Shane Hurlbutt with the Black Magic Cinema Camera

[Gillvane]

http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2013/02/the-black-magic-cinema-camera/

The images look good. Shane talks very positively about the BMC.

The most interesting part to me was the recommendation to use Tiffen IR ND filters for getting DoF on exterior shoots in bright sun light.

I know accessories are important and with inexpensive cameras the accessories can quickly add up to more than the cost of the camera, but it was interesting to see an EVF on the camera that costs 2/3 of what the BMC body costs.

BMC isn't modular like the Red accessories that add up so quickly, but this does instantly turn the $3,000 camera into a $5,000 camera.

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

Traditional film cameras have been using front-of-the-lens ND filters in matte boxes since time immemorial.

Newer digital cinema cameras like the Red and now the BMC have done the same and, with the sensitivity of the new sensors, require an additional IR cut filter to cut down on IR pollution in the dark part of the images, keeping blacks black and not purple.

Some manufacturers, like Sony and Canon, are putting real ND filters in their cinema cameras on a traditional filter wheel, which I find welcome, especially when you want to cut down the rig to a smaller size for run and gun shooting.

Kitting out a Red or BMC requires a bunch of add-ons to make them useable and many people forget that when they think that they are getting a useable rig for the initial price.

 

[Barry_Green]

It's true that film cameras don't have built in ND filters and that if you need filtration you put it in front of the lens... But ... It is still quite different because with a film camera you could choose to shoot on 25 or 50 ISO film stock outdoors. So that means the film camera needs four stops less filtration than an 800 ISO video camera would.

You need a ton more ND for a modern video camera than you ever needed for a film camera. And it is using so much ND (more than 4 stops) that causes the IR pollution we are seeing on newer cameras.

 

[JMtheDP]

It's true that film cameras don't have built in ND filters and that if you need filtration you put it in front of the lens... But ... It is still quite different because with a film camera you could choose to shoot on 25 or 50 ISO film stock outdoors. So that means the film camera needs four stops less filtration than an 800 ISO video camera would.

You need a ton more ND for a modern video camera than you ever needed for a film camera. And it is using so much ND (more than 4 stops) that causes the IR pollution we are seeing on newer cameras.

I was under the impression 500T has been the norm for quite some time, even in daylight exteriors? Now, personally I always liked to use the slowest stock I could when shooting film, but that was mainly due to the fact I was on S16 and I could count the grains on the quicker stocks! I had a real soft spot for fuji's 64D.

I guess when ND'ing on film cameras, you're darkening your viewfinder too and that is a decent incentive not to put too much ND in.

I also imagine that some of the extra ND that gets put in today is that some people think it's very trendy to shoot T1.3 outdoors in the blazing sun, rather than a more traditional 2.8/4/5.6.