- Moderator
- #21
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Messages
- 13,392
- Reaction score
- 796
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Website
- www.phfx.com
rand thompson - The BRAW from the CC6K work in 18.6.
Not to provide too much a grounded perspective on all of this, but there's a great deal of crossed wired conversations regarding all cameras. Moderately why I test so thoroughly is to have a firm grasp and understanding of each system. I'm rarely very surprised and when I am it's usually pleasant or disturbing.
But to hit it a bit squarely on the head, the Cinema Camera 6K is not playing in the same category that more premium priced systems are. It exists in a segment and pricing tier to be approachable by a very large market. And to that point, I do give Grant and the BMD crew credit. In this case the CC6K is really going up hard against other mirrorless bodies in nearby pricing tiers.
Providing some more favorable thoughts, there are things that are good here. BMD is shipping this camera with a Low Pass filter, which solves many headaches. And L-Mount is a very good choice given that RF and E are in play by other manufacturers. And L-Mount has primarily existed in the bottom < 8% of global camera sales. This expands that market and will boost optics sales for Panasonic, Leica, and Sigma by a noticeable margin. Bare in mind Canon and Sony own about 72% of the market share with Canon taking up 2/3rds of that slice of the pie. I'm talking cameras here, but it's important to identify that Sony makes so many of the off the shelf or OEM sensors found in other mirrorless cameras and it's utterly impressive that Canon is such a giant in this space grasping to their own tech without providing it to others. Digital cinema manufactures like RED and Arri globally make up for far less sales and exist in their own realm with their own sensor design and fabrication strategies, which is a good thing to separate from the herd. There needs to be diversity because if everything is the same it will be a far less vibrant landscape of creative choice.
To that point, what often happens is we have the same sensors in various cameras or newer takes on those sensors. Which in the case of the new Cinema Camera 6K is certainly true, but also a reason that they can make this camera so affordable. And more interesting there are other sensors I can imagine existing in future models for them that a few others are currently using.
Tracking discussion abroad across the web I see those who are very interested in the new camera, same for Sony's Burano, but also a great deal of strong criticism. Par for the course. In the case of the new BMD, mainly it seems lack of internal ND, IS, etc. But for that market the users are largely unaware that mount adapters exist with ND solutions and such. That was shown today in a few threads of discussion. For instance, I pointed out that L-Mount to EF-Mount adapters exist with electronics to a longtime Pocket shooter today. He had no idea and thought he'd need to start with new glass. And that was covered on the livestream even.
I think the overreaching thing BMD is really trying to promote is a total workflow solution. It was on full display in the keynote/announcement. Some of those things I feel are very, very interesting and cool. Other, I fear will contaminate other's workflows with some frustrations. Which I suspect is a very, very hard line to straddle with software like DaVinci Resolve which has become such a global standard for so many workflows. This does raise a moderate concern long term, but thus far BMD has done right with Resolve overall. Though I'd eat my own toenails if they were able to figure out how to have a paid license for ProRes export on the Windows version of Resolve. It is just wacky haven't software work different across different operating systems in 2023.
On the flipside, we have a lot of powerful cameras these days at every pricing tier. There's a lot of tit for tat, this is better than that, or this isn't worth this if this can do this. Nearly every single one of those conversations avoids looking at the totality of an imaging system when having those simplistic comparisons. And in a few instances, those comparisons certainly a tickle of merit. But even things like body construction and materials are often overlooked as a having an impact on camera cost, which certainly having a great deal to do with durability. Different chat for a different day.
Now a quick more pointed thought. CC6K's form factor, as many of the general DSLR/mirrorless designs, remain highly unattractive for production cameras. And we've seen a lot of shake up here recently aiming at more compact cubic solutions across other manufacturers. I think BMD would be well suited to explore a new design as a great deal of discussion I read today is squarely aimed at the form factor and difficulties tied to powering and rigging this camera for various professional filming scenarios. And we do indeed need very small cameras as people do desire them. It's a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. In this case, I can see 5 or 6 designs that would be worth exploring.
But I'll wrap this spillage of words with something more interesting to ponder. None of the new cameras announced step on any other existing product pricing tiers squarely. This is interesting and I suspect a strategy to maximize profits in specific tiers as there isn't truly competition at each step of the ladder when you really look at it. And there's certainly some discussion of value of each system and what you get as you start exploring 1-3 steps up and down. That's looking primarily at motion picture cameras. It is a vicious tide in the mirrorless waters however and there is much overlap, but that is indeed mass market swimming.
Not to provide too much a grounded perspective on all of this, but there's a great deal of crossed wired conversations regarding all cameras. Moderately why I test so thoroughly is to have a firm grasp and understanding of each system. I'm rarely very surprised and when I am it's usually pleasant or disturbing.
But to hit it a bit squarely on the head, the Cinema Camera 6K is not playing in the same category that more premium priced systems are. It exists in a segment and pricing tier to be approachable by a very large market. And to that point, I do give Grant and the BMD crew credit. In this case the CC6K is really going up hard against other mirrorless bodies in nearby pricing tiers.
Providing some more favorable thoughts, there are things that are good here. BMD is shipping this camera with a Low Pass filter, which solves many headaches. And L-Mount is a very good choice given that RF and E are in play by other manufacturers. And L-Mount has primarily existed in the bottom < 8% of global camera sales. This expands that market and will boost optics sales for Panasonic, Leica, and Sigma by a noticeable margin. Bare in mind Canon and Sony own about 72% of the market share with Canon taking up 2/3rds of that slice of the pie. I'm talking cameras here, but it's important to identify that Sony makes so many of the off the shelf or OEM sensors found in other mirrorless cameras and it's utterly impressive that Canon is such a giant in this space grasping to their own tech without providing it to others. Digital cinema manufactures like RED and Arri globally make up for far less sales and exist in their own realm with their own sensor design and fabrication strategies, which is a good thing to separate from the herd. There needs to be diversity because if everything is the same it will be a far less vibrant landscape of creative choice.
To that point, what often happens is we have the same sensors in various cameras or newer takes on those sensors. Which in the case of the new Cinema Camera 6K is certainly true, but also a reason that they can make this camera so affordable. And more interesting there are other sensors I can imagine existing in future models for them that a few others are currently using.
Tracking discussion abroad across the web I see those who are very interested in the new camera, same for Sony's Burano, but also a great deal of strong criticism. Par for the course. In the case of the new BMD, mainly it seems lack of internal ND, IS, etc. But for that market the users are largely unaware that mount adapters exist with ND solutions and such. That was shown today in a few threads of discussion. For instance, I pointed out that L-Mount to EF-Mount adapters exist with electronics to a longtime Pocket shooter today. He had no idea and thought he'd need to start with new glass. And that was covered on the livestream even.
I think the overreaching thing BMD is really trying to promote is a total workflow solution. It was on full display in the keynote/announcement. Some of those things I feel are very, very interesting and cool. Other, I fear will contaminate other's workflows with some frustrations. Which I suspect is a very, very hard line to straddle with software like DaVinci Resolve which has become such a global standard for so many workflows. This does raise a moderate concern long term, but thus far BMD has done right with Resolve overall. Though I'd eat my own toenails if they were able to figure out how to have a paid license for ProRes export on the Windows version of Resolve. It is just wacky haven't software work different across different operating systems in 2023.
On the flipside, we have a lot of powerful cameras these days at every pricing tier. There's a lot of tit for tat, this is better than that, or this isn't worth this if this can do this. Nearly every single one of those conversations avoids looking at the totality of an imaging system when having those simplistic comparisons. And in a few instances, those comparisons certainly a tickle of merit. But even things like body construction and materials are often overlooked as a having an impact on camera cost, which certainly having a great deal to do with durability. Different chat for a different day.
Now a quick more pointed thought. CC6K's form factor, as many of the general DSLR/mirrorless designs, remain highly unattractive for production cameras. And we've seen a lot of shake up here recently aiming at more compact cubic solutions across other manufacturers. I think BMD would be well suited to explore a new design as a great deal of discussion I read today is squarely aimed at the form factor and difficulties tied to powering and rigging this camera for various professional filming scenarios. And we do indeed need very small cameras as people do desire them. It's a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. In this case, I can see 5 or 6 designs that would be worth exploring.
But I'll wrap this spillage of words with something more interesting to ponder. None of the new cameras announced step on any other existing product pricing tiers squarely. This is interesting and I suspect a strategy to maximize profits in specific tiers as there isn't truly competition at each step of the ladder when you really look at it. And there's certainly some discussion of value of each system and what you get as you start exploring 1-3 steps up and down. That's looking primarily at motion picture cameras. It is a vicious tide in the mirrorless waters however and there is much overlap, but that is indeed mass market swimming.
