Blackmagic 6K Full Frame- Why not to buy + 1 issue
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 มิ.ย. 2024
- I got my hands on the new Blackmagic Cinema 6K, and I love it, but it's probably not for you- plus the 1 issue I encountered while filming with it on day 1.
Subscribe, like, write which camera hurt your soul www.youtube.com/@omidacademy?...
Want to learn how to close your sales (Weddings or any kind of shoot?)- check out: 100percentcloser.com/
#blackmagic6k #blackmagiccinema6k #blackmagicfullframe - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
![Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6K vs Panasonic Lumix S5ii [Including BRAW]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/iuzKtL8p5M8/mqdefault.jpg)
![ภาพนี้ก็ฮาเหมือนกันนะเนี้ย #1 SS8 [ พากย์นรก MEME.EXE ] | easy boy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ytc50m91QK8/mqdefault.jpg)
Damn. You've convinced me. Even for weddings. I'm a wild man. I don't mind a bit of manual focus. I shot my first few hundred weddings pure manual focus on a C100. I miss those days. Now I might be able to shoot 1.4 because of autofocus, but I am constantly frustrated by terrible colours, especially for skintones.
Haha- rent it out. But you sound like an OG- there's a certain "excitement" when you're shooting completely manual, including the focus. Sure, you may miss some, but if it's a safe "necessary" shot, just shoot at F6. Loved hearing about the C400 today, but the quality isn't better per se than the Blackmagic 6K FF.
@@omidacademy so... I bought one. Matching the BMCC 6K with vintage lenses is amazing. They soften the resolution and create magic. Here are some camera tests at sunset with it. Barely any colour grade.
th-cam.com/video/gej6huYEytw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=cq5pZdlGohEBvPqc
Thanks so much for this thorough review! Appreciate particularly that your samples were shot fully with natural lighting, both indoor and outdoor, as I feel that gives the best examples of typical use case (at least for me). Your video has helped me make my decision to buy this camera! Excited :) Thanks so much again.
You're welcome!
The cinematic look is absolutely quantifiable as thats how manufactures of cinema lines tweak their purchased or in-house semiconductors we affectionately know as "image sensor" to craft their respective signature look.
The Asian Brands vs. all the others.
Sony and Samsung supply most of the world's image sensors. It's extremely expensive to build the scaleability and infrastructure to produce sensors in-house. It's easier for a camera manufacturer to buy chips off the self in bulk or co-op with Sony and Samsung (and others) to build a custom chip.
But these purchased raw sensors are just that, raw and dumb. Each camera manufacturer has to then take these raw sensors and tune them in a way that produces an image that is their respective signature brand.
There is strong speculation that all the modern BMD Pocket cams, including the 6K Cinema camera, are using a raw Sony chip. So, then why does the output look different when you compare a camera like a BMD with any Sony camera on the market? Why then do many Sonys look more "digital" and "video-y" and thin? The answer is multifaceted, which begins with understanding culutral differences.
1.) The Asian market has a different sensibility than Western markets. The highly saturated, contrasted, and extra sharp image that makes footage instantly look like the hallmark of video is celebrated and highly sought after in Asian sensibilities of what creates a "good-looking image." It's about precision down to the metric. Standard operating procedure. It's cultural.
2.) Many of the big players of the camera world come out of Japan. If you know anything about Japanese culture, you know the Japanese are culturally very insular people. THIS is why Japanese camera companies are slower to innovate because they serve the sensibilities of their own domestic markets first and foremost.
We also see this with Japanese car manufacturers. They always give the top of their line up to their domestic market, sometimes exclusively. Same culutral bias at play here.
The Japanese camera makers arent listening to the expressed desires and wants of their western customers because they don't agree on the premise that a "cinematic" look is a "good looking image" that will compel their prime customers to purchase units.
3.) The Western camera makers have a completely different aesthetic take. Arri, RED, and Blackmagic all take their visual cues from traditional Hollywood film. Especially Arri, which was the pioneer in bringing the digital film age to bear.
RED eventually came to market and promised to be the "Blackmagic" of today, bringing digital film to the masses. Somewhere along that mission, the company got really damn greedy, which eventually left the door wide open for Blackmagic Design, who then actually delivered on REDs broken promise of accessibility.
Blackmagics's main charter in building any camera was to best highlight and feature their software, DaVinci Resolve. They felt the heavily compressed video-y footage from cameras like Sony, Canon, Panasonic, and others crippled that marketing effort, so they decided to just build their own cameras that could serve that mission uninhibited.
So, what makes an image "filmic" or "cinematic"?
1.) Softer graduated edges (no digital sharpening) Show me any major Hollywood blockbuster either modern or old, and I will quickly show you it is soft. NOT clinically, ultra-sharp by any means.
2.) Higher DR. It's not about the total stops in terms of the numbers. It’s more about where the active dynamic range sits along the IRE.
Cellioud film has an effective DR of about 5-6 stops, but mostly sitting in the highlights, so they roll off beautifully. BUT If you underexpose film, even 1-2 stops, the shadows look like a grainy hot mess.
3 ) Higher color bit depth, which thickens chrominance values exponentially. It's hard to decern consciously, but the increased subtlety in chrominance values subconsciously gets perceived as "thick" or "creamy." Buttery if you please.
4.) Color science that emulates the cellioud film reponse curve in skintones, and in the magentas, greens, cyans, and orange/yelllows.
5. Motion cadence. How the image renders motion blur. It's not about just having motion blur present as in the 180° rule. it's about how that motion blur is rendered and interpolated during playback. It tends to be more painterly in Western manufacturer's tunings. Not by accident.
To summarize: The western manufacturers are trying to emulate cellioud film to chase that Hollywood vision of cinema, as this is their cultural understanding of what "cinema" is.
The Asian brands are trying to emulate detail and clinical precision, which are the hallmarks of video, videography, documentary, and clinical antiquity.
The difference is a culutral definition of what creates a "good-looking image."
As long as you keep buying cameras, camera makers are going to keep supplying them. Choose the right one that informs and supports the right kind of project and sensibility that speaks to you as both an artist and technician.
What a detailed response and insight!
Well said - a lot of truth in these words.
I just saw a test of this against the FX3 and it crushed it in shadows and highlights. I'd wager this has more dynamic range than the RED Komodo, especially after applying davinci highlight recovery.
I think honestly it has to do with the user and how they're exposing everything. I think 13 stops is a very fair and accurate representation.
I’ve never gotten excited about the battery grip. I would rather have a v-mount on my rig. And I have a set of the NiSi Athena lenses on order which make for a perfect pairing. Demoed them the other day and the size/weight/clarity for the price is nothing sort of amazing.
Funny, I'm having issues with it and may have to opt for the Anton Bauer plate. When I first got the 4K, my Core power died after a few weeks.
Lovely image. Unsurpassed for the money. Once your budget allows for a better image, the Ursa 12k eats everything way above it's price point. Everything else is about vanity °¬)
Shot a indie feature on bm12k. While being good on good lights, the moment it hits a dimly lit corner in a frame even in good light or element with lot of shadow details.. its generate visible pink digital noise. So much tht i wonder i could hv chosen red or sony. Not tht i m saying it cant shoot in night bt pink noise partially in frame is visible on large tv becomes a distract.
I just don't know what to do with 12K, but it's on the bucket list!
@@visualstoryteller6158 most of that can be removed in post with denoise no?
Interesting. In footage I've seen, I wonder if the highlight roll-off is less pleasing than the pocket cameras or UMP 5.6k G2?
@@JonasStuart i dont hv a 5.6k g2.. had few similar to insterstellar shot , looking out window, those data is clipped n whatever remained its high luminance color details, its gone.. its meant to be graded , n interior came grt, but any window or high bright tube light bounces r tough.. i dont knw why it felt more video cam than a film camera. Low light noise is atrocious. Not tht film dont hv grain, bt its pleasing n not digital. N if iso pushed to compensate for lowlight then noise n tube light white clipping. Like an old upgraded camcoder.
nice review!
Thanks!
Oh btw what lens did you use for these shots???
Just the Laowa 28 and the Panasonic 50 1.8
Which lens adapter are you using?
Just the Sigma MC21
I'd would say if you go Red, go with the DRAGON! Still better than most camera's. Great review!
Never shot with that- just the OG Komodo
Hi bro ,, red komodo x or blackmagic 6k fullframe ???
I’m curious aswell
You have $13K? Go Komodo X. You don’t? Get the new Blackmagic or the Pro with the ND filters.
@@omidacademyit’s the highlight rolloff
You can put together a three camera CC + ATEM Extreme streaming platform for the price of one Komodo X. These are entirely different cameras.
I’m loving mine bro! Just made a video on it too!
nah nothing "extra" cinematic about it - most modern cameras that can shoot 10bit produce near identical image if you follow correct CST procedures. literally every manufacturer. the cinematic part comes from better manufacturer creative luts provided. RED and panasonic has some of the best ones. I test them all before you think I'm talking from my ass haha
I get your take, and I’ve tested them all too. To my eyes, Red and Blackmagic “look” more cinematic- if lightning, depth, etc we’re all the time. And believe me, I had my eyes checked for cinematicitis, and it was negative.
Nah you’re wrong lol. Blackmagic definitely has a better cinematic look and it’s a mixture of the highlight rolloff, the lack of crazy noise reduction, and motion cadence
@@RandomMotoThingsAll of Blackmagic cameras including the OG Pocket camera have that cinematic look so I see and understand what he’s saying and I own just about all of them.
Absolutely phenomenal if you don’t mind the Jell-O effect all over the place… It’s rolling shutter just about ruins this camera. Now go by the new Sony a9iii !
Hahah, just pan slowly