4K BM “pocket” camera for weddings

[Steve Burkett]

BM worst decision is leaving it so long between announcement and delivery. You've lost the initial buzz and now with Nikon launching a fullframe mirrorless, Canon and Panasonic rumours of their own fullframe mirrorless camera, it's feeling a bit over crowded in the video buzz at the moment. If Panasonic were to offer a fullframe version of their GH line, I'd see that being more useful to me in Wedding work than the 4K pocket.

[Noa Put]

That rumored panasonic fullframe camera will most likely have a canon mount so get ready to buy a all new lensset if you heavilty invested in native glass like me. :)

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

That rumored panasonic fullframe camera will most likely have a canon mount so get ready to buy a all new lensset if you heavilty invested in native glass like me. :)

Yes but I can start with just 1 lens, a 24 to 70 2.8 is a favourite and would provide me with better lowlight without resorting to 1.2 apertures on my 4/3s system.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

BM makes more weird design decissions, like having a record button on the front of the camera and a red light so you know you are recording youself :)

It's normal to have the tally light on the front of the camera. It's to let the talent know that the camera is "live" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tally_light

[Noa Put]

I know that it’s normal to have such a recording light on the front with videocamera’s but I remember seeing a BM representative mentioning they put it there especially for vloggers. I only think it won’t be a popular vlogging camera if it has a fixed lcd screen.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

Yes but I can start with just 1 lens, a 24 to 70 2.8 is a favourite and would provide me with better lowlight without resorting to 1.2 apertures on my 4/3s system.

But being able to shoot wide open all day long at f1.2 or f1.4 is one of the advantages of m4/3, with full frame that would almost be impossible as the razorthin dof would be unmanagable. That means you’d shoot at f2.8 on a FF for a similar result but you would need a higher iso to compensate so here I don’t see how that would result in better low light?

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

But being able to shoot wide open all day long at f1.2 or f1.4 is one of the advantages of m4/3, with full frame that would almost be impossible as the razorthin dof would be unmanagable. That means you’d shoot at f2.8 on a FF for a similar result but you would need a higher iso to compensate so here I don’t see how that would result in better low light?

Thing is Noa, I've worked with Sony full frame footage from a colleague's camera. It's cleaner and still maintains some depth of field. I can never get my cameras that clean even at 0.95 aperture. So it's possible. Now this maybe not from a 2.8 lens. And to get that results, I would need to invest. I've no issue with that.

In the meantime a good 2.8 zoom lens would be welcome. I find the Panasonic 12 to 35 too sterile and less aesthetically pleasing as my primes. If a great Canon lens or another make can give me a nice zoom. I've considered the 18 to 35 sigma, but the adaptor puts me off.

[Noa Put]

It still remains to be seen if a full frame GH type of camera will be that much cleaner then a GH5S considering you will have to push it to a higher iso to maintain a dof that is managable. I never had to use neatvideo on my GH5 or GH5s though, not even for candle light venues but I only use fast primes in the evening with the exception of my GH5S where I use my 40-150 f2.8 for speeches with no issue, the only camera in my camerabag that produces noticeable noise when pushed is my sony ax100.

the only compelling reason I would see for switching to full frame is if you like the look you can achieve because of a much shallower dof, something that is harder to achieve on a small m4/3 sensor, even with a speedbooster. It won't however make you more money or get you extra bookings.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

the only compelling reason I would see for switching to full frame is if you like the look you can achieve because of a much shallower dof, something that is harder to achieve on a small m4/3 sensor, even with a speedbooster. It won't however make you more money or get you extra bookings.

To be fair I never use Neat Video either and much of the time I'm very happy with low light video from my cameras. Having worked with Sony full frame, you can't help but see the difference. Even compared to the GH5s. And in some situations I am in, any advanatage no matter how small can be useful.

That said, I think my real reason is that shallow depth of field. Not for the super shallow depth of field but more because I was doing a promo and the guy hiring showed me a video where the interviewee had a nice shallow background, which they wanted to duplicate in the video I was doing for them. However I struggled as the room was small. Give me distance and the 75mm or even 42.5 and I can get a good shallow background. But I didn't have the room. Full frame would help here.

And no it wouldn't make me more money. Or get me more bookings. The GH5 didn't do that, so why should any other camera. However it can help me in my work and give me options. I'm interested and I think you'd be too if it came out.

[Noa Put]

I'm interested and I think you'd be too if it came out.

Only if it's autofocus would be as good as the sony a7III, if not I"d rather put my money into some Olympus f1.2 primes. :)

[David Peterson]

The fact the BMPCC4K supports timecode input means this would be a great choice for anybody doing a lot of multicam shooting.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by David Peterson

The fact the BMPCC4K supports timecode input means this would be a great choice for anybody doing a lot of multicam shooting.

My GH cameras have timecode, and I don't see the BMPCC4K camera as a good multicam option in say something like a Wedding Ceremony. More indie movies, documentaries, promo videos and music videos.

[Nigel Barker]

I don't think that timecode is all that important for small scale event shooters when PluralEyes makes syncing multicam footage so easy nowadays.

The BM 4K pocket camera does look interesting especially for the price but the newly announced Nikon Z6 is going to be far more useful for shooting weddings.

[Noa Put]

In what way is that Z6 more usefull for weddings?

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

In what way is that Z6 more usefull for weddings?

It looks like a Sony A7 iii but with nicer colours & the possibility of 4-2-2 10-bit log files. The Nikon also has a better EVF & larger LCD. It looks like the 5-way IBIS might be better too.

The BM lacks both IBIS & AF which may be OK for purists but does make shooting fast moving events like weddings a lot harder. It's also MFT rather than FF.