It's shipping! And there's a surprise
- Thread starter Marino215
- Start date
Nope
And I would bank on never seeing them in this camera or the other cameras. My thoughts do not reflect BMDs, or what they plan on in the future, but I wish they would have never put anything about good audio recording in the camera. They should have said reference audio, called it a day, and I would never have to hear anyone complaining about audio in a camera that's solely about the image quality it produces.
Better audio, meteres, wave etc, just don't count on it. If those are things people need there are other options that offer that kind of usability... of course most of them either cost a lot for a better image, or lack in the IQ department. =P
And I would bank on never seeing them in this camera or the other cameras. My thoughts do not reflect BMDs, or what they plan on in the future, but I wish they would have never put anything about good audio recording in the camera. They should have said reference audio, called it a day, and I would never have to hear anyone complaining about audio in a camera that's solely about the image quality it produces.
Better audio, meteres, wave etc, just don't count on it. If those are things people need there are other options that offer that kind of usability... of course most of them either cost a lot for a better image, or lack in the IQ department. =P
Michael Schrengohst
Well-known member
Yeah, i don't get it….you can get great audio from a cheap ZOOM recorder. I don't understand why BM could not have made a complete system? That has to impact sales.
I used my BMCC a lot when I first got it - but after so many interviews it wears thin to always have to sync up audio. It might not be a big deal for some people
but after a few hundred clips it gets old and takes time no matter if you have it do auto sync or not. Hell I bought a Sony RX10 and the audio that comes out of that is great.
I have started using it over the BMCC for interviews.
filmguy123
Veteran
Definitely wondering if BMD has plans for a more all-in-one type of design at NAB. Who wouldn't want the BMPC with good audio and XLR, better ergos and form factor, physical switches, etc.? If they can sweeten the deal with over-crank, better low light, and 13 stops on their 4K model... for under $5k... that could be a huge deal!
I don't think the 2.5K was the right tool for interviews in that case, I mean... right? Why not use an AF100 or FS100? You solved it though with the RX10, but if I knew I couldn't invest in a Juiced Link to run audio directly into camera, and my bread and butter's interviews... I would not have invested in a Cinema Camera that's pretty much about the image quality.
There are so many more options for this kind of work, I haven't figured out why people keep buying it over something like the above mentioned, used at that.
Edit:
On the other hand, if you've seen Luis Caffesse's Pocket Camera rig, that's a gent that knows what his gear is and was willin' to make it work for him.
That thing's a one-man-band beast.
True North
Well-known member
Don't forget that the audio out of Sony products is no accident. Sony has a very rich and deep history in the professional audio market, they know how to build a pre-amp. That being said, I also find it very perplexing why BM can't get their audio together. Seems kind of ridiculous to me and its a large oversight, especially considering their core market with their camera is the smaller independant guys where time and resources are not plentiful. Anything, like integrated audio, which can literally save the user hours of time is something that needs to be addressed with future cameras.
My next BM Camera wishlist includes
- all of the existing features
- high frame recording
- better battery solution
- an improvement in DR
- better integrated audio
Marino215
Well-known member
Theres always this for the time being. http://www.sounddevices.com/products/mm1/ Some of the very best preamps in the world. If I had my way I would rather have a robust interchangeable battery system. Why we can't record 2 hours on end still baffles me in this day and age. On my pocket cam the 1/2 hour or so hasn't been all that easy to work with. I can work around the audio, the media looks like its improving, it's getting cheaper, we just need a better (smaller) battery solution.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
Can you at least format the media in the camera now?
combatentropy
Veteran
combatentropy
Veteran
Ironically, if you design a camera for the most expensive genre (feature films) you set the bar the lowest. A sensor in giant box would work. It doesn't even need to record sound. In fact, such a set-up would connect you to the Hollywood of yesteryear. One slow, meticulously prepared angle at a time, carefully lighting the DR all the way down. You have a crew (pros or friends, depending on whether you have money) to hold a mic, flag off hot spots, etc. And post? Well, you have months. Designing for the movies is the one mistake that BlackMagic and RED make.
Now, what if you designed a camera for great wedding videos? The least-paying gig is the rock against which all cameramen smash themselves. One take, dim churches, dimmer receptions, white dress, black tux, disparate audio sources, non-actors who you'd better not distract or even worse shine a light in their faces. An ideal wedding videocamera would be as small and inconspicous as possible, yet needs XLR, built-in ND filters, wide dynamic range, great focus peaking, global shutter (for all the flashes). And good resolution wouldn't hurt. Wouldn't such a camera also just happen to make great feature films? Paul Graham said:
When Bauhaus designers adopted Sullivan's "form follows function," what they meant was, form should follow function. And if function is hard enough, form is forced to follow it, because there is no effort to spare for error. Wild animals are beautiful because they have hard lives. (Taste for Makers)
Last edited:
I agree
Combat, that's a great post.
My only question: Why is it a mistake? They targeted this segment of filmmaking and surely knew they would not attract AF100, FS100, etc. users. That's not a mistake, is it? It's a strategy that just doesn't line up with what a certain bracket of consumers want.
However, just about everything in a BMD camera lines up with what I want, RED too if I liked the image coming out of it. I just want the camera to capture amazing images, sound is left to the sound guy with his or her expensive gear. There are very very few cameras that I (personally) think produce a great image, and most of those cameras are not the ones that people are asking for in the GH4 thread, AF100, FS100... even the GH4.
So, not sure it's a mistake, just a target.
My only question: Why is it a mistake? They targeted this segment of filmmaking and surely knew they would not attract AF100, FS100, etc. users. That's not a mistake, is it? It's a strategy that just doesn't line up with what a certain bracket of consumers want.
However, just about everything in a BMD camera lines up with what I want, RED too if I liked the image coming out of it. I just want the camera to capture amazing images, sound is left to the sound guy with his or her expensive gear. There are very very few cameras that I (personally) think produce a great image, and most of those cameras are not the ones that people are asking for in the GH4 thread, AF100, FS100... even the GH4.
So, not sure it's a mistake, just a target.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
Agreed...and I also thought combat's post was excellent. Black magic definitely hasn't made a mistake, their cameras are giving a lot of people what they have been asking for (I remember them asking for it here at dvx user for that matter) - Basically the desire by a big section of buyers was "Just give me a great sensor in a box and I'll build around it"
Black Magic did that and kept cost down by not adding a lot of bells and whistles. I think the mistake comes from some shooters wanting the IQ of a BMC, even though the camera itself doesn't fit their needs.
I think many are truly asking for a large sensor camera like the AF100...but with a much less compressed codec.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
I also agree with everything in that post, except for the "mistake" thing. As I always say, those blackmagic cameras are not niche by any measurable standard. They've been at the top of the BH pro section FOR MONTHS. Just like the gopro always has at least 4 entries in the Amazon top 10 for general video cameras. I want a niche like that one!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Pro-Camcorders-Cameras/ci/16763/N/4256818817
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Camera-Photo-Camcorders/zgbs/photo/172421
But yes, it is indeed way easier to make a camera for shortfilms and movies than for wedding shooters. It can be a sensor in a box, you don't need audio, and recording RAW is much easier than recording H.264.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Pro-Camcorders-Cameras/ci/16763/N/4256818817
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Camera-Photo-Camcorders/zgbs/photo/172421
But yes, it is indeed way easier to make a camera for shortfilms and movies than for wedding shooters. It can be a sensor in a box, you don't need audio, and recording RAW is much easier than recording H.264.
combatentropy
Veteran
Imagine the insides of a BlackMagic camera in the body of a Sony VG900, with XLR inputs, ND filters, etc.
1. How much more would it cost them to make it this way? I would be surprised if they had to raise the price more than $500.
2. How many people would say, I can no longer use this camera, I must have the SLR form factor? How many more units would they sell, now that they have opened up its usefulness to more people? Twice as many? 10 times as many?
Last edited:
I think you might be surprised at the increase in cost such a design would require. The current form factor allows for the camera circuitry to be machine assembled on one circuit board, that would of necessity become several requiring significantly more assembly labor even if component cost did not increase much.
Don't know about the 500 dollars it's probably more, but I want one. I'm willing to pay more for XLR and ND.
ryan brown
lOwEr CaSe Member
Maybe $500 in parts after all is said and done, but you're leaving out one very important factor. R&D. Sony and the other big boys have had years to refine their model, whereas black magic are pretty much starting from scratch. I'd think it would take a considerable amount of time, money and R&D to get anywhere close to the point of the vg900, and they'd have to make that money back eventually... meaning a markup on price.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love the camera you're talking about and would buy it in an instant, and I believe it's coming in the future (1-2 years), but I don't think anyone's quite there yet.
ryan brown
lOwEr CaSe Member
2 more similar responses while I was writing mine... seems we're on the same page