FS100 / Blackmagic Cinema

[Les Wilson]

Originally Posted by Bill Weaver

I'm stunned by the bad ergonomics and feature sets on all cameras in the price range. ...

This is a good observation... just to pile on .... it should come as no surprise that ergonomics suffer when camera designers come from DSLRs and electronics instead of film and video camera design. But I think that like anything, ideas have consequences and worshipping WHAT is acquired at the sacrifice of HOW it's required also leads to poor ergonomic designs. Both are possible and it's not a handheld vs sticks issue. There's a reason why controls are on the LHS for both uses.

[Alister Chapman]

The automatic assumption that because a camera has RAW it will create better pictures than a non raw camera is great example of how manufacturers pick careful headlines to sell a product.

RAW is still dependant on the quality of the sensor, some sensors are noisier than others, some have more skew, dynamic range, colour reproduction, aliasing etc. One thing to consider is that by definition RAW will need to be manipulated to make it look nice, so any flaws in the RAW data may become accentuated during post.

BMD talk of a "2.5K" camera. Well frankly it's not. It has 2.5K of horizontal pixels, almost exactly the same as the FS100, so don't expect resolution or chroma key performance to be significantly different to an FS100 recording on a ninja or similar. The BMD is an HD camera.

The sensor size issues have already been discussed, yet the BMD is being sold as a "cinema camera". So my guess is that BMD's definition of a cinema camera is based purely on the RAW workflow.

I've seen many stunning looking clips shot with the FS100, so far I have yet to see anything from the BMD that has impressed me. I know that they have tested the camera side by side with a 5D, yet they are unwilling to release the side by side comparisons, why?

[Chris Barcellos]

Cinema is as Cinema does. When I talk about cinema shooting, I talk about shooting with a camera in traditiaonal narrative film making. Set up shots, and lighting, etc. We are talking different shooting levels for different purposes. For a lot of us who are looking for that it is something less expensive than a used car to get into 10 bit or more because our thing is purely for the fun of it, and I am sure this represents a lot more potential buyers on this forum, and the buying public in general, than those that want to put up the price of a new car. So a lot of us look at this camera as an entry point to new level of capability, and that is what it is all about. Noise, less low light capablity, bad ergonomic, etc, all issues, but it sure is nice for a lot of us to be able to enter a new play ground with a single purchase of a camera and software.....

[Chris Barcellos]

And guess what...... it is a whole lot of fun trying emulate a $30k production camera, with a $3000 rig.

[Alister Chapman]

Or a $1000 DSLR. At least the DSLR comes with a removable battery and a sensible choice of wide lenses.

[Chris Barcellos]

As I said Alister, we had all kinds of issues trying to make the 5D work. I worked on the Magic Lantern project, as one of the original testers, putting my 5D on the line. (Still have it and still Luv it by the way.)

And when I got the 5D, we had none of the hardware out there that helps turn the camera into a more usable product. I built my own series of shoulder braces, etc. In initial stages of the BMC camera, I am sure the same will be going on.

Point is, there is just something fun about trying to get somewhere by a different route than one that eats up a lot of cash, especially if you are not into it for anything than an avocation.

[Evan Donn]

I built my own series of shoulder braces, etc. In initial stages of the BMC camera, I am sure the same will be going on.

The big difference of course being that the BMC camera will hit the market with 3+ years worth of development of endlessly adaptable support systems from dozens of manufacturers available at nearly any price point.

And 2.5k raw certainly makes for a great marketing point, but I suspect that very few people who buy this camera will spend many hours with it actually shooting raw. It's clear to me that the real value of the camera is the ability to record directly to ProRes. If you consider the nominal cost of buying an external recorder to do that with another camera, plus the value of the included software, the price differential isn't much more than a $1k DSLR - but from the samples I've seen I expect it would have noticeably better dynamic range than the DSLR. Until we see more samples it's impossible to tell how it will compete in terms of other image attributes.

[Robert Turchick]

Originally Posted by Bill Weaver

I'm stunned by the bad ergonomics and feature sets on all cameras in the price range. You would think that someone could come up with versatile large sensor camera with a good form factor. It's not rocket science, and I just don't understand the consistent rollout of crippled cameras that could be so much more with just a little bit more design attention.

I don't know what you guys are talking about! The ergonomics of my 7D and 5D mk3 are perfect! It just cost about $4000 in extra parts but they work great now! ;) HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Alister Chapman]

And the BMD is no different, it will cost just as much to make it into a decent workable package, maybe more as you will need a 3rd party battery system plus unless you only shoot long shots you'll need to spend more on glass as low distortion, fast, ultra wide lenses don't come cheap.

Yes the BMD sensor in a box is cheap, not disputing that, but is it really so revolutionary? There are many MVC cameras out there that cost about the same as the BMD that have higher resolution, bigger and small sensors (take your pick), RAW recording (to a laptop) and C mount so you can use much more appropriately size lenses, yet no one appears to be getting excited by these, even though they have been available for years. But by sticking a "cinema camera" tag on what is an industrial sensor in a box, suddenly it's the best thing since sliced bread.

[Kyle McConaghy]

Glad this forum is still here! My old link stopped working so I thought it was discontinued...

I'm a very happy FS100 user yet I am excited about adding a BMCC to my arsenal. Here is why...

1) Film-like motion rendering: I love how the FS100 looks but there is something ever so slightly off that makes the motion not very organic, even less than a DSLR or the AF100. The BMCC, from little what we have seen, looks very filmic in regards to motion. I was thinking of buying a GH2 or canon just to achieve that look for certain projects... now I'll be happy to have the BMCC

2) Color: I've found some FS100 picture profiles that yield great results, but I think we can all admit that the FS100 is a bit difficult to dial in a natural color rendering. With RAW/prores log, grading / coloring will be much better with the BMCC

3) Resolution: This is an area that the FS100 also excels at, but I can't imagine the BMCC having worse resolution than the FS100. John Brawling, who is used to Alexas, has been extremely impressed with the detail. At this point, we can't know for sure, but my best guess is that the BMCC will have more detail than the FS100.

There are many areas that the FS100 will still rule: ergonomics, low-light ability, slowmo, timelapses, etc. I definitely do not see selling my FS100 anytime soon. But I have never felt like the FS100 is the right tool for indie films. I'm currently working on one right now with good results but the motion alone isn't going to make anyone ask, "what filmstock did you use?"... which was possible with the 5d and, I believe, will be possible with the BMCC.

[Mike Watson]

Came in to say what everyone else has already said. Despite the solidly mediocre form factor of the FS-100, the Blackmagic cam is 10x worse. And a month ago, I'd have said you couldn't get much worse than the AG100/FS100/etc.

Actually, the longer I use it, the better I become at shooting hasselblad style.

[Alister Chapman]

Originally Posted by Kyle McConaghy

3) Resolution: This is an area that the FS100 also excels at, but I can't imagine the BMCC having worse resolution than the FS100. John Brawling, who is used to Alexas, has been extremely impressed with the detail. At this point, we can't know for sure, but my best guess is that the BMCC will have more detail than the FS100.

Extremely unlikely that there will be any significant difference in the actual resolution. The FS100 and BMD have almost identical pixel counts. Both are bayer cameras. Don't get sold down the river by the BMD "2.5K' resolution claims. It has 2.5K horizontal pixels, not 2.5K resolution.

Colour and grading will depend on sensor noise. If it's noisy, you'll have a lot of problems getting a clean grade. Motion should also be the same, these are both CMOS cameras with similar frame rate and shutter options. You must consider that what you see online from the BMD currently has no image sharpening, this leads to smoother more film like motion. You can turn down or off the detail correction in the FS100 for a similar effect. The noise in the BMD footage also masks any motion judder, you can add noise to the FS100 to achieve the same effect.

[Chris Barcellos]

Having had the BMCC in hand now for about three weeks, I have to say that using only the Prores codec, and shooting in film mode, the camera's output seems to be more forgiving than what I have seen out of Sony NEX cameras. Of course, my primary experience is with VG 20 and the NEX 5n, but I have had access to a few FS 100 lower light clips that seemed so less forgiving when getting to the grading process.

I think the Camera also is no more of an ergonomic nightmare than the FS100. In fact, with various attachment points left to one's own imagination for adding components as needed, the camera can be very versatile to those with just a llttle bit of DIY ability.

Rigging a Black Magic Cinema Camera - YouTube