Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema 4K Camera

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post
    
Maybe that’s because Rawlite is a smaller third party manufacturer? Do they have access to the same resources and infrastructure and information about their own cameras that BMD has? I feel like we’re comparing apples to oranges here. I know you can’t hire nine women to give birth to a baby in one month, but if all BMD’s resources can’t find a solution to this problem faster than a garage-band third party shop then maybe that’s something they should address…

    

Basically everything about this paragraph is wrong. For starters, the actual low-pass filtration in front of Red’s DSMC2 sensors is behind the user-serviceable glass in the DSMC2 bodies, so the different “OLPFs” that users can install affect colour and light transmission only (Source). Second, many of those competing OLPFs you mentioned are things like aesthetic diffusion (e.g. netting), ND, or filtration for specific applications (e.g. IR shooting)—they don’t really compete with any of RED’s “OLPFs” as much as they augment a shooters stable of tools. Lastly, say what you will about there being so many options with RED’s “OLPF” ecosystem but at least RED gives their users options that won’t void their warranties.
    

Your seatbelt won’t save you in 100% of car crashes but I'll bet that hasn’t stopped you from wearing one. Along the same lines, I’m aware that an OLPF won’t kill aliasing and moire in every scenario but I can tell you right now that not having one basically means that I’ll never use an unfiltered BMD camera for anything mission critical. Ever.



    It is 2018 and moire/aliasing, like the kind you see with the UMP 4.6K, is unacceptable at this point. It was bullshit when we had to deal with it on the 5D Mk.2 in 2008, and ten years later it’s still just as infuriating. To add insult to injury, there is no way to address the lack of filtration in any BMD camera without voiding my warranty. When BMD releases the 4KPCC in September they’ll have released--if memory serves--about thirteen different cameras in six years, so if this was a problem that BMD was interested in solving I wager we’d have an official solution by now.

    Why everyone continues to make excuses for BMD is beyond me. I get that low-pass filtering isn't easy or cheap or quick to turn around, so from a business perspective I don't hold it against BMD for not making it a priority—it makes sense that corners need to be cut somewhere to meet price points and deadlines. But don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining guys.
    Man, just write to BM. No one's going to tell you what you want to hear here. Stop clogging up this thread please.

    Comment


    • Well it was on conversation, a little silly to tell someone not to voice their opinion on an open forum where everyone was speaking about that exact topic and how it relates to the pocket 4k. On top of which there is no new information, no footage so nothing to talk about but speculation and our experiences with the old version.

      Both sides raise good points and it's just interesting conversation. Depends on what your willing to put up with and what you need out of a camera.

      BMD has a history of issues it's fair to crtique those issues especially when the pocket 4ks main competition have said issues under control.

      Comment


      • Any footage yet? Really not trying to go through 127 pages

        Comment


        • Nope.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post

            —they don’t really compete with any of RED’s “OLPFs” as much as they augment a shooters stable of tools.
            Of course they do. Read this thread where most of them are talking about which one they LEAVE in their cameras, and the merits of how they change sharpness, ISO and colour / spectral response.
            http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...n-1-and-2-OLPF


            Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post

            It is 2018 and moire/aliasing, like the kind you see with the UMP 4.6K, is unacceptable at this point. It was bullshit when we had to deal with it on the 5D Mk.2 in 2008,
            How exactly would Canon have fixed that Alex ? (Yes it’s a trick question)


            Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post


            Why everyone continues to make excuses for BMD is beyond me.
            It’s not an excuse Alex. They are making a choice. They read the forums. They hear from users. They’re making a choice to leave their product without an OLPF. You don’t like it. You hate moire. If BMD and the majority of their users all made noise about it I bet you’d see an OLPF appear in the camera.

            OLPF’s were mandatory in stills cameras for a long time till resolution meant they were pointless. In an ideal imaging system, you don’t have a filter in there blurring out fine detail. As soon as they could remove them, the manufacturers do. Then they start marketing a lack of OLPF as a feature. What we’re arguing about here is the threashold between where it’s acceptable and not.

            I don’t get why you’re complaining when there ARE after-market OLPF’s available. If you want it that bad, and you want a BMD camera that bad, then install them. Is that really the ONLY reason you’re not using an after market solution ? Your warranty ? I'm 99% certain that if you had a warranty issue with your camera that had nothing to do with removing the sensor cover glass, BMD would do the right thing.

            JB

            Comment


            • Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
              Of course they do. Read this thread where most of them are talking about which one they LEAVE in their cameras, and the merits of how they change sharpness, ISO and colour / spectral response.
              http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...n-1-and-2-OLPF
              I’m just gonna quote from KipperTie here:



              “The true optical low-pass filter function is maintained, and colour calibration is matched to Red’s standard options.”



              The carbon “OLPF” that KipperTie makes is basically the same as putting a misting filter in your matte box and running the standard “OLPF” inside the camera. That tells me two things—that the actual low-pass filtering performed by the non-serviceable glass is fine, and that the colour rendition of the standard OLPF is adequate enough that KipperTie doesn’t want to mess with it. All those filters are really designed to do is increase halation/bloom, as opposed to completely re-working the other aspects of the in camera filtration.

              Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
              How exactly would Canon have fixed that Alex ? (Yes it’s a trick question)
              My point is that I don’t really hold anything against 2008ish Canon. The story goes that adding video to the 5D Mk.2 was something they did for Reuters, and in photojournalism the phrase “f8.0 and be there,” tells you everything you need to know about photojournalism’s relationship with image quality—that fidelity is great, but it’s more important to get a usable shot than no shot. Not to mention that processing nodes were still at 45nm in 2008, and I imagine that cramming the necessary silicon for a full sensor readout into the electrical, physical, and thermal envelopes of a DSLR was trickier then. It’s arguable that where Canon went after that represents corporate mandates rather than technical limitations, but that’s neither here nor there.

              Flash forward to 2012; after four years of Canon DSLRs, any shooter would tell you that one of the biggest pains in the ass is avoiding aliasing and moire. BMD goes on to release the BMCC without an OLPF and—quelle surprise—it is prone to harsh aliasing and moire. Then the BMPCC continues that trend; as does the BMPC4K, the Ursa, the Ursa Minis, etc. By 2018, BMD is kind of the outlier in this regard in that their cameras exhibit more susceptibility to, or at least a more noticeable manifestations of, aliasing and moire than other manufacturers in the market.

              Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
              OLPF’s were mandatory in stills cameras for a long time till resolution meant they were pointless. In an ideal imaging system, you don’t have a filter in there blurring out fine detail. As soon as they could remove them, the manufacturers do. Then they start marketing a lack of OLPF as a feature. What we’re arguing about here is the threashold between where it’s acceptable and not.
              For reference, the 4.6K sensor in the UMP has a photosite density of about 182px/mm. The first camera near the prosumer space I really remember ditching the OLPF for the first time was the Nikon D800E, with a photosite density of about 205px/mm on its sensor, and Nikon still recommended that most users stick with the regular, filtered D800. If you look at their sample images, the benefits of the OLPF removal are so minimal that it feels like you could achieve the same results by bumping midtone contrast and calling it a day. The only real difference I notice between the two cameras is at the end, when the D800E suffers from moire and aliasing. And that’s just a still image, where you wouldn’t see the pattern swimming with movement.



              There are cameras out there that don’t benefit from an OLPF, and for those specific applications I don’t see the need to have one in there, but for the kinds of densities we’re talking about in the video world I don’t think it’s a stretch to argue that OLPFs are still necessary. It’s hard to argue against Nyqvist when there are so many practical examples of its accuracy.

              Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
              I don’t get why you’re complaining when there ARE after-market OLPF’s available. If you want it that bad, then install them. Is that really the ONLY reason you’re not using an after market solution ? Your warranty ?
              I can’t be 100% sure about this but I’m fairly certain that I was one of the first people on this forum to own a Mosaic Engineering BMPCC OLPF. I installed it, I don’t take it out, and it definitely helps with the moire and aliasing even if it can’t completely eliminated it. So, what’s my deal? Why am I so bothered by this?



              Because third party solutions, however well bespoke, will likely never work as well as something that was intended to be an integral part of the optical path.

              Because Nyqvist’s sampling theorem is well know and understood to be a prudent design philosophy for any sampling device, and ignoring it is pretty reckless if your end goal is quality images in a variety of scenarios.

              Because once you record it, aliasing and moire are extremely difficult to work around.
              Because on a long enough timeline, I'd bet that every BMD camera user will likely encounter aliasing/moire that will ruin a setup for them.

              Because BMD’s cameras embrace so many other philosophies that prioritize image quality, yet they neglect this one crucial field that most other manufacturers do not seem to have a problem with in 2018.


              And because, as a community, I’m a little shocked that we have not made more noise about this.
              Last edited by Alex.Mitchell; 08-05-2018, 03:19 PM.

              Comment


              • John B., here's where I'm at. The BMC's need IR reduction with ND. The Hoya ND's (Pro sereis) don't claim to reduce IR, but it looks like they actually do. Is this a good solution?

                Also, I'm interested in shooting on a gimbal. Is there any existing solution for controlling focus either with a wire or wirelessly?

                Lastly, for gimbal shooting, is lens image stabilization recommended? Any recommendations for a lens that will give a good cinematic experience on a budget?
                Filmmaker - Author
                https://jgiambrone.wordpress.com/

                Youtube

                Comment


                • I'm glad i don't make moire ruin my day like some of you guys.
                  Darren Scott
                  Freelance Director/Director of Photography


                  https://vimeo.com/jambredzvisions/videos

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post
                    I’m just gonna quote from KipperTie here:



                    “The true optical low-pass filter function is maintained, and colour calibration is matched to Red’s standard options.”



                    The carbon “OLPF” that KipperTie makes is basically the same as putting a misting filter in your matte box and running the standard “OLPF” inside the camera. That tells me two things—that the actual low-pass filtering performed by the non-serviceable glass is fine, and that the colour rendition of the standard OLPF is adequate enough that KipperTie doesn’t want to mess with it. All those filters are really designed to do is increase halation/bloom, as opposed to completely re-working the other aspects of the in camera filtration.
                    C'mon Alex !

                    I'm just gunna quote KipperTie here too...it's the SUBJECT listing...

                    It's literally on their product page as "OLPF".


                    Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post

                    My point is that I don’t really hold anything against 2008ish Canon. The story goes that adding video to the 5D Mk.2 was something they did for Reuters
                    Actually you said it was “bullshit in 2008”.

                    The point really is that the 5d MK 2 HAS AN OLPF.

                    But it still aliased.

                    The reason you get aliasing though is because of how the image was created (line skipping) which is far far worse than the false colour aliasing we see from sensors that use the full readout at full resolution like BMD do.

                    You're conflating two very different types of aliasing and saying they're the same. They're quite distinctly different AND there's no way Canon could have done what they did at the time without it happening.

                    And, can we say for the record, how many thousands of people were just fine with the far far worse aliasing that the 5DMK 2 had ? It started an entire revolution in low budget film making where the LOOK was highly praised DESPITE it's limitations of aliasing and crappy 8 bit codec.

                    In your world that camera would have never had the function added because it was so bad.

                    Grandstand all you like, but most people don't see it or if they do, don't care enough that it stops them from using a camera.

                    I can honestly say it's never killed a shot in the many years and hundreds of FINISHED GRADED hours of my work with the Blackmagic cameras. I have however had an F55 shot get bounced for moire on the tech check. Go figure.

                    Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post
                    The first camera near the prosumer space I really remember ditching the OLPF for the first time was the Nikon D800E
                    Leica M8. Introduced in 2006. All of 10 MP (no digital Leica M, S or SL has ever had an OLPF). The original Leica M8 actually had no IR filter either and it was very prone to IR contamination. Now days they are practically a cult camera because they do amazing B&W shots because of this "fault". There were versions of the Ricoh GXR too I think, launched in 2009 that had no OLPF. By the way, Blackmagic do a "mild" IR filter in their cover glass as opposed to the M8.

                    M8 takes a beautiful shot. Let’s at some pictures from a low res sensor with no OLPF instead of zone plates designed to trigger moire (and do from all the cameras compared not just the BMD ones!)

                    https://flic.kr/p/kA8KUD
                    https://flic.kr/p/iBr6Fr
                    and black & white
                    https://flic.kr/p/j6wwJq

                    And here's a terrible torture test for moire. A stocking pulled over someone's head...https://www.flickr.com/gp/johnbrawley/6Y8P38

                    I still use it today. and so do many others. Not many other digital still cameras from 2006 are in use I think 12 years later...

                    Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post
                    I can’t be 100% sure about this but I’m fairly certain that I was one of the first people on this forum to own a Mosaic Engineering BMPCC OLPF. I installed it, I don’t take it out, and it definitely helps with the moire and aliasing even if it can’t completely eliminated it. So, what’s my deal? Why am I so bothered by this?


                    It's exactly the same process. There's no formula. It's about the manufacturing quality and precision. They'd be doing the same thing that mosaic and others are doing. There wouldn't be any advantage to an in house design other than the installation process. It's not that hard at all to remove your cover glass. I've done it. It's three screws on the UMP.

                    The fact is a solution exists if you want an OLPF. I don't see how a BMD designed one would be better when the degree of OLPF is all about making a subjective choice.


                    Originally posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post
                    And because, as a community, I’m a little shocked that we have not made more noise about this.
                    And why do you think that is ?

                    JB

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Taikonaut View Post
                      I agree.
                      People have bought Firecrest IRNDs that was fine with BMCC, BMPC4k suddenly find that they are pretty naff when dealing with IR cut on the UM 4.6k sensor.
                      just to clarify....firecrests IRND aren't as good for IR cut on the Ursa mini 4.6k?
                      Darren Scott
                      Freelance Director/Director of Photography


                      https://vimeo.com/jambredzvisions/videos

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by jambredz View Post
                        just to clarify....firecrests IRND aren't as good for IR cut on the Ursa mini 4.6k?
                        Jam is right. I used firecrests IR cut filter (not the IRND) on the Ursa and it does what it is meant to do. Works fine with Hoya ND or Tiffen ND too.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
                          Grandstand all you like, but most people don't see it or if they do, don't care enough that it stops them from using a camera.
                          I got it as cinematographers we all want perfect IQ, no artifacts, and on and on in our cameras. Besides those 1% (including us) who are very particular of the final look, the 99% of the viewing public can't distinguish or even spell moire, let alone see very slight color shifts, and many others. As long as it's not so visible to the level of "crappy" and the 99% is enjoying the movie, we should be able to contend with what is available and just make more movies with good story, lighting, and composition.

                          Comment


                          • I'm with Alex on this one ! I find moiré very distracting and hard to accept in 2018 where almost every camera are free of (to a certain extent). That almost kept me from ordering a Pocket 4k, almost But I'll give it a shot ! Maybe the increased sensor resolution or processing will make it less present than with my pocket or my BMMCC.
                            Having said that, I completely agree, you can still install one by yourself (which I did for my pocket) further down the line but I think it's kind of a difficult pill to swallow psychologically. I mean, paying almost 400$ for a low pass filter for a 900$ camera... arg ! I'd rather pay more from the start without knowing the cost of it.
                            And the other thing with moire in my pocket or my bmmcc: I think it's a flaw that completely kills the analog feel of those cameras which is, to me, their strong suit. The image is gorgeous, makes you feel like you almost shot something on 16mm and then, moiré in the talent's hair...
                            Anyway, here's a piece I recently shot with the bmmcc (no moire here, blackpro mist filter + canon FD wide open
                            https://vimeo.com/280733184

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by EYu View Post
                              Jam is right. I used firecrests IR cut filter (not the IRND) on the Ursa and it does what it is meant to do. Works fine with Hoya ND or Tiffen ND too.
                              Oh i was asking cuz i'm gonna get some firecrest in the future. Wondering if I still needed my Hoya Ir cut...I guess I do . I currently use Hoya pro ND as my ND filters.
                              Darren Scott
                              Freelance Director/Director of Photography


                              https://vimeo.com/jambredzvisions/videos

                              Comment


                              • Moire is very much a product the subject, lens in combination with the sensor. I used to see pretty severe moire from 16mm when going through a simple ccd film chain transfer unit. You wouldn't see that projected, and you wouldn't really see with sd video cameras of the era which kind of blows the notion that higher res makes it go away. It might be that. Specific resolutions are more prone, especially when sensor raster is the same as the recording.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X