Which of my cameras should I use?

draculr

Well-known member
I currently have at my disposal a C100 and a BMCC EF 2.5k. I'm posting this here as posting to the BMCC or Cinema EOS forums would probably give more biased answers :)

I've got a fairly ambitious short film coming up that will be set mostly at night and the production will go on for the next few months. I was fully intending to use the BMCC for this, shooting it all in RAW since I wont be in any real rush to edit and grade it. In fact, this project would be the only thing on the horizon I'd be using the BMCC for.

However, in the last few weeks I've been leaning more and more toward using my C100 with a Ninja for this short film also. Let me list what I see are the pros and cons:

BMCC
Pros:
- 10bit Prores or 12bit RAW.
- Quite nice colours, generally has a great look straight out of camera.
- 13 stops of Dynamic Range (but that may be pointless at night).

Cons:
- Much much MUCH harder to work with due to weight and a whole load of accessories needed. A lot of shots will have to be filmed guerrilla style in really creepy places at night.
- Will really push the limits of storage space if I shoot RAW.
- Requires a laptop on set to really make it work (cannot even see how much space is remaining on the SSD, or format/delete footage).

C100+Ninja
Pros:
- S35 sensor, I've shot a lot of weddings that have that classic cinema look due in part to the sensor size. Very different to the usual full frame look I see in most wedding videos. I always notice the same effect - the perspective and amount of DOF - in most well made films.
- 8bit prores ain't too shabby and realistically I doubt anyone will tell the difference.
- Much cleaner high iso image. Since I'll be shooting in really dark locations, I'll require a lot less lighting and be able to capture some more of the ambient light. I'd usually shoot at the native ISO but being able to get clean 3200 (and really even 6400) ISO shots is great. Clean images in the dark may offset any BMCC IQ advantages. Lower powered lighting means it'll be easier to get in and shoot without drawing as much attention.
- I'm really used to using it on top of it being terrifically easy to use so I'd be able to concentrate on doing everything else rather than the camera demanding a lot of my attention.
- Lighter weight means it is easier to use with smaller jibs and steadicams - admittedly heavier cameras have a much more pro look when used with a steadicam.

Cons:
- I have to use an external recorder. My ninja has taken a fall a few times, might need to buy another one as it's a bit flaky now.
- No 2.5k so no cropping without IQ degradation.


What say you? Use the BMCC or just stick to my trusty C100?
 
BMCC produces very muddy colors is shot to ProRes or DNxHD - probably a great colorist could that that forgather far but my personal "decent" coloring skills didn't do much to improve it. Never worked with the camera RAW so i don't know how great the image is in RAW.

C100 looks great straight from the camera. The camera is lightweight and hass ALL necessary knobs and audio connectors. I would personally go with c100 (or c300 if possible).
 
Why do you have to shoot only one for the entire production? Maybe use the C100+N2 for night exteriors and action, the BMCC for shots with more careful lighting, or whatever your testing determines best to convey the desired image for the scene.
 
If I had both cameras at my disposal I would likely run some tests under the same conditions I would be shooting to see which would best suit my needs. Then I would work out my post workflow.
 
my biased opinion: c100

don't forget rolling shutter issues, aliasing, moire, all not so great on the BMC, but great on the c100.

clean higher iso means less light wattage needed.

even just comparing the battery needs would have me running to the c100
 
If I had both cameras at my disposal I would likely run some tests under the same conditions I would be shooting to see which would best suit my needs. Then I would work out my post workflow.

This

And I think it's going to be a tough call, because the BMC is awesome, but the C100 is great too (the only thing I don't like about it is the price, if it was $2K like the BMC it would sell like crazy)
 
This

And I think it's going to be a tough call, because the BMC is awesome, but the C100 is great too (the only thing I don't like about it is the price, if it was $2K like the BMC it would sell like crazy)

Yea, I just so happen to own it for filming weddings. I definitely see a certain look baked in with the BMCC which is very cinema like but I feel confidence with the latitude prores will give me that I can get just as cinematic a look with the C100.
 
my biased opinion: c100

don't forget rolling shutter issues, aliasing, moire, all not so great on the BMC, but great on the c100.

clean higher iso means less light wattage needed.

even just comparing the battery needs would have me running to the c100

I didn't even take those BMCC issues into consideration. I think i'm almost 100% now on using the C100.
 
You seem pretty set on the C100.

Do some tests under similar conditions to what you'll be shooting in.
 
You seem pretty set on the C100.

Do some tests under similar conditions to what you'll be shooting in.

Below is an image from my location scout. That's taken with a 35mm lens at f1.4 and an ISO of 12800 (but I did drop the exposure by 2 stops to achieve the look I wanted - so I'd dial in 6400 ISO and f2.0 on the C100 to get similar results). I took it with my 5D3 and since I hadn't brought my flash along or any other kind of lighting equipment - it was an impromptu location scout! - under the bridge was lit with just an iPhone LED light. It actually is pitch black under there. Of course I could go ahead and light it fairly well but what I wont get without using high ISO and fast lenses is the lit up background elements which look really cool. I feel in this scenario the BMCC may produce a cave like effect but I don't think I'll take it out there to test, I'll just use the C100 which I know from experience would work quite well.

I always felt I'd light a scene properly enough to not use high ISO's on a short film shoot - since they're much more controlled than an event - but in conditions such as these having a fairly good 3200/6400 ISO setting is a huge boon.

1410945_10151727402511930_1506161848_o.jpg
 
Back
Top