batteries attach to a pro camcorder ...
 
I can see using the BMCC's internal battery for a quick grab shot, but mostly think of it at a hot swap battery. Not having to shut down while swapping external batteries is a great feature, & requires a bit of a juggling act with cameras like the Alexa.
 
The answer is easy: both. First get the GH3 in november, earn money with it then spend that cash on the BMCC mft version in spring. That way you'll have both a top notch motion picture camera and a pretty good still camera that can share lenses. Win-win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top