Comparing 3K and 2.5K IQ

[Dmitry Burenok]

Nothing to discuss unless BM release a APS-C size matrix camera.

2.4 CROP - YOU GONNA BE KIDDIN ME!!! YOu put a wrong mount, than.

Well, will see. 4K uncompressed RAW with big sensor at least - than we can do some comparison :) Until than - not interesting at all.

[Les Dittert]

What 'crop' would 16mm film be ? That is a very valid format.

As the OP, I am interested in the image quality with similar cropping on my Scarlets. Simple reality check is my goal.
A 2.5K camera is not in the same class as a 4k camera. Just like a 65mm film camera is not the same class as a 35mm , as a 16mm, as a 8mm film camera. But the resolved line pairs per mm on the film plane is an interesting comparison figure.

Nothing to discuss unless BM release a APS-C size matrix camera.

2.4 CROP - YOU GONNA BE KIDDIN ME!!! YOu put a wrong mount, than.

Well, will see. 4K uncompressed RAW with big sensor at least - than we can do some comparison :) Until than - not interesting at all.

[John Brawley]

It came from John Brawley himself -
"Then of course, you can choose RAW. RAW simply means you get everything the camera produces. The only thing that’s baked into this file is the white balance point. "
http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/201...-from-the-top/

This puts me off too - I see it as a crucial part of the RAW workflow being able to fine tune white balance in post.

@ Conrad - your "RAW notes" regarding white balance is not factually correct - see David 's post above regarding D21 and ARRIRAW, as well as the above quote. There are a thousand different flavours of "RAW" - it is not a unified standard.

Hi.

It used to be that the WB was baked into the DNG's. it's now no longer the case. BMD did it originally to speed up the DNG developing process, but they've now done the work to make it so it behaves as one would expect a RAW file to behave....WB is not baked in.

jb

[Christopher Mills]

Anyone been able to see if REDCINEX can process the BM files?
not sure this could even be done.. but I would love to see if the files could be treated like R3D files, making the BM camera another b or c camera option for a RED shoot..
ok... go ahead and tell me if I am being silly...

[Simon Miya]

Raw is not an acronym. There is no reason to use all capital letters.

Sorry to go off topic, but that just bugs me. It's like you are shouting that one word - how annoying.

[Erich Ocean]

Raw is not an acronym. There is no reason to use all capital letters.

Sorry to go off topic, but that just bugs me. It's like you are shouting that one word - how annoying.

People capitalize RAW so that other people know what they're talking about -- that's the reason.

Last I checked, RED isn't an acronym either, but when I say I've got a RED camera, people know what I'm talking about, so I capitalize it.

[Nick Morrison]

For whatever it's worth, I've heard from a very reliable source at a VERY FAMOUS store in NYC (it will go unmentioned)...that the BM camera is NOT what it's cracked up to be. Apparently, the ROLLING SHUTTER is TERRIBLE. BM just don't know how to make a camera YET.

I'm sure the future is very bright for them, and I have to imagine for sit-down interviews this camera could be great....but for day in, day out, pro work...not so much...on this round.

Again, take this for whatever it's worth...in these early stages...of the BM experiment.