Black Magic Cinema Camera or Pocket Cinema Camera?

[kwilli93]

Ok guys im completely torn between the two. On one hand the 2.5K RAW Cinema Camera footage looks amazing! Very high quality. I could really see myself shooting a big production with the cinema camera. Especially compared to the pocket cameras measly 1080p footage. Yuck! Come on now, what are we in the dark ages? lol

On the other hand for the price, the pocket camera is NOT that bad in terms of quality and cost combo. AND it would be MUCH easier in post-production to handle than the huge 2.5K RAW video files.

Which brings me to my third paragraph, and my question. Would you guys say to spend the extra money and go for the Cinema Camera for the better quality? Or...appreciate the Pocket Camera's RAW capabilities and and save money in post production?

And my second question: Let's say, hypothetically speaking of course, that I am a very low budget producer without the necessary tools and hardware to manage 2.5K RAW and not a good enough workstation (or lack of) to edit it...

Would you guys say to start investing in a nice production workstation and buy the cinema camera or work with what I have and go for the pocket?

Any feedback will be greatly appreciated!

 

[kenrivers]

Who is your intended audience? Sure you would be preparing for the future with the 2.5K RAW cinema camera but how many of your clients would be able to view the footage at such a high resolution? Personally, I would invest in a good editing workstation and go with the pocket camera. For the 1K price difference you could get a couple of nice lenses for the pocket cinema camera. The Cinema camera would add so much more costs by the time you added a lens or two plus the upgrade cost of the computer to handle the large 2.5K RAW files.

 

[amuffin]

Is there any reason why you haven't considered the Panasonic GH3? Are you looking for sensor size?

 

[kwilli93]

Who is your intended audience? Sure you would be preparing for the future with the 2.5K RAW cinema camera but how many of your clients would be able to view the footage at such a high resolution? Personally, I would invest in a good editing workstation and go with the pocket camera. For the 1K price difference you could get a couple of nice lenses for the pocket cinema camera. The Cinema camera would add so much more costs by the time you added a lens or two plus the upgrade cost of the computer to handle the large 2.5K RAW files.

Sorry this post is going to be shorter than it was because i just finished typing it and my internet wasnt connected as i hit post. Sooooo..i think films, commercials, and music videos can enlist me and my BMCC as a camera for hire. Why not? If they want the 2.5K let them talk to me and ill bring the camera nothing else.

Equipment would be a problem for the BMCC but the problem with the Pocket is how could i possibly attract the attention of clients with somehting so outdated as 1080p? Im sure ppl would argue against that but the truth is its not all about other poeple. I want to make a film too. I love high resolutions and RAW shooting. I want to make a film with a camera with these features as well. So...what to do?

And to answer the question about the GH3, i took a quick look at the GH3's specs and i didnt see anything that would draw me towards that in comparison to the Pocket Camera. Sorry. Im trying to move away from the DSLR scene

 

[kenrivers]

If you get the BMCC how do you propose to deliver the content to your clients if you don't have the computer hardware to process the 2.5K RAW workflow? Will your clients be showing/viewing the content on monitors capable of showing the 2.5K content? If that is not a concern, do you feel like you would be settling if you get the pocket cinema camera? If you don't think you would be happy with it then go for the BMCC. I like the removable SSD drive for storage but not fond of the integrated battery. Of course battery life won't be an issue if you get an external battery pack. It will be quite an investment with everything you will need for the BMCC but you already know that. In the end I would hope your clients would be more impressed with the quality of your work than the camera you use.

 

[kwilli93]

If you get the BMCC how do you propose to deliver the content to your clients if you don't have the computer hardware to process the 2.5K RAW workflow? Will your clients be showing/viewing the content on monitors capable of showing the 2.5K content? If that is not a concern, do you feel like you would be settling if you get the pocket cinema camera? If you don't think you would be happy with it then go for the BMCC. I like the removable SSD drive for storage but not fond of the integrated battery. Of course battery life won't be an issue if you get an external battery pack. It will be quite an investment with everything you will need for the BMCC but you already know that. In the end I would hope your clients would be more impressed with the quality of your work than the camera you use.

Thanks for your input. I see myself as the person who excels with the right tools. And for me, the BMCC is the right tool. But... im also the person who likes to skip the basics and head straight for the professional stuff. So i should probably stick with the Pocket Camera anyway. As far as viewing and editing go...cant i just downscale the footage to 1080 and make it more manageable? Im sorry, ive only ever worked with 1080 footage so i wouldnt know. Oh! One more thing...it seems from watching pretty much every Pocket Camera footage on youtube and vimeo that NOONE has used the camera's RAW capabilities yet...am i right or am i just misinterpreting them? John Brawley mentioned the camera wouldnt even have RAW when it ships, everyone else seems to be labeling their foootage as ProRes format on youtube...interesting...if this is the case then i havent even seen the Pocket's true potential yet!

 

[kwilli93]

Anybody?

 

[USAFRet]

So you want to hire yourself and equipment out as a cameraman.
Convince me why I should hire you. What have you made? Show me something.

How do you attract clients to hire you and your equipment? Make something. Something glorious. The level of the equipment does not matter much. Some very popular videos have been done purely within an iPhone.

High dollar stuff does not a cameraman make. You can't just buy some expensive stuff, put up a poster and say "Here I am!"
Show me...

 

[kenrivers]

If you get the BMCC how do you propose to deliver the content to your clients if you don't have the computer hardware to process the 2.5K RAW workflow? Will your clients be showing/viewing the content on monitors capable of showing the 2.5K content? If that is not a concern, do you feel like you would be settling if you get the pocket cinema camera? If you don't think you would be happy with it then go for the BMCC. I like the removable SSD drive for storage but not fond of the integrated battery. Of course battery life won't be an issue if you get an external battery pack. It will be quite an investment with everything you will need for the BMCC but you already know that. In the end I would hope your clients would be more impressed with the quality of your work than the camera you use.

Thanks for your input. I see myself as the person who excels with the right tools. And for me, the BMCC is the right tool. But... im also the person who likes to skip the basics and head straight for the professional stuff. So i should probably stick with the Pocket Camera anyway. As far as viewing and editing go...cant i just downscale the footage to 1080 and make it more manageable? Im sorry, ive only ever worked with 1080 footage so i wouldnt know. Oh! One more thing...it seems from watching pretty much every Pocket Camera footage on youtube and vimeo that NOONE has used the camera's RAW capabilities yet...am i right or am i just misinterpreting them? John Brawley mentioned the camera wouldnt even have RAW when it ships, everyone else seems to be labeling their foootage as ProRes format on youtube...interesting...if this is the case then i havent even seen the Pocket's true potential yet!

I understand about wanting to use the right tools. Regardless of the camera the key is knowing how to get the most out of it. The reason you probably see so much footage labeled as ProRes is that that footage was ingested and edited on a Mac using Final Cut Pro. The CinemaDNG RAW would be usable with Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro and probably others as well on a PC or Mac. I'm sure you would be able to convert (downsize ?) the footage to 1080. Do you have samples of your work? I'm sure any potential client would be interested in seeing what you can do by what you have done.

 

[kwilli93]

I do have many samples that i can show.They are low-budget, but entertaining. And do you think downscaled 2.5K footage would even run on my i5 toshiba? My guess is no which is pushing towards the pocket side but...i dont know

Edit: I just downloaded a raw sample clip and it woldnt even open in my NLE lol Oh well Pocket Camera it is!

 

[kwilli93]

One more question, My machine cant run resolve, neither Lite nor the full version...is there anyway to convert the footage from the cinema camera or the pocket camera seeing as how i cant import test footage found online from the camera?

 

[kenrivers]

One more question, My machine cant run resolve, neither Lite nor the full version...is there anyway to convert the footage from the cinema camera or the pocket camera seeing as how i cant import test footage found online from the camera?

Are you referring to the RAW clip you downloaded? Where did you download the sample footage? I would like to try and see if I have anything that will convert it and then I may be able to recommend something.

 

[kwilli93]

One more question, My machine cant run resolve, neither Lite nor the full version...is there anyway to convert the footage from the cinema camera or the pocket camera seeing as how i cant import test footage found online from the camera?

Are you referring to the RAW clip you downloaded? Where did you download the sample footage? I would like to try and see if I have anything that will convert it and then I may be able to recommend something.

A guy on youtube who made a helpful video to demonstrate the uses of RAW shared this link:

https/drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BxpPyUU4VeBHLVNhVUJFcFZVNTg&usp=sharing&tid=0BxpPyUU4VeBHcUZRaU5rTWtubms

 

[kwilli93]

Are you referring to the RAW clip you downloaded? Where did you download the sample footage? I would like to try and see if I have anything that will convert it and then I may be able to recommend something.

Any luck?

 

[USAFRet]

Are you referring to the RAW clip you downloaded? Where did you download the sample footage? I would like to try and see if I have anything that will convert it and then I may be able to recommend something.

Any luck?

Fir file *C0001.zip extracts out to a file ending in C0001.mov. Which is a .mov file.
Opens in Corel VideoStudio Pro x4 as a 3.13 second video. Presumably opens in quite a lot of other things.

Is it supposed to be longer than that?

 

[kwilli93]

Are you referring to the RAW clip you downloaded? Where did you download the sample footage? I would like to try and see if I have anything that will convert it and then I may be able to recommend something.

Any luck?

Fir file *C0001.zip extracts out to a file ending in C0001.mov. Which is a .mov file.
Opens in Corel VideoStudio Pro x4 as a 3.13 second video. Presumably opens in quite a lot of other things.

Is it supposed to be longer than that?

No thats the full clip. it was meant to show the benefits of grading from raw footage so he just graded one frame to show us the difference. Now what was that program you just mentioned?

 

[USAFRet]

Are you referring to the RAW clip you downloaded? Where did you download the sample footage? I would like to try and see if I have anything that will convert it and then I may be able to recommend something.

Any luck?

Fir file *C0001.zip extracts out to a file ending in C0001.mov. Which is a .mov file.
Opens in Corel VideoStudio Pro x4 as a 3.13 second video. Presumably opens in quite a lot of other things.

Is it supposed to be longer than that?

No thats the full clip. it was meant to show the benefits of grading from raw footage so he just graded one frame to show us the difference. Now what was that program you just mentioned?

Corel VideoStudio.
Mine is part of the Photo & Video Suite x4. Currently, they are at version x5.
Medium grade photo and video editing - $80 for the full suite.
http/www.corel.com/corel/product/index.jsp?pid=prod4920158

As this is a .mov, presumably a LOT of things can open and edit.

 

[kwilli93]

Are you referring to the RAW clip you downloaded? Where did you download the sample footage? I would like to try and see if I have anything that will convert it and then I may be able to recommend something.

Any luck?

Fir file *C0001.zip extracts out to a file ending in C0001.mov. Which is a .mov file.
Opens in Corel VideoStudio Pro x4 as a 3.13 second video. Presumably opens in quite a lot of other things.

Is it supposed to be longer than that?

No thats the full clip. it was meant to show the benefits of grading from raw footage so he just graded one frame to show us the difference. Now what was that program you just mentioned?

Corel VideoStudio.
Mine is part of the Photo & Video Suite x4. Currently, they are at version x5.
Medium grade photo and video editing - $80 for the full suite.
http/www.corel.com/corel/product/index.jsp?pid=prod4920158

As this is a .mov, presumably a LOT of things can open and edit.

Thats so wierd! I mostly use After effects and premiere but both gave me an error when trying to open..

 

[USAFRet]

Thats so wierd! I mostly use After effects and premiere but both gave me an error when trying to open..

I see 3.13 seconds of a building.

 

[kwilli93]

No i know the length of the clip what im saying is strange is that i cant open the file in Premiere or After Effects. Any ideas?