What has been your experience with both these cameras. The Blackmagic 4K Cinema camera is $2300 for the body and the Canon c300 is $10,000 for the body alone. Can the price point really be an indication of true overall quality and getting that realy film/tv series look?
How would you compare the Blackmagic Cinema and Canon c300 camera?
- Thread starter dorian2786
- Start date
Thank you for your reply. Could you explain what you mean by diminishing returns?
Do you think the Blackmagic Cinema Camera is capable of achieving that true film look? Their 4k camera is 35mm and has rolling shutter. Seems very affordable for the starter film maker.
The last time that cameras that could bar you from a film look were in wide circulation was 2009 and previous. Now, it really comes down to everything else in the production
The 4k 35mm BMCC is *global shutter; if having top class film look at no cost is the goal, there is no reason not to go with the pocket. (2k, 16mm, fast rolling shutter) An amazing image
Interesting. So the pocket one can achieve that film look? How would you compare the pocket 16mm shutter vs a 32mm?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Yes, it is the way to go for the best at no cost. The rolling shutter is good, as its a smaller sensor with less pixel lines to scan. Far worse dslrs have been used to film scenes in major Hollywood films (really)
There is a lot more that comes into play in a camera's look & quality than the cmos shutter - & all those factors are well addressed on the BMPCC. So now, the new shooter can simply pick up said cam on the confidence of assured quality, and start making films (and not need to be a technician).
You can achieve "the film look" with most DSLRs in my opinion. Learning to properly light a scene will help you achieve the film look.
From my ol' trusty GH2:
The cam brings all the filmic basics. They key here is the lighting and color - filmmaker's input
- the pocket can yet do better at those filmic basics
The cam brings all the filmic basics. They key here is the lighting and color - filmmaker's input
- the pocket can yet do better at those filmic basics
We have the C-100. We got it because it creates amazing video and is MUCH easier to work with in post than the Black Magic. AND the 100 is about half the cost of the 300. We also already had some really nice lenses for EF.
The C-100 has a great "Film Look" - we are presently shooting Behind -the -Scenes for a Hollywood film. I get a similar look from my T4i as well. All HD Cameras will give you a great look if you have good lenses.
The C-100 has a great "Film Look" - we are presently shooting Behind -the -Scenes for a Hollywood film. I get a similar look from my T4i as well. All HD Cameras will give you a great look if you have good lenses.
Last edited:
I think the c300 is a more versatile camera, high frame rate, eng. style docu shooting, etc.
The BMCC 4k is limited in those respects.
The BMCC 4k is limited in those respects.
Having shot on the BMCC, it depends what I wanted to do.
BMCC footage looks good and a good example of what I have done is here: https://vimeo.com/paulrwalker/review/84971935/ccf932163f
BMCC is great at music videos, commercials, film making or VFX-heavy environments. The RAW codec at 2.5 gives a ton of flexibility in post and that means better quality and lots of good things. With prores, irrespective of how flat it has been shot, we simply could not have pulled the colour around, composited or blended a little VFX in the way we did above.
In terms of inserting VFX / compositing, the BMCC's codec gave us the ability to do whatever we wanted in post.
The Canon is a good camera but simply does not do that. However, without the crew (e.g. the little datacenter we had running in the background), or in an environment without backup, easy access to lots of cards, power etc..., then we would've taken the Canon.
Different tools for different jobs.
BMCC footage looks good and a good example of what I have done is here: https://vimeo.com/paulrwalker/review/84971935/ccf932163f
BMCC is great at music videos, commercials, film making or VFX-heavy environments. The RAW codec at 2.5 gives a ton of flexibility in post and that means better quality and lots of good things. With prores, irrespective of how flat it has been shot, we simply could not have pulled the colour around, composited or blended a little VFX in the way we did above.
In terms of inserting VFX / compositing, the BMCC's codec gave us the ability to do whatever we wanted in post.
The Canon is a good camera but simply does not do that. However, without the crew (e.g. the little datacenter we had running in the background), or in an environment without backup, easy access to lots of cards, power etc..., then we would've taken the Canon.
Different tools for different jobs.
I sort of prefer the Black Magic which is the next camera I am upgrading to from my DSLR. From there, I will just save up for a Red, but I don't think the Canon is a big enough upgrade to justify the price over the Black Magic.
It really depends on the type of work you'll be doing. Both cameras have their quirks, and neither are really what I would want as an A camera. If I had to I would choose one over the other depending on what I was doing. I personally like the image out of the C300 better than the BMCC, especially on skin tones, but if you're doing VFX or heavy green screen, it's hard to go past raw.
C300 is a bit more versatile, and more suited to a run n gun shooting style - they're pretty common on corporates and docos!
C300 is a bit more versatile, and more suited to a run n gun shooting style - they're pretty common on corporates and docos!