Image source: PersonalView. UPDATE: Preorder are now available at BHphoto (Click here).
What a surprise! You remmeber how months ago I told you that Blackmagic may announce a MFT camera with active mount (that means with full elextronic aperture control and autofocus). Guess what, this camera is real and is not just a camrcorder! it’s a pocket camera!
The text says:
“Ultra portable Super 16 digital cinema camera with super wide 13 stops dynamic range, Super 16 sized 1080 HD sensor, built-in SD card recorder, high resolution LCD, ProRes and lossless CinemaDNG RAW recording, active Micro Four Thirds Lens compatibility, and micro HDMi monitoring with overlays.” For $995!
Amazing camera for a low price! And I have to say, I like that modern metal design too! I am surprised this has an active mount while the $2999 Cinem Camera camcorder has it not (specs here at BHphoto). UPDATE: Preorder are now available at BHphoto (Click here).
Source: Danielo Garcia
117 Responses
so is it a m43 sensor? or a different sensor with a m43 lens mount?
and lucky i was saving for the e-p5. was giving up on that and thinking nokton 17.5mm…. but now this might be tempting.
more info Admin. release date?
It says super 16 sized, which is smaller than M43 – more like 1″ size if I am not mistaken.
So how does that work? Just crops the image circle. So is a 20mm still a 20mm?
A 20mm is always a 20mm, hence it being called a 20mm
A 20mm lens is not always a 20mm lens. The focal length can change depending on the sensor behind it, and its crop factor.
The focal length of a lens CANNOT be changed by a sensor. That would be quite a magic trick. What a sensor does do is dictate the angle of view, giving the IMPRESSION of different focal lengths. So yes, a 20mm lens is always a 20mm lens.
A crop factor does not change the focal length, just the angle of view. The focal length of a 20mm lens will always be 20mm.
It is even smaller than 1″/CX sensor, but somewhat bigger (mostly wider) than 2/3″:
m43: 17.3 x 13 mm
1″ : 13.2 x 8.8 mm
Super 16: 12.52 mm x 7.41 mm
2/3″: 8.8 x 6.6 mm
All m43 lenses will have strange FoVs. Crop factor of 2.76 vs 2.
Based on the size of a Super 16 chip, the crop factor (compared to FF) will be 3.0. So a 14-42 mm lens will work as a 42-126 mm moderate telephoto rather than as the 28-84 mm standard we are used to. For standard lenses, the 9-18 will work as a 27-54, the 12-35 will work as a 36-105, and the 12-50 will work as a 36-150. However, IIRC videographers often work with longer lenses than still photographers.
The images will not be 4:3 but 27:16 (1.69:1), another sign that this is very much aimed at videographers. This means that the crop factor (based on the diagonal) is not as useful in comparing horizontal or vertical FoV as even between 3:2 and 4:3 cameras.
1st compact mft point n shoot doesn’t come from panolympus. Ouch!
It’s a cinema camera, not a p&s. It’s probably not very useful for still images at all.
A better photo – http://i.imgur.com/oBQhpza.jpg
The only good camera left in Panasonic’s lineup is about to become irrelevant. Panasonic needs a rangefinder more than ever now.
Still haven’t heard a really convincing argument why a ragefinder-styed camera would be much better (apart the coooooooool, retro design) than the traditional, DSLR-styled one. Ergonomically is obviously much worse. So what’s the pint I’ve missed?
the nose on the Screen? 😉
(and a lower body)
Is still wait for a mFT “rangefinder”
it’s coming for sure 😉 Now I know it. But you have to wait a few months. It’s FT5 🙂
A FT5 rumor on rangefinder-like built in viewfinder EP/GX camera?!? Spill the beans admin!
From which company?
I am working on the details. And I will post the news on 43rumors soon. But finally yes, I am sure 🙂
Thanks!
Hmmm…that will time-out well with the Olympus projected new camera offerings,…now won’t it!
With a KODAK logo on the top, back, front, bottom, left side, right side and across the lens.!!!!!
Try G3/G5. The nose on the screen is just an urban legend. The viewfinder hump is not on the centre, rather quite close to the left side of the camera.
And the body is just marginally lower.
Actually, no.
http://i.imgur.com/jhAhz7g.jpg
The DSLR shape makes no sense whatsoever in mirrorless, because as the name suggests, there is no mirror. without it there’s no sense in having a pentaprism hump, EVFs can be placed wherever the manufacturer wants unlike OVFs which need to be placed in accordance to the mirror in front of sensor. If anything it’s DRLS shaped mirrorless which play the nostalgia/retro card, as most of today’s photographers grew using D/SLRs so that’s what they`re more used to. centered EVFs and Humps have nothing to do with practicality, centered evfs induce the aforementioned nose problem (unless you’re voldemort) but also reduce the space allocated for your hand to reach the back controls, humps on the other hands make no sense at all, they’re purely aesthetic and a bad place for built-in flashes.
RF-type bodies are not popular purely because of nostalgia, they follow the true ethos of the mirrorless concept: no mirrors, no pentaprisms, less bulk. It’s the same as P&Ss, you don’t see many P&S shaped like DSLR because it doesn’t make sense, same goes for mirrorless, in fact P&Ss are very much ¨mirrorless¨ too, just with fixed lenses. Superzooms OTOH exist only to attract users aspiring to get DSLR performance, but in the end it’s just looks, they don’t needs humps, it’s purely marketing, just as with mirrorless. In fact, the only system to feature DSLR shaped bodies is m4/3 (and samsung, but, yeah…good for them), that may be because m4/3 was the first and needed to convince DSLR owners to switch to a smaller system and the best way to do that was to transition through the same ergonomics, it was necessary, sure, and it’s logical to stick to those models, that’s good too, but only if there are alternatives for those seeking something other that the generic and tired DSLR concept(GH3 I’m looking at you).
If the “hump” on top would be that of a problem, without film every DSLR today could flap the mirror vertically and have the prism on the side, compared with a small DSLR (like the new canon), this would also create an RF style camera. And the RF placement was also driven by technical problems, not size. For 99.9% of people there is no problem with “the hump” of an OMD, that’s the reason it has one.
OM-D has a hump because of IBIS, not because of evf. I have no problem with it because IBIS works great, but if the hump didn’t have function I’d prefer rf-style evf.
It has the hump because the EVF is placed directly above the IBIS unit. I highly suspect it was designed first, and the engineers just used the available space. When looking at the innards, it appears that had the EVF been offset relative to the IBIS, it would fit without a hump.
That 99.9% of people is only limited to those who already own a OMD not the whole m4/3 spectrum of users. Of course 99.9% of OMD users have no problem with the EVF, they CHOOSE that type of body because it suits their DSLR background, it’s nostalgia too, it’s what they’re accustomed to, it is not, however, the ideal or the logical body type for mirrorless, for practical reasons (see the picture i originally posted). But what about the other % of people who dislike the DSLR form factor and require an integrated EVF (add-ons add as much if not more bulk than a hump, so not and option) ? should they all ditch all their invested m4/3 and switch to Fuji or Sony ? is that good for the system ? An RF-type m4/3 wouldn’t affect current GH and OMD owners so why do people oppose the idea so strongly ?
You are obviously unaware that that sideways flipping mirror for a reflex has been done already, even for film.
3 cameras that had this all have very loudly voiced fans, but very little market success. This kinda suggests people like you are projecting your own preferences onto others.
Then, saying that others just hang on to some legacy design and form, while at the same time asking for one that is even older is just a tiny liitle weird….
And no, there is nothing wrong with asking for a ‘range-finder style’ camera, but everything wrong with acting as if those that don’t see things exactly as you do are stupid.
Sorry, AMVR, but you have to try an ergonomical DSLR-shaped camera (G5), not a retro-styled one. the EVF on G5 is reasonably close to the left margin, unlike E-M5.
Exactly.
Mirror or no mirror, for interchangeable lenses, the viewfinder centered above the lens is the most efficient and ergonomic arrangement. Your eye is aligned with the lens. Like firing a rifle or pistol.
Try shooting closeups or using a long lens with a rangefinder. Oh, wait , with rare exceptions the longest rangefinder lenses were about 90mm. And I’ve never heard of a rangefinder macro lens.
If people are solo concerned about nose prints on their LCD, buy a camera with a fully articulated LCD that can be flipped toward the body.
That said, I’d like to see a true rangefinder M4/3 body, and might actually get one, but I would only use it with short and wide angle lenses. In fact, I’d probably only use my adapted rangefinder lenses. Telephoto? No. Macro? Never.
What a silly argument. You may not want a RF located view finder yourself… but the lack of macro lens for real RF camera, and no common lens longer than 135mm, had everything to do with the RF technology (parallax error, no zoom) than the ergonomics of the location. A corner located EVF could easily handle macro and telephotos since it is giving a view TTL.
At any rate, some people would like it located there, and I’m not sure why you have such strong feelings about it since it will never affect you. There will still be GH3s, OM-Ds etc, so what’s wrong with the choice? Sony and Fuji owners seem pretty happy with it. At any rate, argue on the facts at least.
I have no argument against a true rangefinder body, except in terms of ergonomics. I used rangefinder film cameras for years and was never enamored of the ergonomics, especially when attempting to shootclise-ups. When I got my first SLR I was much happier.
If you’ve ever handled a NEX 6 or NEX 7 with a long lens, you’d know what I mean. Its simply unbalanced and uncomfortable. It’s kind of like playing the transverse flute.
A camera body with a more compact form factor and a built-in viewfinder is very desirable. It makes perfect sense..
What difference does it make to have the EVF aligned with the lens if EVFs give you TTL live view anywhere you put it ? why should m4/3 limit itself to other formats limitations that don’t affect it, it’s nonsense.
Mirrorless are not RF nor do they have their limitations either, what’s all this talk about telephotos and macro lenses ? why would mirrorless be impaired by the position of the EVF? again, nonsense.
Nose prints are not the only reason (look at the photo i linked). having the EVF in the center forces your head to the right reducing the space for your hand to freely reach the controls. Moving the EVF to the left also frees up your left eye which can scan the surroundings instead of being behind the camera. And lastly, a flush top plate makes it easier to store or retrieve the camera into a bag and overall reduces bulk.
As Mooboy said, what’s so bad about having an alternative to faux-dslrs ? how would it affect OMD an GH users, they will still be made, why can’t other people be allowed to use their preferred type of camera ? Should Sony and Fuji feast on that market by themselves ?
Yeah, what could possibly be wrong about not having a viewfinder centered over the lens…
What you seem to fail to realize is that a ‘true’ rangefinder has its view window (almost) immediately in front of the viewfinder. I suppose you never had a rangefinder with a 1:1 finder, so simply don’t know about proper 2 eyed usage, because if you did, you’d also know why it is in fact a very good idea to have the viewing lens as directly in front of the actual finder as technically possible. But even if you didn’t, maybe you learned this little trick of looking at something far away, and then moving a camera (or bi/monocular) in front of your eyes and have it instantly pointed at the far away object? That also really works better when center of taking lens is directly in front of the center of the finder.
You also seem to not know that the sideways flipping mirror has been done, more then once actually, and already in film days. Such cameras have extremely vocal fans, but none was a success in the market.
E-300 anyone?
“EVFs can be placed wherever the manufacturer wants unlike OVFs which….” Yes that’s what we want a bloody evf, where is a nice question, detail detail detail! just put one in left side rear.
“you don’t see many P&S shaped like DSLR because it doesn’t make sense,..” I think you missed a whole generation, nay whole generations of them. Most developed ultra zoom lenses. But were SLR clones to look at and they were (still are) most certainly point and shoot.
And you seem to have missed my whole argument about super-zooms too. Also notice I said ¨…you don’t see [MANY} P&S shaped like DSLR…¨ , i didn’t say there were no dslr shaped P&S i just said they were the minority, again read my argument ( i say pretty much the same as you BTW).
Most P&S cameras don’t have a viewfinder nowadays to begin with. Obviously, positioning of something those cameras don’t have to begin with is not going to be an issue.
But, from those that do have a viewfinder, a significant part, if not the majority, does look like a DSLR, and mostly handles like one.
Nose on screen – given that the screen flips over so it can be closed, I have never had this problem with my G3. But it’s too bad the image quality on the G3/G5 is so shite (compared to the OM-D), I’ve written Panasonic off and am selling my G3 to a friend (for his wife to use, he has the OM-D.)
Excellent news, this. Even if it’s not a camera I’d buy (being a still photographer, mostly) it’s great to see another manufacturer jumping on the m43 landscape. Curious if they can get competitive still image quality out of a smaller sensor, generally the higher the pixel density, the worse the IQ at higher ISO.
Hmmm… Is the nose on the screen a better stabilizer than the cheek on the screen? No, seriously, we should debate this!
Now the same active mount on the large cinema version and we’re happy
“Only” $995 ? What´s so special about this cam that it cost almost the same as an E-M5 ???
If the video is anything like the footage that comes out of the full-size black magic, then this camera is very special
agree. It’s obvious many stills-orientated people don’t care for this product. I have always seen photographing and filming as a similar discipline. I especially can dig the small size and price. Now just waiting for a test in practise I guess.
Wow!
wow! Super 16 sensor is near half the size of M43 sensor though. .. Still pretty interesting!
Micro 43s goes form strength to strength!!!
( I thought we had some Panasonic news this morning?? )
Why would someone get this over a E-PL5 or maybe EM5 with that much money? The portability is the only thing I see that is advantageous.
Wrong question. The more appropriate one: why would anyone get an E-PL5 or EM5 over the mini Blackmagic? A interesting consideration ahead for the brand-agnostic photo/videographer.
Because this is a cinema camera and may be unsuitable for still photography. NAB is a video show. We will not know until the specs are released but this will likely be missing features taken for granted. We already know it has a smaller sensor.
A video only camera COULD (no way of knowing now) have drawbacks like:
1 – No mechanical shutter.
2 – A 2 MB (1920×1080) sensor. Given the claimed DR a low res sensor is likely.
3 – Manual focus only. But m43 lenses should work in focus by wire.
4 – Poor or missing JPEG engine.
5 – Poor user interface for stills.
This sounds like a special tool for film makers, not a general purpose camera.
Didn’t you read?
-Ultra portable Super 16 digital cinema camera
-13 stops dynamic range
-1080 HD sensor
-ProRes and lossless CinemaDNG RAW recording
-micro HDMi monitoring with overlays
It’s cinema camera, that neither E-M5 or E-PL5 are.
Thanks. I guess this is geared toward a totally different demographic. The semi-serious filmmaker. So this is probably even better than the GH3 as far as video performance is concerned. Sorry, I’m not very well verse in filmmaking or video equipment as I on shoot stills.
Me too. Video is still an unknown media to me. I wonder what are these new camera photo capabilities though, and what’s the crop factor.
read “Cinema” camera – therefore targeted at video. And likely will be outstanding for video.
GH3 is a jack of all trades, good at video, good at stills
OM-D is targeted at stills, great for stills, bad at video
I don’t see this as competition in any way for the OM-D, the GH3 and GH2 just got some serious competition though.
+1
I am a still shooter and I don’t know about video much either…(…but if the sensor is that much smaller on the Black Magic how can it be a better movie camera than the GH3?)
It has a better dynamic range than the GH3 which will really show in the footage. It’s the same dynamic range as the standard Blackmagic which is very good and looks far more film like. It will be interesting to see some footage.
Not just video, but *serious* video… but is 1080 serious enough?
Here is the wider-view photo of the announcement banners, including a 4K camera for $4k. 🙂 Global shutter and CinemaDNG, but EF mount.
http://www.slrlounge.com/nab-newsflash-black-magic-to-release-4k-bmcc-for-4k-and-pocket-1080p-bmcc-for-995
Look at the photo. The Black Magic Camera is a dedicated video camera. In other words, no stills. Maybe later, but it’s doubtful.
Why would you want to shoot 1080 pixel stills?
If you were serious about video, you’d be looking at a GH2 or GH3 or a Black Magic camera, NOT an EM5 or EPL5 or a G5 or GX1.
Does it focus at all? Can it change the aperture? Or is it just a passive mount?
Ok, I see now that the mount is active. Sorry.
This is cool news. Go Blackmagic! The only strange thing, is if they have the ability to engineer an active mount then I’m surprised they didn’t hold on and implement it in their big MFT Cinema Camera. Still great, though! Eagerly await more info!
This camera is a specialized little tool for shooting high-quality video in CinemaDNG RAW and ProRes. It probably can’t even take photos, so there is no use to compare it with anything from Panasonic or Olympus, because these companies don’t have a small cinema camera at all. It’s a completely different world.
Wow, that’s really cool, in a number of ways.
Assuming the sensor really is that small, I’m guessing there’s a lot of reasons for me personally to get an E-M5 since I shoot a lot more stills than video, but this thing would be really tempting as a second camera or in place of a video camera if the quality is anything like its big brother.
Is it micro43 system or not?
If not – why such information is in 43rumors?
>> Blackmagic announces a pocket MFT camera!
>> Is it micro43 system or not?
wat
It say: “new camera MFT”
MFT = M43
You can see an 14mm panasonic mounted on
But, as I understand, sensor is smaller then micro43 sensor (super 16 sized), therefore Blackmagic pocket + Panasonic 14mm is not 28mm equivalent. How to calculate FF equivalent for this combination?
I think that super 16 is just slightly smaller than the Nikon CX sensor so the crop factor should be around 2.8x .Though don’t quote me without checking lol , I am for sure not a mathematical genius
Crop factor is 3x. (2.97x) Some other estimates are off, because I think they’re comparing horizontal dimensions rather than diagonal.
So a 14mm lens will have the same field of view as a 42mm lens on full frame. While this isn’t exactly super great on the wide end, the 7-14mm will still be an ultra-wide, just not as extreme.
Wow!!!
Questions that spring to mind:
Will this have a greater crop factor due to the Super 16 sensor? I think it will.
Also, will the hotshoe be compatible with Pan/Oly viewfinders? A viewfinder is pretty important for a video camera.
It doesn’t have a hot shoe mount on top, that is instead a second tripod attachment.
The sensor is smaller, the crop will be greater. 2.97x according to wiki
Ultrawide angle lenses will be required to get wide angle shots.
Oke, there seems to be some confusion about the sensorsize. If it is 1/2 a m43 sensor, why would I buy this over a GH3 which will cost only a bit more? I think te GH3 will have much better output and is also a more complete package (at least from what I seee here). This also does not look like a cam with swiveling display.
It looks great though, really like the design.
Regardless, if this works well, it is a very nice addition to the system it seems.
Otoh: what system. It uses m43 lenses (lensmount) but if it is a 1″ sensor then it seems to be a “1” camera in disguise?
‘Cuz it’s teensy weensy and shoots RAW video, maybe?
They’re two very different beasts.
“…why would I buy this over a GH3 which will cost only a bit more?”
Plenty of reasons, but I’ll give you just a couple:
a) 13+ stops of dynamic range.
b) ProRes 422 (HQ) and 12-bit Log RAW lossless compressed CinemaDNG
If those two points are meaningless to you then you’re not its target demographic….
What’s the meaning of “Super 16 Sized”? Size or Resolution?
Sensor size has nothing to do with resolution. A Super16 film frame measured about 12.5mm x 7.5mm, so that should be the dimension of the sensor here, too.
What is the advantage (for movies) of Blackmagic body (crop x3) over Panasonic GH3 (crop x2)?
Dynamic range is much better, plus the camera shoots RAW video, giving you much, much more flexibility in colour grading.
Also, the footage out of Blackmagic Cinema Camera is just beautiful. Very cinematic, has a lot of character, if you see it you’ll understand. Here’s a good sample: https://vimeo.com/62959319
The downside is that this thing is going to burn through SD cards, since the files will be enormous. It will be a bit like the old film days in that regard.
I did not see this coming. I can’t wait to try out my C-mount lenses (that vignette on M43) on this slightly smaller sensor. If the dynamic range is anywhere neat the Blackmagic Cinema Camera then I’m sold. Companies other than Panasonic/Olympus making M43 cameras. I love it!
so this will be out when? 2015?
That’s exactly what I was thinking 🙂
If anyone is interested in video, I mean NOW, they are better off with GH3 🙂
just for refernce, the The Blackmagic MFT camera was announced when? And is still awaiting shipment in Dec 2013.
Cool stuff though, only if it would realize in something.
By the time this comes out, will prob compete with GH4 or GH5.
The Blackmagic EF mount camera is available now though.
When can we expect to see the full spec for this camera?
So how long before a full frame version. Meaning full
m43 sized sensor 🙂
Very interesting. I’d certainly be interested in it. The crop factor isn’t much of a problem with macro photography.
I think the biggest question is what are it’s still capabilities, if any? I realise this is squarely aimed at those who want video, but to me a hybrid cam is essential. Although having said that, this is small enough to allow you to carry another cam.
Also does it have a working hotshoe?
With mirrorless there is a lot of potential for other manufacters with no real history of camera making to step in. It appears that even lots of the camera manufacturers are buying in generic components. All that’s necessary is for other manufactures to put them together.
A small, nit-picking clarification. It’s not just “all mirrorless”, but only M43 which is an open format. Sony, Samsung etc. are all proprietary formats, so something like this offering will not be possible prior to an official authorization from the vendor owning the format. As far as I know only M43 / MFT is free for anyone to join / use. Over time we will see more and more of these “niche extensions” to M43, now that the critical mass is there, which is great for the format (and who invested into it) and ultimately users.
So, great news!
@any
FYI. m4/3 isn’t an open format. It is a controlled and owned format, it is by invitation only. 4/3 was an open format. However, after the announcement of m4/3 Panasonic and Olympus clarified the status in the BJP (British Journal of Photography)by stating that the m4/3 format was not an open format like 4/3.
A nearly 3x crop factor would be an issue for me if it’s going to be tough and expensive to get a decent wide angle lens that fits and works(e.g 28mm as 35mm equivalent). This is the kind of camera you would use for handheld and I assume stabilisation built into lenses is required.
The Olympus 9-18mm would quite a useful wide zoom. It should also be possible to pick up some C mount lenses wider than 10mm for not much at all.
Thanks for that info Jez
That’s true, the smaller sensor size would allow you to use lenses that would vignette too much on a MFT sensor.
There is also the MTF Samyang 7.5.
Anybody got any idea if this has in-built image stabilisation? Or for that matter if lens-housed image stabilisation would work on this?
Good question regarding in-body stabilization, it would almost be a requirement for a video camera, especially if you’re shooting high-quality/RAW where you don’t want to post-process just to reduce shake. After trying to hand-hold shoot with my NEX-7, I’ve given up trying ;). They should have plenty of room with a smaller sensor and a m43 mount…
And given the pics, looks like no global shutter in this camera; wonder how they’ll fight the jello without IBIS? (Very fast sensor reading, perhaps.) For that matter, if it’s a video-focused body, it might not even have a mechanical shutter. 8^O
for such resolution all lenses are good, even 17/2.8 and 12-50
with crop x3 more wide angle lenses are desired.
7-14mm -> equiv. 21-42mm
9-18mm -> equiv. 27-54mm
12-50mm > equiv. 36-150mm
12-35mm > equiv. 36-105mm
35-100mm> equiv. 105-300mm
14-150mm> equiv. 36-450mm
40-200mm> equiv. 120-600mm
70-300mm> equiv. 210-900mm
wrong…
14-150mm> equiv. 42-450mm
14-42mm > equiv. 42-126mm
strange…
more WA necessary…
Ok its for movies. What does it hook up to? What drives it? It may be a nice little take anywhere extension of your computer or phone. It may have all the functionality and connectability that some people seem to want. There again it may not. Lets see when it gets here.
Finally!!! That´s exactly THE CAMERA I´ve been waiting for. Full HD RAW, active M43 mount, pocketable, affordable. Wow!!!
I paid about the same for my Panasonic TM700 camcorder in 2010. This Blackmagic cam is a great bargain. I shall have it.
They are dropping two cameras: http://www.slrlounge.com/nab-newsflash-black-magic-to-release-4k-bmcc-for-4k-and-pocket-1080p-bmcc-for-995
not a cinema user, but this is an impressive package. Size, price, mFT mount, opens up all kinds of options. Not a still camera that shoots motion, this is an excellent stage for someone that wants to get into motion photography, and have pro-options, without the excessive price of body and lens choices. The larger BlackMagic has a smaller sensor as well, that isn’t a real big issue, as they’ve come up with very impressive output. mFT mount means adapters opening up so many legacy lenses, I can see this being very attractive to anyone that finds the compact idea attractive. look how popular GoPro is and that is simply a rudimentary vid system, with none of the tools this system will provide …
Finally – Raw video for $1000.
RAW video is really tempting stuff. Whole camera seems as pretty interesting. Tho, EVF yes or not? 🙂
No EVF. And probably no hot shoe option either.
Too many uninformed people here. First and foremost, BMPCC is a cinema camera guys. So it’s wrong to compare it to the EM5. It may be weighed in versus the GH3. $995 for 1080p CinemaDNG RAW and ProRes is insane. You guys have to understand that first. This is an insane GAME CHANGER for the filmmaking community, and it MIGHT spell doom for the GH filmmakers. Heck, I’m a GH3 shooter myself. I’ll hang on to my GH3 first while I save up for the BMPCC. This is just insane news.
13 stops DR/1080p/raw/$995
I’m pre ordering as soon as available. I’ve downloaded DNG’s from the current BMCC and the ability to recover details in the shadows and highlights is nothing short of revolutionary in the video world – the nearest price raw video cameras cost many times what the BMCC costs. What an awesome time to buy a camera, so many choices. Hopefully Black Magic has ironed out its production/delivery issues and can get these out this summer.
To drop one at $1000, this could (pending image samples, though the current Cinema Camera demonstrates its capabilities) offer the best 1080p image under $15,000 outside of the other Black Magic cameras. Amazing. Any videographer looking for a small camera will give this a serious look. A P&S sized camera, shooting a codec that far exceeds any HD broadcast standard, wow. Add a cage, external monitor, rig and follow focus and you could fool people into thinking its a full on cinema camera. Or you can shoot small and light with a steadicam smoothie. All I can say is amazing.
More thoughts — get a M43 speedbooster, gain an extra stop and a wider FOV. So many possibilities, goodbye Nex…
Don’t underestimate the complexity of the RAW workflow. CinemaDNG raw is not for consumers. You need to have a super powerful PC, a lot of storage and the know-how to process the raw data. However, an affordable CinemaDNG camera is what I’ve been waiting for.
I was about to place my order to GH3. If the Blackmagic would hit the market soon, I may change my mind.
IT would be great if this had a IBIS, if not it will be harder to take advantage of some good Olympus lenses. If this wasn’t a “pocket Cinema Camera” I guess this wouldn’t matter so much, but since it is, I think that it implies that you won’t use it primary with lots of equipments so IBIS wouls be quite welcomed – even more something like the Olympus 5-axis IBIS.
Incredible sensor, let’s hope the ergonomics are ok. Things like a better battery system and more usable buttons/dials would go a long way.
Glad I have not jumped on a decision yet for my video concerns. If the video is outstanding. I’ll jump on it and just use my Omd for stills and black magic when video is a concern. Being able to use the lens I have for MFT is a serious factor.
Official announcement (PR Release)
http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/press/pressdetails?releaseID=38108
http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicpocketcinemacamera
IF YOU USE C MOUNT 16MM lens, there is NO crop factor.
a 12mm C mount lens on this camera is 12mm.
an 85mm C c mount lens on this camera is 85mm.