FWIW, Bloom has tweeted that he's pre-ordered both of the new BMD cams.

He must, it is his way to get bread and butter. To "review" new cameras.

He must, it is his way to get bread and butter. To "review" new cameras.

Let me save everyone some time. Here's the review from the future...

"These are wonderful cameras, just like the C300. Sure you can shoot 4k, but the workflow just isn't quite as the smooth as glorious 8-bit C300. The Pocket Cinema Cam has a lovely image, but the crop is difficult compared to the C300. They're both a bit too clean at low-light imaging... I like the film-like grain you get with the C300. Did I mention the C300?"

haha :)

Hey, leave Bloom's mum outta this. I'm a big fan of his mum! :-)

As Vitaly says above, it's about bread & butter. I get that.

It would be nice if folks would put more of their energy into using (and learning how to use) tools (cameras, software, etc.) for what they're uniquely good for (their strengths), and spend less energy complaining about the tools' "limitations" (real or imagined).

But, then again, what fun would that be? ;-)

I think the guys of rewo will be more than happy that bmd didn't change the form factor of the body.

@shian

I suggest to use http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/6630/new-black-magic-raw-cameras-pocket-and-s35-4k-general-talk#Item_84 for such posts.

As far as price goes, I like to look at this from the other side. Combined income of all shooters won't be more than they have today, looking at situation, most probably it'll be less than year ago. Add here more expenses to storage, grading. So, this is not revolution from pure economical POV.

@WhiteRabbit regarding the canon mirrorless mount. I think it's ideal, indeed, get electronic communication for adapted lens', even speedboosted eventually. However, as you suggest the mount licensing, I would bet this camera would pillage their DSLR video sales, and also some of their new video centric models, so it's not in their best interest to license the technology. Third party lens' makers (and camera makers) don't "license" the current EF mount, instead it was reverse engineered. I would think that it will take time to reverse engineer, or at least validate support for the new mirrorless mount.

@mintcheerios "The 4k sensor is CCD, yes this means global shutter, but it also means inferior dynamic range and less sensitivity." Well, some of those snippets you included were pretty strange, I haven't read the post yet, but the things he mentioned above are absolutely a reason why you wouldn't want CCD. BBMD even is straight up regarding the reduced dynamic range. Also CCD's are renounced to have less sensitivity than CMOS, just look at any CCD based still photo camera (like Leicas), the are several stops more noisy at high ISO's compared to CMOS based competition. The big sensor revolution in video seems to be exciting to many due to the ability to shoot available light in darker lighting situations, going CCD indeed will hamper some excitement in this area.

However, having a global shutter in this price range, with this size of a sensor? uh.. what? That's kind of a game changer. If you don't think it's a big deal, just look at at what lengths RED is going to to get global shutter like skew correction.

It seems Philip Bloom has edited his post to remove the part where he assumes the BMPC 4K uses a CCD sensor. He now says

I am still waiting for official word on if its a ccd or CMOS sensor. If its CMOS Sensor with global shutter that is impressive!

I guess he finally realized how baseless his assumption was. I need to be more skeptical of people with that many advertisements on their blog.

Just watch him advertising vbag. LoL

I could care less about the 4K TV. I do like how 4K looks downsized to 2K. If I ever got one it would be for that purpose really.

@joesiv, yes, an EF-M mount would be ideal to adapt from. BM are not in the business to rely on other manufacturer's products and EF will have a greater base than EF-M. The EF-M is ideal at 18mm flange distance for us out of the loop with lenses that will remain in their cases.

The word I am hearing, while there is no MFT mount (19.25mm flange distance) version coming, which makes sense due to S35 coverage, the next 4K camera in this latest series may be PL mount. PL mount is great for making an industry standard 'cinema camera', however it is worse to adapt from than the EF mount (44mm flange distance), with PL mount being (52mm flange distance). If PL mount is in fact the next model BMD develop in this 4K camera series, for the rest of us with lenses that can not be made to mount on either the EF or PL mount via mount adapter, we can only hope that a 3rd model is developed in the future with a short flange distance mount so that we can use mount adapters to adapt out to our required flange distance mounts. I would like to see either an FZ-mount which is a solid mount for larger lenses and zooms, or an E-mount. Both have a wide enough diameter for an S35 sensor size, and both have an 18mm flange distance, being ideal to make mount adapters for just about any lens out there. The EF-M would be welcome also. Your view may vary. Any other mount suggestions?

@B3Guy, yes, the mounts probably have intellectual property concerns, likely patent. The EF going back to 1987 may have had the 20 year patent expire in or about 2007. The MFT though may have required permission, as I understand it is only a few years old and Olympus may own that, and they may be more open to using it by third parties, given Panasonic/Lumix MFT cameras, although I only speculate here.

The FZ-mount would be great, Sony being open to sharing it may not be so easy. The E-mount does open a larger audience of potential purchasers of this 4K camera, though I am not sure if their lenses would have S35 coverage.

Since I am using 30-40 year old cine lenses, I am not looking for an electronic mount. Save having all my lenses converted to PL mount, a cost that would likely exceed the cost of two of the BM 4K cameras, my next best option with this 4K camera may be to get a hack saw and start again from the base of the camera body.