BlackMagic Underwater Tests

[simonspear]

Hi all

It feels like it has been years since I last posted here, but I've been testing the BlackMagic Cameras recently and thought I'd share some example videos.

Here is the BlackMagic Pocket Cinema Camera (BMPCC) video:


[video=youtube;dfypQqXnpKI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfypQqXnpKI[/video]


and here is the review:

View from the Blue: BMPCC Underwater Test Review (BlackMagic Part 2)

I've also posted a graded / ungraded example video which should give you some idea of both the work involved grading/colour correcting, but also the flexibility in post that the ProRes footage gives. Sadly I couldn't get RAW to work but that is covered in the review.


[video=youtube;ULcYeP46kMU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULcYeP46kMU[/video]



I also tested the BlackMagic Cinema Camera (BMCC) back in October and here is a comparison between the BMCC and Sony PMW200. There is some noticeable blue water banding on this video, but I've now found that this was due to my initial workflow and although I've not had a chance to go back and re-edit from scratch I have looked at individual shots and saw no evidence of it again.


[video=youtube;aPZHpcHAXY8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPZHpcHAXY8[/video]


Here is the review

View from the Blue: BMCC Underwater Test Review (BlackMagic Part 1)

I hope this is of interest to some of you and any questions please feel free to ask.

Cheers, Simon

 

[Interceptor121]

Very good piece of work thank you for that.
I think the sensor of this camera is 12mm not 16mm which makes it smaller than the SonyRX100

Overall I think this is an expensive option compared to the RX100, the housing is 75% more even if I consider buying a tray and two handles and you are then looking at buying lenses and ports. With a crop factor of 2.9x even the Panasonic 7-14mm will only give you 93 degrees diagonal.

Not convinced this will be a great success to be honest considering the limitation in memory card autonomy and even after grading the footage in my opinion is not stellar and lags behind a Panasonic GH3 of a great deal

 

[simonspear]

I think you are confusing the physical size of the sensor with what the sensor is actually called. The BMPCC has (as near as dam it) a Super16 sensor, but yeah the physical dimensions are not 16mm - just like a 35mm sensor is not actually 35mm and Super35 is no where near 35mm! I had put 16mm rather than Super16 in my review, so thanks for the proof read

I'm genuinely surprised you think that the image lags behind a GH3. I'm not defending the BMPCC (it is what it is) and the GH3 is a lovely topside camera, but apart from a couple of guys I know who are doing some decent underwater work with it I've not really seen anything from beneath the waves that has impressed me from the GH3. I think the good footage that I've seen is quite a bit sharper, but that is almost certainly down to the lenses used. It will be interesting to see once I get a decent lens on it.

The main difference between the BMPCC and virtually any other camera is the latitude that it gives you in post. There are plenty of consumer, prosumer and even pro cameras that will give varying degrees of good underwater images, but try to manipulate them in post and the image often falls apart very, very quickly. I didn't manage to break the ProRes footage from the BMPCC and I tried really, really hard. The RAW footage is going to be even harder to break. I've done a direct comparison manipulating underwater footage from a BMPCC, FS100, 7D and PMW200. The FS100 you can't manipulate at all (it is truly awful for underwater work), the 7D you can push quite a bit and the PMW200 you can push quite a lot, but none of them compare even a fraction to what you can do with the BMPCC.

Ultimately this camera is certainly not going to be for everyone and anyone who just wants to shoot, cut and output is going to run a mile that's for sure!

For me it is only ever going to be a B camera or a camera to be used when travelling light is absolutely essential, but I do think that there is going to be some stunning footage shot with it once users get used to the post workflow and colour grading. Just my opinion but let's see!

Cheers, Simon

 

[Interceptor121]

I referred to the GH3 outside, the fact you don't see people using it is a another matter (I think it is expensive as I looked into it myself) the camera itself for me has much more detail there have been some GH2 examples here also impressive (tough cold water diving not the best examples)
And you are right about the grading but the results am getting from my RX100 with very limited post processing (I use iMovie and don't even bother colour grading) look comparable. Yes if I had to make significant alterations I would probably struggle but I don't usually need to
I just do not see a market for this camera, not strong enough for serious users and not cost effective for the lower segment
I take videos in water that when I dive looks like milk but afterwards looks great on video with a very limited amount of editing. Am not sure any entry level person would spend too long on this although there are people spending ages to edit some gopro files that eventually gets boring
You are right that if you put effort into it you will see good results but you can get there with less effort and less money in my opinion

Also a question how does this camera do in macro? Usually micro 4:3 lens autofocus is useless and you need manual focus, can you have a focus gear as otherwise this would be a total loss

This is a good comparison

[youtubehq]JAIF5Q5tPAQ[/youtubehq]

 

[simonspear]

Well there is definitely a market for it, but it is obviously not going to be similar to the volumes of a consumer point and shoot. I think we will have to agree to disagree regarding the underwater images from the BMPCC being comparable with a RX100. The RX100 is a fantastic little camera, but they are very different beasts.

Cheers, Simon

 

[Interceptor121]

Well there is definitely a market for it, but it is obviously not going to be similar to the volumes of a consumer point and shoot. I think we will have to agree to disagree regarding the underwater images from the BMPCC being comparable with a RX100. The RX100 is a fantastic little camera, but they are very different beasts.

Cheers, Simon

This is a clip from Barbados from last November the conditions were not good with lots of silt and 12-15 max visibility, there is no grading to the footage

[youtubehq]vDsJaR2Crgs[/youtubehq]

How far do you think it is from the BMPCC footage shot in Egypt?

this is the RX100 first version in better conditions (the Mark I had a tendency to crush blacks)

[youtubehq]nwmEg9yY874[/youtubehq]

No color correction or other edits

 

[simonspear]

To me there is a world of difference.

There is certainly nothing wrong with your footage from the RX100 and it produces some pleasing images, but it definitely has much more of a baked in and 'video' look to it. You can definitely see that the footage has been recorded at an AVCHD type bitrate, although admittedly once footage is on the web everything tends to lower in quality somewhat. Interpretation of images is certainly subjective and I guess if you don't see it, you don't see it.

I'm not sure how we got into a comparison between the BMPCC and a RX100 anyway - apart from their diminutive size there really isn't anything else to compare between the two. One is a pocket sized Cinema Camera capable of shooting RAW and 220Mbps ProRes(HQ) while the other is a great point and shoot. Like I said they are very different beasts.

I have 6 or 7 cameras, 4 of which I can use underwater. To me they are all tools to be used in the right situations and there is no one size fits all. By the sound of it the RX100 fits your needs perfectly and that is great but it is not going to fit everyone's needs, just as the BMPCC will not either.

 

[Interceptor121]

That's because I considered it. The cost of the housing together with the other issues with white balance put me off. One thing though is that once you recompress into a format you can actually play most of the benefits are gone. Cheers

 

[ronscuba]

The bitrate a camera records has a big affect on the quality of the footage. The differences are not as obvious when viewing over the internet on a computer. Show the footage on a 50+ inch HDTV or HD projector and it's easier to see.

The blue water background on underwater footage is challenging for a camera. The constant movement of the water shifting the suns light rays is where a high recording speed bitrate and a cameras dynamic range really shows. High bitrate lets the movement look silky smooth. High dynamic range lets you see many different shades of blue as the light penetrates the water.

 

[Interceptor121]

I think there is not much difference in dynamic range but definitely the bitrate the panasonic go series with the hack though seems to be much better than this

PS i have a 50" tv