I did look at a couple 4K external recorders, but...adding such to a run & gun shoot just did not appeal to me. Now that I've shot with the slightly smaller and lighter BMPCC, such a proposition is even less attractive.
GH4 Very Disappointed
- Thread starter Jim Simon
- Start date
I did look at a couple 4K external recorders, but...adding such to a run & gun shoot just did not appeal to me. Now that I've shot with the slightly smaller and lighter BMPCC, such a proposition is even less attractive.
stoneinapond
Veteran
Don't know.....run 'n gun and the BMPCC in the same sentence? :huh:
DPStewart
Veteran
I've been doing it for almost 3 years.
Nothing about any Panasonic mirrorless camera makes any difference for "run and gun" compared to the BMPCC. Not size, not weight, not features or functions, and certainly not simplicity.
Lenses with auto-focus and IS *can* help with fast paced work, but that's lost if the lenses you WANT to use don't have AF and IS. Plus - you can still get both if you use Canon lenses with the EF Speedbooster.
The cameras that actually make a significant difference for "run and gun" work are either ENG style video cameras, or full featured EXPENSIVE cameras like Canon C100-C300 or Sony FS series cameras which basically start at $5,000.
rob norton
Veteran
The EVF on the GH4 is reason enough to pick it over the BMPCC for run and gun situations. I used the BMPCC to shoot a small documentary in Vietnam. Of course it can be done but it was far from ideal.
People's definition of run and gun are all over the place. One person's run and gun may be shooting their grandchildren at a party and another's may be walking with someone in a humid jungle. For more testing conditions I'd pick the GH4 every single day of the week.
People's definition of run and gun are all over the place. One person's run and gun may be shooting their grandchildren at a party and another's may be walking with someone in a humid jungle. For more testing conditions I'd pick the GH4 every single day of the week.
DPStewart
Veteran
Indeed.
My $99 Khinotechnic loupe on the BMPCC is better than all the EVFs on all my other cameras (see list in my signature) because I don't have to jam my face all the way up on the camera to see through it.
Good to know. That was one of only two issues that I consider "major fails" on the BMPCC (the other being battery life) which are in need of solution.
I understand your skepticism. I felt it myself. That's why I watched a lot of reviews and did a lot of testing.
Blackmagic has solved nearly all of the issues that made the BMPCC a non-option for me when it first came out. The remaining issues can be solved with third-party tools.
Having used the BMPCC for two weddings now, I can say I prefer it to the GH4 from a usability standpoint, and most definitely from an image quality standpoint.
stoneinapond
Veteran
Fair enough. But for me, the biggest issue is battery life. Can't go around with six or more batteries. And I understand there are third party power options, but that's getting away from my style of shooting - just camera and lens - period.
I'm happy you found something you're happy with. :beer:
Thanks. I am really enjoying the BMPCC.
It's very interesting to hear these perspectives on the suitability of the BMPCC to run and gun situations.
Jim, what lens(es) are you using with it, if you don't mind me asking? I know that you have been after the holy grail of a good constant aperture zoom, and those are definitely available for the BMPCC (in the form of vintage Super16 zooms). Just curious if that's another factor that is making you like this camera?
Also, have you run into any issues with moiré or aliasing, which is apparently somewhat of a weak spot with the BMPCC?
Oh, and last thing, how about sound on the camera? I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread that it was terrible in the beginning. How about now?
Jim, what lens(es) are you using with it, if you don't mind me asking? I know that you have been after the holy grail of a good constant aperture zoom, and those are definitely available for the BMPCC (in the form of vintage Super16 zooms). Just curious if that's another factor that is making you like this camera?
Also, have you run into any issues with moiré or aliasing, which is apparently somewhat of a weak spot with the BMPCC?
Oh, and last thing, how about sound on the camera? I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread that it was terrible in the beginning. How about now?
Last edited:
I use the original 14-140 with a Format .6 ND for shooting outdoors, and the 12-35, 35-100 and 20mm pancake for shooting indoors. I am very interested in what I might find in older C-mount lenses, but as yet I haven't had the time to even look.
I am planning on the Canon Speedbooster along with the Canon 24mm 2.8, which has OIS. That should give me something quite usable for dark wedding receptions.
The forthcoming Cinema version of the venerable Sigma 18-35 is also on my wish list. (If that thing only had OIS, it would be the perfect reception lens.)
I haven't yet seen any artifacts in BMPCC footage, but there's still two projects yet to edit.
Sound is not great, but I also found it less than acceptable on the GH4 as well. I'll be buying the new Rode Stereo VideoMic Pro with Rycote suspension. (I would have bought that even if I stuck with the GH4.)
Surprisingly, the stereo separation on the BMPCC is superior to that of the GH4. It's just missing some fullness (bass), it's a bit thin in character. The Rode should handle that.
I am planning on the Canon Speedbooster along with the Canon 24mm 2.8, which has OIS. That should give me something quite usable for dark wedding receptions.
The forthcoming Cinema version of the venerable Sigma 18-35 is also on my wish list. (If that thing only had OIS, it would be the perfect reception lens.)
I haven't yet seen any artifacts in BMPCC footage, but there's still two projects yet to edit.
Sound is not great, but I also found it less than acceptable on the GH4 as well. I'll be buying the new Rode Stereo VideoMic Pro with Rycote suspension. (I would have bought that even if I stuck with the GH4.)
Surprisingly, the stereo separation on the BMPCC is superior to that of the GH4. It's just missing some fullness (bass), it's a bit thin in character. The Rode should handle that.
Martin Murphy
Member
I've been a GH4 owner from day 1, and I've gone through phases of loving and disliking the images. I was excited about V-Log, but to get that profile to work I had to have perfect exposure and shooting conditions. 70% of the time I felt the image was no good or too noisy. I've probably tried 100 settings on the GH4, and I've now settled into always using the "portrait" picture profile with Nikkor primes. Keeping it simple, and using these lenses has made me love the camera again. I think the trick with the GH4 is getting the image exactly how you want it before it's in the computer.
I can't argue that. Even at 3200 ISO, I find the GH4's image usable for my work. That surprised me.
But with some extra lighting, I find I can get a usable image from the BMPCC even at 2.8. The Speedboster can only help.
More so with the Sigma, rated at T2.0.
That can be difficult with event work, where you often have 2, maybe 3 seconds to frame, focus and expose the shot and begin rolling or you miss the shot forever. In those situations, I either need the camera to do a lot of the work automatically, or I need a lot of freedom in post.
RAW gives me that freedom.
Martin Murphy
Member
I hear you. I mostly work with controlled shooting situations so I don't think about shooting on the fly so much. But with the GH4 compression I've found that moving around the color and exposure in the computer makes the image quickly fall apart, it just doesn't have the bit depth. I guess that's why I'm eager to see how the GH5 performs... 10bit internal would be great.
DPStewart
Veteran
The BMPCC specific Metabones speedbooster makes a RADICAL difference.
The BMPCC with that speedbooster will BEAT the GH4 in lowlight - plus the BMPCC's noise is far far more pleasing looking than any Panasonic noise.
There are many times where I'll just leave the BMPCC's noise in, rather than hitting it with Neat Video because it looks better with the subtle noise.
When I do use noise reduction I use it almost exclusively just on the chroma noise and not the luma noise.
Here's a BMPCC/Speedbooster shoot that was so underexposed it was ridiculous. I was just hanging out at a Halloween party with friends. I mean this footage should not have worked at all for anything. And yet, I used zero noise reduction on it at all.
That's the thing about Blackmagic noise - it LOOKS GOOD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmQA2gGxniA
The GH4 noise is solely in the luma channel as well. The H246 codec is what starts to degrade the entire image as encoding steals bits from important stuff and applies it to the noise. After seeing that footage, I'll take the GH4 with a Ninja 2's ProRes/DnHD any day