@babypanda

All three points are not valid, >90% of the time people have no idea about actual similar products and competition, underestimate risks, and absolutely do not give a fuck about support. All they want is get some advertised, exclusive, new, amazing, etc, etc thing. Btw this is why Kickstarted specially tell that they are not shop - because otherwise different laws and approaches must be used that will kill all this chutzpah.

Is it safe to suggest that you don't like this camera very much?

LOL. Go back and spend some time. My posts here started from facts and statements about real release date estimation (that was accurate in result).

All else are just result of finished product.

Vitaly is everytime right, ok ? :-)

Yep, he is right if he is not wrong.

@luekio still waiting to see your professional video on the Bolex, or any other camera signed, "one of the kids". Look forward to seeing it!!!!!!!!!! Linky! linky! (sorry for the exclamation points but that's the way us kids talk)

PS The review from Bloom, among other things, said it was unusable in low light and that for any professional use there were better alternatives--I don't see how that is a positive review. I personally would interpret that to be the most negative review imaginable, whilst still being civil. But I would encourage ppl to see the Bloom review for themselves too see if it is positive, and make their own determination.

PPS here is a sample of my work--I'm not saying it is great but OTOH I'm perfectly willing to put it online.

@luekio This thread was not created to piss on the D16. Go read the first page from March 2012. The OP is excited about the camera's announcement, and if you scroll down to @vitaliy 's first comment he warns that projects like this are usually late to deliver by one to two years: a pretty good prediction, I'd say. seconding @DrDave, is Bloom's review really a positive one? If I recall he said that the one place where he thought it useful was in film schools when students are learning to light (and thus won't be limited by the D16's 200 iso).

I for one would be happy to review this camera, and I also look forward to an m4/3 version. I don't think the comments are overall negative on this thread, either. I think it would be great if Bolex submitted one for a review on this site.

@digger a film student would be better off with a different camera, IMHO. Also, if you are ordering cams for a class you need a batch of them all at once, with a fast repair turnaround if needed. Maybe that can be done, but I haven't seen that they are geared up for that.

The BMC's are cheap and do shoot raw and Prores, but they still suffer the same range of low end CMOS artifacts. Prores is just another compressed HD video codec, though better than most.

I don't think you understand anything you're talking about. Prores is used for about 90% of the Alexa shoots I've seen. You could film a feature on it. Plus, the BMC also shoots 2.5k RAW... why are you leaving this out and only focusing on how "compressed" Prores is? Is it because your post is nothing but opinionated conjecture?

suggesting a gh2 or an old camcorder is a better alternative to a cinema camera with a kodak true sense sensor without moire

Here's the problem though... the DB doesn't look that cinematic to all people. To me, it looks like 80's film stock. To most people something like the GH2 is still going to look more like modern s35mm.

At that size all of the typical low end HD camera artifacts like rolling shutter

The Alexa and Red camera's suffer from some rolling shutter artifacts too... are they low-end now? The audience doesn't fucking care about rolling shutter for the 10 millionith time. Nobody notices!

Plus, have you even seen the striping and sensor-quadrant errors that occur when filming into a window, bright object, or scenes that are drastically different across the frame? THIS is something people will notice and about 1000x worse than rolling shutter. This Kodac sensor is nothing special. Quite low-end from when compared to the quality of most others on the market. At least from what I've read.

444 Prores from Alexa was good enough for Only God Forgives and helps make Hannibal arguably the best looking show on television.

@luekio hate to say it but your post is a good example of the Stockholm syndrome community brainwashing originating from the D-Bolex web forum. The "Kodak Truesense sensor" is becoming a kind of religious mantra there because it suggests some magic transfer of Kodak's film stock to digital sensor technology. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The KAI-04050 is an old industrial CCTV camera sensor; Google the product name and see which kinds of cameras use it. CCD has no jello, but this is bought with reduced dynamic range and highlight clipping in comparison to CMOS. And for that matter, nobody who bought Kodak's digital photo and video cameras in the past (no matter whether the "EasyShare" series or the early DSLRs co-produced with Nikon), thought that their image resembled Kodak film.

I happen to be member of a filmmaker's 16mm lab, and sorry, the footage I've seen from the D16 so far looks nothing like 16mm film, neither reversal, nor negative - no matter whether I'm thinking of Kodak E100D, Kodak Vision2/3, Fuji Eterna or even Kodachrome. With the limited dynamic range, the D16 image looks more like vintage UMatic video than vintage film. If you want to know how real S16 looks, have a look at this. Or, 16mm reversal stock shot on a Bolex, this. Especially the latter example, with the kind of grittier, handheld, artist's filmmaking look that Digital Bolex is supposedly aiming for, shows you that the D16 has as much to do with real 16mm as Instagram has to do with a real Polaroid.

Nothing of this is surprising since a video sensor is not film emulsion, and will never be, despite what marketing people try to make you believe. Digital cameras always look different from analog cameras, and those differences increase the more you don't go for a polished mainstream look but push the camera to its extremes (like handheld, self-developing/-grading, low light, grain etc).

Except for the audio department (where the D16 is clearly superior) and maybe the form factor (matter of taste), a camera like the Blackmagic 4K does everything the D-Bolex does (raw video, global shutter) and more (4k, display resolution, dynamic range, low light), and better, for a lower price. The D16 could have been a game changer if it had been delivered on time, but is simply no longer unique and came too late to the market.

"Except for the audio department (where the D16 is clearly superior) and maybe the form factor (matter of taste), a camera like the Blackmagic 4K does everything the D-Bolex does (raw video, global shutter) and more (4k, display resolution, dynamic range, low light), and better, for a lower price. The D16 could have been a game changer if it had been delivered on time, but is simply no longer unique and came too late to the market."

I would like to know objectively if this is a better camera overall price/performance wise compared to BMC, but I think your arguments are not objective.

1 - The audio and the form factor are not MINOR points to be dismissed lightly. Those 2 factors alone make the D16 a very different camera from BM and possibly much better, image quality notwithstanding. 2 - So what if it's too late to be a game-changer? The only reason that would be an issue is if someone has already invested in Blackmagic. Otherwise, who cares if it's late. Better late than never. 3 - This is connected to the first point. It has audio and doesn't need to be rigged up as much as BMC, and therefore is it really more expensive than investing in BMC?

@babypanda Decent Tascam (DR100 Mk 2) or Zoom (H4n) portable recorders are available for only $200 or so and can be attached to the shoe mount on the Black Magic camera and then wired into the audio input of the camera for internal recording. Doing so allows use of preamps superior to those built into the camera and allows one to use the audio meters built into the external recorder. Even if that plus rigging puts it and the BM extremely close in terms of price, the BM is still a superior camera in many other regards... except the crank. Black Magic have yet to come out with a camera with a fancy crank on the side. NAB is coming up, though, so we can all hold out hope!

Oh, and the BM camera also comes with a copy of Resolve so if you're a Resolve user, they also have that going for them.

@DrDave What did you film that video with? I went full screen on my 27 LPS monitor, stepped back and it looked nice.

@vicharris GH2 with lpowell's flowmotion.

@cantsin I haven't seen any tests to show that the audio is "clearly superior" but I would be happy to test the audio--thoroughly--if someone provides me with a cam, including the voltage of the phantom P48 under load as well as the bit depth and a number of other tests. Agreed it does not look my 16mm film, but unlike you, I haven't used film in while, so it is good to have an opinion from someone who is still working with film. Good film looks pretty amazing.

@bwhitz yup, not everyone agrees what "cinematic" is, and maybe that even changes over time.