Blackmagic Camera with Micro 4/3 Mount Announced

[Andy Wilkinson]

Not sure if this has been posted on DVInfo yet. Official website below. Shipping in December

http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/prod...iccinemacamera

[Chris Hurd]

Thanks, Andy -- I guess we're going to need a dedicated forum here... although BMD is running their own.

[Allan Barnwell]

Chris - with everything Blackmagic is making lately, you might consider a general Blackmagic area - though I understand the focus on cameras historically in the forums.

Allan Barnwell
Omega Broadcast Group - Professional Video Sales, Rental & Services

[Zach Love]

Am I reading this correctly, it is the exact same camera, but with a m4/3 mount instead of EF mount? But the EF mount has electronic controls (iris, focus, ...?) & the m4/3 doesn't.

I think the m4/3 is better because it opens up to more lenses than the EF (Canon's FD lenses for one), but might be a negative for anyone with EF glass since you wouldn't be able to adjust your iris w/o an expensive adapter that can talk with the lens (RedRock is the only one I know of).

I'd like to see a BMD camera w/ a generic flat mount w/ electronics (with the most narrow back flange distance possible). Then you can get differen adapters from BMD or third parties with or without any electronic control.

[David C Wright]

So if you have Nikon glass, is it best to get the original BM camera with a Canon-Nikon lens adapter?

[Thomas Smet]

I would think so. m4/3 is great for adapting vintage glass. The only problem I would see is getting a lens wide enough to use with this camera. Older Canon FD and Nikon glass works great with m4/3 but they don't always come in very wide options. This will be slightly compounded due to the slightly smaller BM sensor size. If I recall a 24mm will look like a 28mm and so forth. Not bad if you don't need wider then that but a major pain if you do. I think most older lenses below 20mm are fisheyes.

Of course this camera may not be a great option for those of us who like to use the native Lumix lenses due to a lack of electronic control but for those who have moved on to the much better manual control m4/3 lenses this would be a great option. The SLR Magic 12mm f1.6 for example as a fully manual lens would be great on this camera and plenty wide even with the slightly smaller sensor.

[Jos Svendsen]

I talked to BM at IBC and they clearly stated that the MFT-mount in passive edition was simple to do and can be considered as a cheap way to do PL and Leica M-mount,

They have discovered that the target group was much wider than they initially thought. Originally they had the Canon-SLR shooters as the primary target segment. The response after NAB made it clear to them that there was a big demand by users not having a load of Canon optics.

BM had considered PL-mount, but had found that the MFT mount was a better choice as more adapters exists here due to the popularity of the GH2.

And opening op for PL-mount means a much wider pro audience. There are also fully manual MFR optics on the market for a lot less than PL-mount.

[Zach Love]

Originally Posted by David C Wright

So if you have Nikon glass, is it best to get the original BM camera with a Canon-Nikon lens adapter?

I think if you have anything other than Canon EF glass, the MFT is the one to get. Even if you have EF glass, you can get a powered MFT to EF adapter, which would almost turn the MFT into a EF. But you definitely cannot turn a EF into a MFT.

The other thing that I think is a good mix is a B4 adapter on the BMD camera. You'd need something that is 2/3" w/ a doubler to cover the chip, but this has worked well with the GH2 & AF100, so it should work well with this camera too.

Easy way to get wide glass that people find lacking for the BMD camera.

[Steve Nunez]

Zach, the only problem with your example is that the BMC M4/3 type is passive meaning NO electrical communication to the lens which means using EF lenses with adapters would have to be fully manual as there would be no way to control aperture- as even the Metabones adapter wont control aperture electronically as there is no provision to do so with the BMC in m4/3 mount.....you could however use the diaphragm version which you could adjust manually.

[Cees van Kempen]

Originally Posted by David C Wright

So if you have Nikon glass, is it best to get the original BM camera with a Canon-Nikon lens adapter?

Could the camera be used with new Nikon glass without manual iris ring if adapters come available. Is there space between lens and sensor for adding an adapter with iris ring (like there are avaible for the Sony NEX cameras)?

[Steve Nunez]

Yes- what you're going to look for is a "Nikon G to NEX" adapter via eBay....I have some and they work perfectly.
There are also non-G adapters, don't get those as they require the Nikon lens to have an aperture ring.

Always check the adapters with a flashlight to ensure there are no light leaks.....90% are fine but some leak.

[Cees van Kempen]

Steve, The adapter you mention is for Nikon G to NEX, which obviously fits the NEX-cameras. But I'd like to know if similar adapters could come available (or probably already are) for Nikon G to BMC Micro 4/3. Or does the flange distance to the sensor not allow such an adapter?

[Steve Nunez]

Yes silly mistake- had NEX on the brain- the same adapters are available for micro 4/3- I have a bunch!

[Lee Mullen]

Originally Posted by Zach Love

I think if you have anything other than Canon EF glass, the MFT is the one to get. Even if you have EF glass, you can get a powered MFT to EF adapter, which would almost turn the MFT into a EF. But you definitely cannot turn a EF into a MFT.

What adapter do you suggest?

[Philip Lipetz]

Annelectroic adapter absolutely will not work since the BMCC MFT mount is dumb and an electronic EF adapter requires the camera signals to adjust the EF lens iris.