I wonder how many would like a Micro Cinema/Studio Camera 4K with the same m4/3 sensor and innards as in the BMPCC4K? I, for a very long time, wanted to get either the Micro Cinema or Studio Camera, but the super 16 sensor put me off, as it made all of my existing lenses far too narrow in angle of view for my liking. A similar sized camera with the guts of the BMPCC4K would make for a very nice gimbal and automotive camera (and other uses), and complement my other cameras very nicely.
Count me in on that! And I wish they do it soon. I have exact same need for it as you stated, inside cars and on a gimbal.
Take my money. I love the shape and size of the micro. Its symmetrical size made it near perfect for a gimbal.
I would love to see a new bmmcc4k camera with same expansion port, genlock, timecode full implemented. Full integration with video assist. Give us better battery mount options, Sony np-l. Optional v-mount adapter plate with power distribution built into (say 2×5 volt, 2x12volt) the plate. I will just stop there short of going into my full rant of wanting a highly modular camera that will be around and fully supported for at least 10+ years. But I know the gear head market will not allow for that.
I think it’ll depend on demand and how well the Micro did. Only anecdotally will we know based on others. So if it’s cost effective, I’m sure we’ll see another one. The Micro studio? Not sure if there’s a market for that.
I can’t say for certain, but if what I noted about the super 16 sensor holds true for others, that would have put many off. A m4/3 sensor would be something else, as there’s then a huge range of lens options that would make the camera far more versatile.UsernameParticipant
I definitely would love one.
I love the form factor of my Micro Cinema. And if BM offered a firmware update for their recorders to manage the Micro Studio raw output I would get one of those today.
I’m a fan of the OG micro.
Question is, which sensor do you put in there.
I personally liked the near S16 size sensor. There’s plenty of S16 glass out there and it’s fairly cheap.
Otherwise maybe a cut down of the new 12k sensor would work as a 6K camera. Or 8K if it was m4/3 sized.
My preference would be the same sized sensor/mount as in the BMPCC4K, it just opens up so many options when it comes to lenses.
Agree, I like met mount in that size camera.
I think the camera would have to get bigger with the bmpcc4k sensor so that it can have the proper cooling. But even with that aside I want more bottons and a small menu display. Using the Using Philip Lemon’s last version of One Little Remote I can set hard stops (using the knob on the remote not the ring on the lens) and pull focus as well with native glass. It work very well with the pany 12-35 2.8. There is no technical reason that could not be implemented right on the camera body. Have, say up to 4 buttons to configure various focus points and when pressed use the knob or dial to control the speed of transition. Basically pressing the configured focus point button sets a new hard stop. Lots of use for the buttons other than basic camera settings. I am ok with the extra wide bmpcc4k sensor as long as I have 2700 pixel wide for s16. At that width I would also like an extended 1.33, 1.5, cropped 2.0, 2.35, 2.4, and 2.66.
I would like BM to put a lot of bells and whistles in the camera and a lot of thought to make it the go to beginners cinema camera that would be available for mainly years to come.
Personally, I’d prefer the camera to be reasonably basic. I’d be happy for it to be slightly larger to accommodate the sensor and what else is necessary for it to perform optimally. But once a committee starts designing it to meet all-comers, you end up with something that satisfies no one. Something that combines the features of the studio and cinema cameras would be fine for me (plus a USB-C outlet for external recording). I’m not after a Z-Cam.
We agree to disagree.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.