There's room for more cameras with an S16 sensor, m43 mount

[combatentropy]

I wish there were more cameras with an S16 sensor and a Micro Four Thirds mount.

I used to think I wanted S35. But I've come to prefer what you might call mild bokeh. Here's a Blackmagic Pocket video with a lens that goes no wider than f-1.8, and even then it's shallower than I would prefer:

Depth of field is a double-edged sword, and S16 (12.52 x 7.41mm) is still a bit bigger than the 2/3" format (8.8 x 6.6) that was common for news.

EDIT 3/24/2018: In this video I think he used a Speedbooster, which makes it like Flat 35 (the Speedbooster for the Pocket is especially severe, with a whopping 0.58 crop factor). On the one hand, it shows what can be done with S16 and an m43 lens mount, but on the other hand it misrepresents what S16 looks like with an 18-35 f-1.8 lens. I'm sorry for misleading anyone.

The m43 mount lets you use a lot of different lenses, not only for 4/3 but also many that can adapt to its short flange. I would prefer a better body than the Pocket's, though.

 

[Josh Bass]

I haven't really worked with that sensor size much but I agree. Shallower than an "ENG look", but not so much to be difficult to work with on faster moving shoots.

 

[Grug]

I think the Docu/Verite market is crying out for a great S16mm option.

If someone could deliver 4k, with a wide-dynamic range and variable framerate ProRes recording, with all of the standard professional features you'd expect (internal NDs, timecode, decent audio inputs, good EVF), I think there's a big market crying out for it. Something to make use of S16mm zoom lenses and the vastly superior focal-range to weight trade-off they make.

 

[morgan_moore]

For solo shooting I totally agree.

Maybe S16, maybe a little larger.

Basically if you want a zoom lens then S35 is too big/heavy costly

Id buy into this system basically to get that canon S16 zoom

You could get a couple of 0.95 voiglanders for interviews or broll

(very small lenses that fit in a pocket!)

Unlikely IMO that 4k would be good with such a small sensor.

I still dream of a small robust 'real' camera that is small enough to solo operate with.

A real (solo op) camera needs..
2.5k for great 1080 (or sktchy upscale to 4k like you can with the F3)
10bit log
XLR
ND
A viable manual focus zoom starting at 75 degrees (24mm FF fov)
maybe 100FPS
1600 usable
Menu functions with gloves on
Cache record
Audio during HFR

 

[Samuel H]

The sensor on the RX100 V is just slightly bigger than S16, it would be the perfect one for such a camera.

Personally I love the Pocket but I always feel constrained in terms of lens selection: can't get them wide enough, can't get them fast enough. Even with a speedbooster.

What I'd like to have is two prime-lens versions of the RX100: one with an 8.8mm f/1.2 (equivalent to 24mm f/3.2 on FF) and one with a 32mm f/1.2 (equivalent to 85mm f/3.2 on FF). Even better if you make those f/0.95 (equivalent to f/2.6 on FF). I'd gladly pay $2k for the pair of them.

 

[Run&Gun]

F5/55. The crop mode is s16 (or darn close)(all be it only 2K max), so you could throw s16 lenses on (or ENG with adapter). And if you needed or wanted(which it sounds like some do not), you could flip back over to s35 and s35 glass for sit-down interviews. Best of both worlds.

 

[morgan_moore]

F5/55. The crop mode is s16 (or darn close)(all be it only 2K max), so you could throw s16 lenses on (or ENG with adapter). And if you needed or wanted(which it sounds like some do not), you could flip back over to s35 and s35 glass for sit-down interviews. Best of both worlds.

Same with FS7

But this is still quite a lump if you want S16zoom, PL adapter (maybe 5/55 is neater and more solid with PL) and not cheap. Id wish for something more FS5 size but built by adults for adults.

 

[combatentropy]

2.5k

Yeah, I was thinking 2,880 x 1,620, which is exactly 1.5 raw pixels for each output pixel. So the demosaic, I would think, is easier on the processor and less prone to moire.

And hey, Alexa has the same resolution (in 16:9 mode).

 

[Greg_E]

Well, I'll agree that an s16 sensor is lacking, but I'm not certain that I would suggest M43 mount. I would probably suggest the shortest flange available that can have PL, M43, C, E, Fuji X, etc mounts attached to it. Real mounts, not an adapter. But look at Digital Bolex, this was promising and yet it is now gone. Price is a big issue, as is ability to turn out product. I think Panasonic, JVC, even Fuji would be able to do a good job between features, size, cost, and ability to produce quantities needed to satisfy demand.

 

[Razz16mm]

For solo shooting I totally agree.

Maybe S16, maybe a little larger.

Basically if you want a zoom lens then S35 is too big/heavy costly

Id buy into this system basically to get that canon S16 zoom

You could get a couple of 0.95 voiglanders for interviews or broll

(very small lenses that fit in a pocket!)

Unlikely IMO that 4k would be good with such a small sensor.

I still dream of a small robust 'real' camera that is small enough to solo operate with.

A real (solo op) camera needs..
2.5k for great 1080 (or sktchy upscale to 4k like you can with the F3)
10bit log
XLR
ND
A viable manual focus zoom starting at 75 degrees (24mm FF fov)
maybe 100FPS
1600 usable
Menu functions with gloves on
Cache record
Audio during HFR

See Harry Lime's post above requesting an S16mm raw crop format for the EVA1.

2k raw RED format would be nice. Well supported in NLE's and post processors.
EVA1 should be around 2.5K raw with an S16 crop.

 

[Razz16mm]

I still find my Bolex to be quite adequate. This is straight 1080p raw with a sharp prime. The color gamut is incredible. Not seen any other camera anywhere near it's cost that can reproduce the oil paint colors on the palette anywhere near this accurately.

 

[Greg_E]

The D Bolex had features that were very good, but it still just didn't make it. Not sure why I it didn't make it, the images are without question fantastic. Maybe Black Magic will produce a 4k pocket with swapable lens mounts so you can use 16mm lenses or m43 or E, etc.

 

[Run&Gun]

I still find my Bolex to be quite adequate. This is straight 1080p raw with a sharp prime. The color gamut is incredible. Not seen any other camera anywhere near it's cost that can reproduce the oil paint colors on the palette anywhere near this accurately.

The D Bolex had features that were very good, but it still just didn't make it. Not sure why I it didn't make it, the images are without question fantastic. Maybe Black Magic will produce a 4k pocket with swapable lens mounts so you can use 16mm lenses or m43 or E, etc.

Kind of saddens me that CCD's have been pushed out to pasture and everything is a CMOS sensor, now. I still love the way my VariCam's(tape and P2) look.

 

[Razz16mm]

The D Bolex had features that were very good, but it still just didn't make it. Not sure why I it didn't make it, the images are without question fantastic. Maybe Black Magic will produce a 4k pocket with swapable lens mounts so you can use 16mm lenses or m43 or E, etc.

They had decent but not huge sales volume. From what I heard they shut down when they were looking at a major quantity jump in their sensor order for the next production run to maintain price. With the rapid adoption of 4k they weren't sure they could make the sales. There is still significant demand from people looking for second hand ones, but not sure it would be viable if it was forced into a higher price bracket because of material cost increases.
I think the engineering sophistication that went into the Bolex is under appreciated and they did not do a very good job of selling it. It was far more expensive to produce than a BM pocket. A six circuit board camera vs the Pocket's single board.

 

[Samuel H]

But that was exactly the problem: the pocket had an awesome sensor as well (CCD can have better colors, but I think that CMOS had much higher DR), it was much smaller, and waaaaaay cheaper. And yes, the screen on the pocket was a pain to work with, but think about the one in the DBolex...

 

[morgan_moore]

The D Bolex had features that were very good, but it still just didn't make it. Not sure why I it didn't make it, the images are without question fantastic. Maybe Black Magic will produce a 4k pocket with swapable lens mounts so you can use 16mm lenses or m43 or E, etc.

I gave up following the camera and its hatted hipster guru waffling about filmic experience (both hats and a filmic experience have their place of course)

AFAIK this camera did not work for me becuase..

-No playback.

-Other 'issues' that I forgot.

Without that playback to me it was not a viable production tool. I work in an environment where clients want to see what they are buying!

Maybe they mended that.. but it was off my radar by then.

 

[combatentropy]

CORRECTION: In the video in first post of this thread I now believe he used a Speedbooster. He often does but did not mention it in that video's description. But now that I look at it, I can tell that's wider than what 18mm looks like on S16. The Speedbooster for the Pocket is extra strong, too, with a whopping 0.58 crop factor. This transforms the optics into almost exactly Flat 35, the most popular format of Hollywood in the second half of the 20th century (21.95 x 11.86 mm, not Super 35, but halfway between 4/3 and Super 35).

On the one hand, the video shows what can be done with S16 and an m43 lens mount, but on the other hand it misrepresents what S16 natively looks like with an 18-35 f-1.8 lens. I'm sorry for doing too much research from the armchair on this one.

 

[puredrifting]

People always want what they can't have. These specs. Digital Bolex. I have a feeling that if either were available right now, everyone would still complain and want something else.
It's the human condition to only want what we cannot have and once we have it, we want something else. Just like the inexplicable hype machine around FF Digital Cinema Cameras.

 

[lambert]

Agree puredrifting about always wanting more or different,As someone who started with a vhsc and loved watching films that were developed in bathtub type systems I can only say that I am thrilled with the choices I have today and try to focus on content over the incremental steps of cameras. But that's just me and to each their own. If I shot for a living maybe I'd have a different take.

 

[puredrifting]

Agree puredrifting about always wanting more or different,As someone who started with a vhsc and loved watching films that were developed in bathtub type systems I can only say that I am thrilled with the choices I have today and try to focus on content over the incremental steps of cameras. But that's just me and to each their own. If I shot for a living maybe I'd have a different take.

This is why I dislike mirrorless and DSLR cameras for pro work, unless it's mounted, POV or gimbal or there is a reason you need tiny. But no internal NDs, little to no TC implementation, horrible audio quality, there are so many reasons to NOT make a mirrorless or DSLR your A camera as a working pro. There's a time and place for everything, I've been using my iPhone on a gimbal for some projects and it's working well so far. But I always have my A camera, whether its my C200, or a rented higher end camera. It is amazing that we can get all of the quality and features in cameras like the EVA 1 and C200 for well under $8k, kind of incredible. It's astounding we can get all of the quality and features we are getting in cameras like the GH5S or even an iPhone or Galaxy. Equipment in our business has kind of ceased to be about needs, you can shoot a feature with a smartphone and if you know what you are doing, it can look amazing. It's all about wants and mainly hype (VR, 3D, Full Frame, Anamorphic, etc.). I try to avoid the hype machine. 3D a few years ago was going to be the next big thing. Fizzled. VR, the next big revolution. Fizzled, at least for narrative and documentary filmmaking. Full Frame (I predict will fizzle and won't become a viable new standard in digital cinema). Anamorphic for digital cinema. 98% of users use it wrong, it's implemented in projects and films where it is more of a detriment than a benefit. 8k, 12K, 16K. Pointless and not innovation. Pixel bloat and pushed to obsolete existing gear.

Manufacturers and industry reviewers, YouTubers, VLoggers and writers couldn't survive without "the next big thing" so that'll always be coming but we're at the point where most of it is pointless hype. Camera manufacturers also still have misplaced focus in many cases with useless feature bloat, while ignoring what users really need to do good work more consistently. As someone who writes about gear and reviews a lot of it, I feel like it's my job to continually nudge, suggest and ask for the things that we all really want and need.

Ten Things Camera Manufacturers As an Industry Should Innovate:

1. Eliminate stupid consumer connections like HDMI on pro gear. Should be SDI with a locking connector or better yet, new, reliable short range, integrated wireless or adapt Bluetooth better
2. ALL digital cinema cameras need built-in 10-stop variable ND. Mirrorless and DSLRs included. 6 stops and even 8 stops don't cut it. Tiered preset NDs don't cut it. Variable is the way to go, kudos to Sony and it must be 10 stops.
3. ALL digital cinema cameras need XLRs. Real XLRs with 48v Phantom, integrated into the body, not riding on some cheap plastic box that sits in a hot shoe. I'll take a 15% increase in size and even a 10-15% increase in cost for this, just do it. Audio matters more than picture, get a clue camera designers.
4. ALL digital cinema and video cameras need a version of Canon's DPAF. Come on guys, Panasonic, Sony, BMD, why is phase detection high quality AF not now standard on every damn camera you make? Kills me to test cool cameras like the GH5S and EVA 1 with sucky, subpar AF. Focusing 4K on a 3" screen doesn't work and mounting 5-7" monitors with hoods or high brightness on everything isn't always possible. At least make it an option that you can turn on and off like Canon did. Phase detection AF isn't perfect but it's better than missing focus or not being able to focus because you can't see a touchscreen clearly or access an EVF.
5. I'll never stop harping on audio quality. All manufacturers need to up their audio game as fewer and fewer shoots, even low to medium end pro ones, always have budget for a sound mixer. I love when they do, a sound mixer is always high on my list of priorities but when it's not in the budget, do you really have make audio chains in cameras so bad? I'd be willing to bet Apogee, Røde, Lectrosonics, Sound Devices or someone else who makes high quality audio would do a licensing/co-manufacturing deal with a camera manufacturer? It used to be, you shot with a big, expensive camera and recorded dual system sound. Now, LOTs of work gets done without the benefit of a sound mixer. Make the audio in cameras better, higher quality, feature innovative, like an internal wireless mic system that uses low range internal or modular small light receivers to use with tiny transmitters that are easily placed and hidden on talent. The way it is today with having to use relatively large, heavy transmitters and even larger receivers is dumb, it's 30 year old thinking.
6. Eliminate or reduce in size camera device cabling. Look at the cable clutter and stupid snag points all over the most popular digital cinema cameras. Why, in 2018, do we have this? These cables get in the way, break, short out, snag on things and are generally a nuisance. Why aren't manufacturers accomplishing the same function with integrated or low visibility routing channels molded into the camera bodies? Better yet, why can't they route a cameras touchscreen video output or other external cable function with built-in WiFi/Bluetooth or other short range wireless? It boggles my mind that we can have the cameras we have in 2018 with all of the stupid feature bloat but designers can't figure out how to run the touchscreen or EVF output of a camera 10" away without a huge, costly, clunky cable. Give us what we need and care about.
7. Menus. Some are obviously better and some are worse but in general, why do no cameras manufacturers hire ergonomic and or intelligent designers to design camera menus and interfaces? Why must most of them be so terrible, clunky, illogical and unintuitive? Kudos to those who have get it close (Canon, Arri, BMD) and sighs to those who are clueless (Sony, RED and even to a point, Panasonic?)
8. Form factor. It's already established that there two form factors that seem to work for digital cinema cameras. Those who want/need/desire a traditional shoulder mount with the camera laid out in a low COG and those who want a short, stubby, tall design with a high COG for gimbal and or cradled shooting. This will never resolve but it would nice if someone started with a clean sheet of paper and designed a new body style that could function well for both, even if it were modular with optional modules to build it up to shoulder mount. Franken rigs suck and that's what most of us are stuck with.
9. Log Curves - Is it really necessary for each and every camera manufacturer to have to have their own Log curve? With so many hundreds of LUTs? C-Log, S-Log, V-Log, Vlog Lite, F-Log, etc. Kind of dumb. Might be better if there were some sort of industry consolidation into a standardized log/gamma curve option? Still keep your proprietary stuff but offer the option of an industry standard look, kind of like REC709/2020 but a true Log curve that could be built into every camera? This ties in with image matching, it can be really, really difficult to even match cameras from within the same manufacturer (ie; my C200 and the C300 MKII supposedly have the exact same imager but matching them can be difficult). That all becomes even much more difficult if you need or want to match cameras from other manufacturers. Not possible with today's technology to really do this but it's something that it would be great if the manufacturers could work toward it. Imagine if you were shooting with a GH5S and a RED Weapon and could just dial in a Log profile that would get the colors (not the quality obviously) 99.9% matched with the touch of a button. How cool would that be?
10. Standardize power connections. D-Tap works but what about 7.2V, 7.4V, 12V, 14V, 14.4V? D-Tap and P-Tap are old technology, invent something new that functions more like the magnetic connector on a MacBook Pro for all gear that mounts on cameras that need power. Monitors, EVFs, small LEDs, wireless transmitters, etc. Imagine if it all worked transparently through a single industry standard connection. Pretty damned cool. Imagine if worrying about amperage, voltage matching became all transparent and the gear and connection intelligently managed all of that instead of us? This could easily be developed by camera and gear manufacturers instead of D-Tap, LEMO, power taps, etc.

There are dozens of more ideas, these are just off the top of my head. We've reached the point where most of us will stop buying new gear on a regular cycle because we don't need to. But we will buy new gear if it features TRUE innovation that make our jobs better, easier and allow to worry more about the creative and less about the stupid technology that can't get out of it's own way. I don't know a single camera owner who enjoys worrying about how to get quality audio in and or out of their camera, who likes worrying about voltage draw and power connections? Get it manufacturers? it's for your own survival, give the market what it needs, not what you think it wants.