Opinions on the BMD 4.6 camera footage?

JMtheDP said:
The Blackmagic doesn't have a 4:3 sensor, does it?
Click to expand...

Taken from the BMCuser forum


quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by CaptainHook
It won't be a 4:3 mode but rather a crop of the sensor so that a 2x desqueeze will produce 2.4:1 exactly, rather than 2.66:1 as 4:3 does (which requires cropping of the sides for 2.4:1). And yes, we demoed this at NAB on an URSA 4.6K.






I believe it's a 3k crop
 
Okay, so it's doing the same as the RED/F5/F55/F65/Alexa 16:9 then... ie. not 4x3 at all in the traditional sense
 
JMtheDP said:
Okay, so it's doing the same as the RED/F5/F55/F65/Alexa 16:9 then... ie. not 4x3 at all in the traditional sense
Click to expand...

We'll take it. How much are the D-21s these days. Do they even sell the studio camera? But yes the only other 2 cameras that have a true 4:3 sensor :)
 
I had a D-21 here for a while. They've pretty much fallen out of favour. Even though rental houses were renting the camera for pennies, by the time you added recorders, lenses, accessories, you could get an ALEXA so they basically all sold.

Really interesting camera and a unique digital camera - I doubt we will ever see its like again. The ALEXA Studio is a relatively rare beastie, I believe the most popular variety in high end productions is the 4:3 XT / SXT
 
It's amazing what you get today for so little. But even still the F35 image is still so unique and organic, it's undeniable. Such a thick, robust image with beautiful roll off. It's like cameras are the new film stock, some defined by their own look. Even the BMPCC reminds me of a modern day Bolex, I saw this video shot with an anamorphic adapter. It's done well, nice vintage feel. https://vimeo.com/128700933
 
Marino215 said:
organic
Click to expand...

Please don't use that word, it makes me sick! :)

The F35 picture is very nice. I think the F65's is extremely similar - certainly shooting to 1080P/SR it is much closer to F35 stuff than I expected it to be. Cleaner, but it certainly isn't "noise free", I have no idea who ever thought that it was.

The issue you get when you go RAW/raw (delete as applicable) is that you open yourself to the mercy of your post tech and people
 
S
JMtheDP said:
Please don't use that word, it makes me sick! :)

The F35 picture is very nice. I think the F65's is extremely similar - certainly shooting to 1080P/SR it is much closer to F35 stuff than I expected it to be. Cleaner, but it certainly isn't "noise free", I have no idea who ever thought that it was.

The issue you get when you go RAW/raw (delete as applicable) is that you open yourself to the mercy of your post tech and people
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm bit too nostalgic, I meant it as in the original sense. Not the overdone, doesn't mean **** anymore version. Hope you understand.
 
Honestly - IMO the footage looks great, plenty to make anything with.

maybe there is a bum bite with brick walls (moiree) , and yes no ND is a pain, and the URSA form is generally a pain.. but to me these images were sweet.

personally Im pretty happy with ursa FS7 and above.

Beyond those cameras you are playing for high frame rates, ergonomic pros, workflow pros.. Im not saying those things are not worth it but I feel these imges are great.

S
 
They make a variable nd filter i just bought. Goes in snap in matte box. Its not a big deal. Built in nds are nice but hey for 6k you cant complain. my f3 cost 20k when it came out and the bmc 4.6k image blows it away times 50x.
 
eddavid said:
They make a variable nd filter i just bought. Goes in snap in matte box. Its not a big deal. Built in nds are nice but hey for 6k you cant complain. my f3 cost 20k when it came out and the bmc 4.6k image blows it away times 50x.
Click to expand...

Its a huge deal when you are doing doc work or a director suddenly wants to follow an actor outside and through a garage, for example... stuff like that happened to me several times. On a doc not having it built in is 100% impossible to deal with.

$20K? It was neever close to that.
50x? Don't agree at all.
 
if you get a heliopan variable nd screw in filter, wear on your belt and throw it on quickly - in transition - just go to f.11 on the f35 or bmd camera as you move outside, then wait for the right moment and throw it on

It's really not that hard.
Maybe you lose 10 seconds of time - but really - it doesn't happen that often.

usually you are outside or inside - and not quickly going in between worlds enough that those 10 seconds matter that much.
 
I agree. Not much effort using NDs when you're prepared. If you're shooting in such a sporadic environment, going in doors and out why not use a video camera with a fixed lens. There's plenty that are more than perfect for documentaries. But for normal shooting, fixed lighting or outside shots the New ursa should be great.
 
The F3 looks nice but damn the rolling shutter is bad. Also the form factor is absolutely hideous - one of the poorest designed cameras Sony have made IMHO. Two screens, both useless
 
No, the rolling shutter is not bad at all. And I think its funny when people talk about how bad the design is, and it's based solely on the rear VF. Who cares? Take it off or don't use it. I bet if that camera came out without the VF it would be praised all around.

If it's that bad then I guess the Red one or Epic must be absolutely unusable then. The AF100 must not have sold at all, same with the C300's and so on. The F35/65 must be completely useless. Give me a break.

I always liked the big handle and 1/4 20's. Makes a great set-up on a zacuto plate as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top