Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Any BMMCC without FPN?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Any BMMCC without FPN?

    I'm in the market thinking of buying a BMMCC. I have a BMPCC and it is free from any FPN. In fact, I think I have a really good sample without any FPN and hot pixels.

    The seller has been nice enough to send me a few DNG. From reading on forums, I see FPN is a common problem on the BMMCC. When I raise the exposure 1.5, I can see FPN on the BMMCC. I do shoot a lot of available low light content so this could be a issue.

    So the question - does anybody have a BMMCC without any FPN or less FPN than my sample?

    In the pictures, only exposure has been raised and nothing else.




  • #2
    I don't have FPN with mine (with correct exposure) but I do have to work around pretty weird moire' artifacts.

    As for having to raise the shots he sent you up 1.5 stops this looks pretty normal from any camera (without in camera noise reduction baked into the footage). If these already darkish shots are raised 1.5 in Resolve than they must have been shot with very little light.

    And I'm assuming that's what the original owner was trying to show you... when shooting in lowlight it's clean of FPN. But if you try to raise it to normal exposure without lighting for that, well you'll get the FPN you're seeing.
    Remember, if you're shooting a scene and the shadows are clean for the exposure you set for the talent then that is great. If you ever have to ask "is my camera clean at 1.5 -2 stops lifted exposure?". Then you need to ask yourself, "why am I raising the exposure in a shot by 1.5 stops?".

    So I would say you've got a really clean camera!
    Last edited by Timothy Cook; 08-12-2017, 06:59 PM.
    Vimeo.com/dropbars

    https://www.instagram.com/cook_it_off/

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks Tim for your reply. I think in most cases for production shoots, the camera's FPN performance would not be a big issue, but I shoot docs in low light which is often just street lights. Sometimes the only exposure I can use is ETTR and there are rare occasions I need to bring the exposure up a little more in post. Maybe close to 1 stop.

      My BMPCC is super clean devoid of any FPN. Also I seem to have one that doesn't have a huge issue with hot pixels. When I was going through the first two BMPCC, I did notice a slight difference between sensors. Some would have hot pixels show up right away or another would seem to have a little harsher FPN in really really low light.

      I also notice the BMPCC is noiser than the BMMCC. Even though the sensor is the same, maybe the way Blackmagic tweaked the sensor for the BMMCC removed some of this noise and allows FPN to show a little more easily. I actually don't mind the BMPCC noise at all so if they kept it the same without FPN, I wouldn't complain.

      I just want to know if there are super clean BMMCC out there that allow 1 to 2 stops of exposure gain like my BMPCC.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yes mine is clean of FPN when I raise it two stops, but as always it depends on how low the light is originally.
        But to truly answer your question: "So the question - does anybody have a BMMCC without any FPN or less FPN than my sample?"

        I don't think anyone can make a honest comparison with these JPG stills because you didn't shoot them and we don't know the source light or original exposure, and we are only looking the JPGs. I can put a lens cap on and raise it two stops and it looks like crap. But I can shoot a slightly underexposed shot and raise it two stops and it looks clean.

        I'll honestly try to help you out with this, Dropbox the DNGs and I'll shot a comparable shot at the same exposure with my BMMCC and I'll let you know exactly how good the camera you are looking to purchase compares to mine. Mine is great when it comes to FPN but I can't shoot a dark back ally shot and bring it up to the exposure of the JPGs you provided without FPN. So I guess it's relative to the shot? I hope you understand we can't just look at your JPGs and make a judgement on how bad that Micro's FPN is . We need more info, like the DNGs

        Or grab the DNGs yourself try to simulate the setup, and then try as hard as you can to match the exposure on the Pocket's waveform with the exposure you see in Resolve from the Micro DNGs you received. If they are no where close...don't buy it.

        If your Pocket is shooting really great then you may want to keep shooting the lowlight stuff with it and pass on this micro.
        Last edited by Timothy Cook; 08-12-2017, 08:03 PM.
        Vimeo.com/dropbars

        https://www.instagram.com/cook_it_off/

        Comment


        • #5
          These are extreme low light scenerios, but they will show the limits of the sensor.

          Obviously, "CAM1" are from the BMMCC. I also made a DNG using my BMPCC with a similarly underexposed scene just for comparison.

          So will I ever really shoot something this dark? Probably not, but will I ever need to raise the exposure to at least 1 stop? On a rare occasion. The BMPCC does perform better than the BMMCC in regards to FPN. I was looking to make a BMMCC my A-camera with the added 60fps bonus.

          Tim or anyone with a BMMCC can have a crack at it. These two BMMCC images were shot under his desk I was told.

          https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...nc?usp=sharing
          Last edited by goodgoings; 08-13-2017, 04:36 PM. Reason: unlocked link

          Comment


          • #6
            ive only had mine for a good month, still need to shoot more to understand it but for me I also tend to see those lines when I start bumping up exposure in post. I came across a post in the BM forum where some guy made an inverse of his vertical FPN and applying some form of correction with it in davinci to help remove it with some success. He never went into the full step by step details of how he did it, thats something that I'd like to look into also.

            Comment


            • #7
              Goodgoings your google drive file is locked, I requested access so I'll test it out when the file is unlocked.
              Vimeo.com/dropbars

              https://www.instagram.com/cook_it_off/

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm very sorry to say this so openly, since I love my BMPCC, but these cameras are not really for low-light situations. They are great for situations with controlled light. Even the 'Cinema' in the name implies that. You might say that it is just marketing speak, but I'd say that BM is rather giving you a hint what these cameras are made for.

                If you need to make docs under extreme conditions, get a Sony A7S. The older model is getting cheap on the second hand market and it's a low-light monster. You can literally film where your eyes don't see any more. Does it have RAW or even 10 bit recording? No.

                If you want it all in one package, until now you'd need to look at a different price level, like the new Panasonic EVA-1 (RAW still only announced, though).

                Comment


                • #9
                  https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...nc?usp=sharing

                  Files should be unlocked now.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Nomad View Post
                    I'm very sorry to say this so openly, since I love my BMPCC, but these cameras are not really for low-light situations. They are great for situations with controlled light. Even the 'Cinema' in the name implies that. You might say that it is just marketing speak, but I'd say that BM is rather giving you a hint what these cameras are made for.

                    If you need to make docs under extreme conditions, get a Sony A7S.
                    I'll politely disagree the BMPCC with the Speedbooster and say it is even better than the Sony a7S in anything below 3200ISO. I say this because I owned them both and did extensive tests with them before shooting a feature documentary. Colors and noise so much better on the BMPCC. The a7S had to be crushed to hide the ugly noise while the organic noise of the BMPCC was pleasing allowing more information in the shadows.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hey John I tried to recreate the background and lighting of your image with the circuit breaker. Play around with it and see what you think compared to yours. I always feel my Micro has a really clean image in lowlight and the images you sent aren't to far off. Your images look good to me minus having to push a little two much and I see two faint lines on the left. But I've seen worse from some of the other on here. I believe Zak said he didn't get the best of luck with his Micro. But the one you are looking to buy looks pretty ok.

                      For a real world base line I'm sending a shot from an actual job I was on several weeks ago (shot with my Micro) which like you I end up having to shot with available light. Which sometimes is nothing more than a street light. the photographer is well exposed but the background is really dark especially on the far left. I can push to max exposure and all I get is noise. But I am plagued with crazy aliasing and moire artifacts with my camera. Noticeable on the shorts of his right leg, around the word "PLUS".
                      I've been told this is a debayering algorithm flaw and can bee fixed. I wish BMD would work on it cause I feel my camera is golden besides that issue.

                      https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...1E?usp=sharing


                      And I agree with you on the Pocket and Micro's sensor in lowlight. With the speed booster on I've shot under some extremely lowlight conditions, and with the help of Neat Video the shots turned out great. The color information these camera retain in lowlight is excellent.

                      Good Luck!

                      Oh, and the photog image is shot under fluorescents and the room is under tungsten, for WB.
                      Last edited by Timothy Cook; 08-13-2017, 07:07 PM.
                      Vimeo.com/dropbars

                      https://www.instagram.com/cook_it_off/

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The fact that the bmpcc seems fine is an interesting case as to why they haven't easily solved the issue yet on the bmmcc. I say the more we make a fuss the sooner anything gets done if them saying that they didn't know anyone wanted the DNX codec even though it's in the ursa's menu, they're gonna turn around and say they didn't know we wanted a camera without fpn.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Make some noise here if you want, or make another one with a more on point heading. https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/v...356199#p356199

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by goodgoings View Post
                            I'll politely disagree the BMPCC with the Speedbooster and say it is even better than the Sony a7S in anything below 3200ISO. I say this because I owned them both and did extensive tests with them before shooting a feature documentary. Colors and noise so much better on the BMPCC. The a7S had to be crushed to hide the ugly noise while the organic noise of the BMPCC was pleasing allowing more information in the shadows.
                            Well, that are quite different testing conditions. The Speedbooster gives you nearly one stop extra, which could be done on the A7S with a faster lens. And I can always add Neatvideo to improve any footage.

                            But regarding the structure of noise I admit you got an important point there. I never found any footage that is so massively compressed as in the A7S satisfying. So, when I had to shoot a doc under very low-light conditions, I used external recording with the Atomos Shogun. Since my final resolution was HD anyway, I used Neatvideo plus downscaling, both of which is further improving on noise. Result: no FPN whatsoever and really low dynamic noise. But then it's true that the color science of Sony sucks, saturated blue in particular. BM got much nicer colors.

                            Whenever you lift a BM camera too much in the shadows, there is some FPN to be found. Unfortunately the cameras vary quite a bit. Whenever I see someone complain about visible FPN from a BM camera, I look at stuff from 3 UM4K cameras and one UM46 we tested and say: don't lift your shadows that much and it's not a problem.

                            I've yet to see any FPN from a Red camera that was calibrated properly. Unfortunately, that calibration can take more than 10 minutes… I suppose BM would achieve something similar if we could do such a calibration at working temperature and exposure by ourselves.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Thanks Tim. Your BMMCC dng looks pretty good to me. If I look really hard, I might see a trace of it but that's the same with my BMPCC. It's basically non-existent in my books. Mine doesn't look as good as yours unfortunately. For the kind of shooting I do, I really need to find one that has clean shadows.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X