GH4 GH5 vs BMPCC

R

rc444

Well-known member
Given what little information we already know about the GH5, am I better to wait for the GH5 or purchase a BMPCC/BMMCC? I am very tempted to buy one of these Blackmagic cameras. Even though the GH5 doesn't do RAW, I have heard it is much sharper than either of these two Blackmagic cameras. Obviously the GH5 has Prores going for it, but it's hard to know what other advantages the GH5 will have at this stage (besides 6K photos).

Is the GH5 streets ahead of the BMPCC/BMMCC by being 4K? Does 4K actually make your pictures appear more detailed looking than 1080p, or is that irrelevant? I heard that bitrate actually determines the true colour science.
 
Most of what you're asking is not answerable by people not familiar with your shooting style and preferences. For example; is low-light important? Could make all the difference between your choices. If the GH5 isn't coming available for another 8 months and you can wait that long, then just hold off and see what the reviewers say. As for 4K looking more detailed -- YES it is! That's the definition of higher resolution, more detail. 4K has 4 times the detail as HD. I don't even have a proper 4K monitor, but the image looks so much better even on my HD plasma than regular HD (BluRay movies).

If you get the BM camera now, because you want it now, keep all the receipts and the box just in case you end up selling it in 8 months. Personally, I refuse to wait that long if I want some new added capability. What if the GH5 is all screwed up? What if the early adopters have lots of complaints? I would get the camera that's available now to do the things I want it to do. By the time the GH5 hits the street, you know someone will have announced yet another camera coming out soon, possibly even BM. It never ends.
I don't know what you like about BM cameras but be careful there. Do your research and pay attention to the negative reviews, which I seek out before reading the 5-star ratings. BM has made some cool looking cameras, but the functionality I expect just seems to be lacking too much for me to plunk down my money for any of them. Close, but no cigar.

Good luck whatever you decide.

Mark
 
Faced with the exact same question recently, I went ahead and bought the BMPCC, and I LOVE it. To my eye, the footage coming out of that camera is much better than what I was getting from the GH4, despite the latter having a low-light/4K advantage.

I am now seriously considering selling my GH4 and buying another BMPCC.

How the GH5's 10 bit 4:2:2 will compare is a subject I will follow closely when the GH5 hits. But one of the things I prefer about the BMPCC is the colors. Shooting in Film mode and using a LUT to get to Rec.709, the colors are gorgeous. Very natural, very pleasing, very little work required. I don't expect 10 bit 4:2:2 to change the color science of Panny cameras, though, so it's possible I will still prefer the BMPCC.
 
Mark Watson said:
That's the definition of higher resolution, more detail.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Higher resolution means larger frame dimensions. More detail means higher resolving power. You don't always get the latter with the former. I recall a test where a Canon 4K shot looked less detailed than the BMPCC's 1080 shot.

Having said that, I don't expect it will apply to Panasonic cameras, which also have a history of out-resolving Canon cameras.
 
Jim Simon said:
Not necessarily. Higher resolution means larger frame dimensions. More detail means higher resolving power. You don't always get the latter with the former. I recall a test where a Canon 4K shot looked less detailed than the BMPCC's 1080 shot.

Having said that, I don't expect it will apply to Panasonic cameras, which also have a history of out-resolving Canon cameras.
Click to expand...

When I hear "resolution" I am thinking more like dots per inch, then what size the monitor is. If I put a 1920x1080 image on a HD capable screen that is 40 inches wide, I have a screen resolution of 48 dpi. For a SD image that's 640x480 on the same 40 inch screen, I have a screen resolution of 16 dpi. I don't know what your "frame" size has to do with this. 4K is 4K whether it's watched on a 10 inch screen or a 60 foot screen.

Mark
 
Pick the tool which is right for your shooting situation.

Let's be honest, in 2017 almost any modern camera is capable of making pretty pictures when used by talented people.

There are plenty of us that have been using what some would consider lesser cameras like the GH4, Black Magic and the like as B and C cameras on shoots with Alexa, Red, F65, and so forth. They cut seamlessly if you know what you are doing. Pick the one which works best for your shooting situation, not somebody else's.

All the best!

Dave
 
David has given some great input.

Also, they're two different beasts. It depends what your needs are. People buy the BM cameras because image quality is their top priority where as the GH4 does most things well. I'm using the BMMCC at the moment and rate it highly. Although I'm only using it for images because to me, the sound recording is absolute garbage. With the GH4, while it doesn't compete with dedicated video cameras, I've used a wireless system straight into camera and been very happy with the results.

DO NOT wait til the GH5 comes out. If you're truly interested in video production you will be out shooting (I realise the hypocrisy), even if the camera ends up being less than ideal.
 
rob norton said:
David has given some great input.

Also, they're two different beasts. It depends what your needs are. People buy the BM cameras because image quality is their top priority where as the GH4 does most things well. I'm using the BMMCC at the moment and rate it highly. Although I'm only using it for images because to me, the sound recording is absolute garbage. With the GH4, while it doesn't compete with dedicated video cameras, I've used a wireless system straight into camera and been very happy with the results.

DO NOT wait til the GH5 comes out. If you're truly interested in video production you will be out shooting (I realise the hypocrisy), even if the camera ends up being less than ideal.
Click to expand...

How does the BMMCC compare with the BMPCC? I know it has a better battery life.
 
rc444 said:
How does the BMMCC compare with the BMPCC? I know it has a better battery life.
Click to expand...

The Micro Cinema Camera is only 1080p hi-def, NOT 4k. and NOT global shutter. ALL Black magic cameras really require external batteries just like RED. As for the Micro - it's a standard Canon LP-6 battery which gives about 45 minutes on most high-draw devices they are used on. The BMPC4k internal battery will last about the same.

*The internal batteries on Blackmagic cameras are basically there to facilitate the changing of external batteries without having to stop the camera.
 
Bern Caughey said:
AKAIK Panasonic has not stated ProRes will be available on the GH5.
Click to expand...

I'd say ProRes is highly unlikely. Panasonic doesn't need ProRes anyway, since they have their own H264 based codec with different bit rates. To go ProRes, one will need an external recorder.
 
You obviously need to ad your own monitor to the micro - I use the small HD 501 with wooden camera cage. I don't use external batteries but instead use single Canon batteries for the camera and the monitor.

I would understand if you had a lot (like 20) of the BMPCC batteries because you wanted to keep a tiny set up (while shooting) - I got sick of that set up very quickly.

I have a lot of fun shooting with the BMMCC, which was one of the top priorities - to enjoy shooting with the camera. If the pocket batteries lasted as long as the micro I'd probably use the pocket every time but swapping out batteries so frequently cut deeply into my shooting experience.

Image quality is near identical as far as I know?
 
rob norton said:
You obviously need to ad your own monitor to the micro - I use the small HD 501 with wooden camera cage. I don't use external batteries but instead use single Canon batteries for the camera and the monitor.

I would understand if you had a lot (like 20) of the BMPCC batteries because you wanted to keep a tiny set up (while shooting) - I got sick of that set up very quickly.

I have a lot of fun shooting with the BMMCC, which was one of the top priorities - to enjoy shooting with the camera. If the pocket batteries lasted as long as the micro I'd probably use the pocket every time but swapping out batteries so frequently cut deeply into my shooting experience.

Image quality is near identical as far as I know?
Click to expand...


The Small HD 501 is perfect for the Micro.
I was shooting with the Atomos Shogun Ninja but it was too large for a monopod setup.
Sold my GH4 for a Micro with the speedbooster and Contax Zeiss lens. Combo is far superior to any GH4 setup IMO.
 
Jim Simon said:
Faced with the exact same question recently, I went ahead and bought the BMPCC, and I LOVE it. To my eye, the footage coming out of that camera is much better than what I was getting from the GH4, despite the latter having a low-light/4K advantage.

I am now seriously considering selling my GH4 and buying another BMPCC.

How the GH5's 10 bit 4:2:2 will compare is a subject I will follow closely when the GH5 hits. But one of the things I prefer about the BMPCC is the colors. Shooting in Film mode and using a LUT to get to Rec.709, the colors are gorgeous. Very natural, very pleasing, very little work required. I don't expect 10 bit 4:2:2 to change the color science of Panny cameras, though, so it's possible I will still prefer the BMPCC.
Click to expand...

The BMPCC is an AMAZING 1080p image, even when you don't consider it's size. By the way, I don't think the BMPCC has a disadvantage in low light. I've had one for a long while now and used to own the GH4, too. The thing with the BMPCC is that it doesn't do any NR in-camera, which makes sense because it's a cinema camera and you have the most control, but some folks might think their stuff is less usable than it is. I've also found that you can push 1600ISO raw footage 1.5-2 stops in Resolve without needing NR. That's 6400ISO with pleasing grain-like noise. It's no A7s, but I'd call that pretty good!
 
To be fair I have found external 10bit ProRes from the GH4 to also clean up well with noise reduction in post. You really need to compare apples to apples when talking about pushing material. Sure out of the box the Gh4 codec isn't as robust to do that but when you add external recording you level out the playing field a lot more in terms of quality and what you can do with the material in post.

The GH4 in camera NR is not very good so if you can shoot to a higher format and do that in post your results will be much better. Not the same as starting with raw of course but you can still do a lot with true 10bit ProRes422 HQ.

To some NR is evil because it reduces sharpness. Yeah it does but the same is true when you let the camera itself use its pathetic little processor to try to perform noise reduction on frames 24, 30 or 60 times per second. The amount of butchering that will take place on footage is greatly reduced when you use a better tool in post vs letting the camera do it.
 
Jim Simon said:
In a way we are - internal codec against internal codec. Granted the internal codecs aren't perfectly equal, more like a Granny Smith (GH4) against a Red Delicious (BMPCC), but I'd wager the battle of "internal codecs" applies to more people than not.
Click to expand...

It's really pretty simple. NOTHING can be pushed as far as RAW, and pretty much the whole world accepts that ProRes is the best image quality of the compressed codecs.

ARRI and RED could use any compressed codec in the world - they use ProRes. (and RAW.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top