2 
The Black Magic Cinema Camera, if you remember from its surprise announcement this spring, is a £2,000 video camera that shoots 12-bit RAW 2.5k video files. No other camera on the market offers this capability at such a low price.
It is clear from the comparison video above, produced by One River Media, that when viewed against the ubiquitous Canon 5D Mark III, the Cinema Camera gushes resolution and dynamic range that the Canon DSLR can only dream of. It’s actually quite stunning to see the difference.
The image quality is clearly there, but that’s not the whole story; let’s not ignore the fact that the Cinema Camera has its fair share of disadvantages. It is not a fantastic low-light camera for one thing. This is where the 5D Mark III really excels. Also, shooting RAW with the Cinema Camera requires a butt-load of hard disk space, and a cumbersome editing workflow. Other issues like the non-removable battery and clunky ergonomics definitely should be taken into account.
But in terms of sheer beauty of the image, this camera packs a punch for an extremely low price. As soon as we have one in our hands, we will bring you more tests and a full review. [Vimeo via No Film School]
Is this the Canon 5D Mark III?
Is This the Face of the Canon 5D Mark III?
Why You Should Buy a Canon 5D Mark II Instead
I need to watch this when I get back on a wifi connection but been seriously considering getting the BMCC – I think I’ll get one depending on what they do with the first firmware update.
This is clearly for video peeps, but consider that the video feature of the 5D Mk3 is actually its secondary feature i think it holds up well. I bet if canon dropped all the DSLR mode stuff from the camera and the Digic boards, it would be cheaper.. i like the idea of DLSR video for a lot of things but if its all you do why would you not buy the video camera whos primary focus is to shoot video?
There’s a big group who adopted the DSLR style of filmmaking, when the 5dmk2 took the top spot it meant a very quick and cheap (in comparison) way of making some great looking films (mainly because the use of filmic lenses)
The biggest thing that is holding back DSLRs at the moment is their compression – it sucks, big time and when something like an uncompressed 2k camera under £2,000 its going to make a big splash
I just hope that with the introduction of this kind of camera to the market, we’ll see an increase in movement towards decent compression on DSLR’s.
I wouldn’t say lenses were the main thing; it’s the large sensors, relatively high dynamic range and lack of oversharpening that make it look more filmic. A good lens can’t do anything with a bad sensor.
Not really – in film terms sensor size isn’t as focused on. It’s one of those hot terms that everyone focuses on but doesn’t quite get why. DSLR’s, when talking filmmaking have quite a poor dynamic range.
The point I made about lenses is the prosumer level of camera’s before DSLR’s got hot at videoing either had a single lens or an expensive entry level. DSLR’s came along and gave many a change to use primes and wide angle options in their films.
At the end of the day it’s a combination of a lot of factors but the orginal point at the moment is one of the main things holding back DSLR filmmaking is the encoding of data & the lack you do with it afterwards. Which is why the BMCC is such an important camera.
all the above is kinda right.. but it just agrees my point of the DSLR being a video camera second and stills first.. its never going to really beat a video specific built camera is it.. Hybrids are never as good as primary. in this case they just happen to be dam good but the new focused ones are better.. which is what you should expect.. My Microwave is a Combi-Grill but it dont grill as well as my actual grill.. see my point?
Your right – and I am by no means arguing with you. If anything I’m just adding to your point. Don’t forget not everyone on the internet is looking to start a fight.
There are groups out there that will wage war but forget that in DSLR video is secondary.
In film, I’d say “sensor size” is definitely focused on. There are large differences between s8mm, s16mm and s35mm film, mainly depth of field, grain size and resolution. Video sensor size affects DOF and, somewhat indirectly, video noise. Prosumer cameras previously to DSLRs tended to be somewhere between 16mm and 8mm.
While the DR of DSLRs is nowhere near film, it’s still significantly better than previous prosumer cameras. As such, it allows a far more filmic look, even if it’s not all the way. It also allows far better colour rendition, rather than the strange skintones of previous cameras.
I still disagree with your point about lenses. Prosumer cameras either came with an integrated zoom, or allowed interchanging. In either case, you’re totally able to get wide or long shots. Again, they were limited by the sensor image quality, not the lenses themselves. Putting a Cooke Panchro on a 1/3″ CCD is pointless, even if it’s hypothetically wide enough to manage the crop factor.
I totally agree about compression though.