February 10, 2014

Blackmagic Production Camera 4K Now Shipping at a Reduced Price of $3,000

Amidst several delays, many of us have been eagerly anticipating the release of the Blackmagic Production Camera 4K, but the time has finally come, and rest assured -- your patience was well worth it. The Production Camera 4K is now shipping, but not at the initial $4,000 price. In hopes that it would become accessible to more filmmakers, Blackmagic is now offering the camera at $2,995. Continue on to find out more about Blackmagic's announcement.

Here's a bit from the press release:

Blackmagic Design today announced the Blackmagic Production Camera 4K is now shipping and with a new low price of US$2,995. This new low price will be available for all customers, including existing pre-orders. Blackmagic Production Camera 4K is available now from Blackmagic Design resellers worldwide for only US$2,995.

"The support from the creative community for the Blackmagic Cinema Camera and Production Camera 4K has been amazing,” said Grant Petty, CEO, Blackmagic Design. “As with all of our products, we work hard in production to reduce costs so we can pass along the savings, even to our first Blackmagic Production Camera 4K customers. The Blackmagic Production Camera 4K is a perfect companion for ATEM Production 4K switchers and we hope the new low price will help more customers to expand their Ultra HD live production set ups with even more camera angles!"

As we saw a couple of weeks ago, the footage the Blackmagic 4K is capable of capturing is absolutely breathtaking, so if you haven't pre-ordered, but are itching to get your hands on one, they're now available at all Blackmagic resellers worldwide -- though, you might have to give them some time to catch up with the announcement.

For more information about availability, as well as Blackmagic 4K features, check out Blackmagic's press release.

Links:

Your Comment

242 Comments

But..but...now you can't say "4k for 4k" :<

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply

Yes you can pay 4k if you insist

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Jason

I sell these ones for 4k. Call me.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

LOL!

February 10, 2014

1
Reply
Gene (not the 3...

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply
Peter

It would appear.

How many people are still dragging their feet in protest into 4K?

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Gene (not the 3...

Looking at the price drop and all I am guessing they'll show us something we haven't seen at NAB and are probably ready to cannibalize their near to be shipped cameras once again...

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply
Raul

This just means we will see yet a new camera at NAB this year, If they do I think it will hurt them, not help them. People are growing tired of how they are doing business. The cameras dont even have some of the most basic things you need. They are a sensor that dumps data in a box. Its does a great job at that but thats it.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

Would have paid even 6k if it shot 4k proress 444 and 13stop dr

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
JustCallDBoss

May well be that they sold so many of them already in advance that they got a better price on the sensor, and possibly other components, because they could order a bigger bulk.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Thyl Engelhardt

The pressure of the GH4 is on?
I just shot my first few productions on my new BMCC, kinda wished I waited a bit longer for this one, but then again im pretty happy with the 2.5k version.

If only this means the firmware updates start rolling out again for the 2.5k version :)

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

Exactly my thought.

February 10, 2014

-2
Reply
Jesper

does anyone know if it's going to ship with the compressed CinemaDNG codec, or just ProRes HQ for now?

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
luke

Just Prores on shipping. CinemaDNG will follow later, hopefully not too long a wait.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

do you guys think they will release another version of the 4k camera, that will have a mount other than ef ?
they did make a bmcc version with m43 mount...

February 10, 2014

1
Reply
othermount

of course i meant the "a" in "a mount" as the use of "an" in "an apple". i was not referring to sony a-mount, which is also a mount ... :P

February 10, 2014

1
Reply
othermount

And you are the other mount...:D

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
TJL

This is some kind of weird genius conversation... Deep...

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply
Kraig

I would buy that in a few heartbeats.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

Bah Bah Bah Bah... Conversation at Black Magic Company.
Black Magic R&D Person: "Did you hear Panasonic is going to release a $2000 4K Camera"
Black Magic Sales Person: "Panasonic did what?"
Black Magic Sales Person: "Not before we release ours"
Black Magic R&D Person: "Ours isn't ready..."
Black Magic Sales Person: "Fuck that Sell it, first we'll fix all the bugs later"

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Maximus Moretta

How much do we trust this company right now? Hmmm. GH4 is a far more attractive proposition if only for the fact that it's a) also a stills camera and b) you might actually get to own the camera you've bought before we colonise Mars.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

GH4k sounds really cool. But, I can't get over the soap opera / sonyish look. It doesn't look cinematic at all, just like the GH3 didn't. I want to make movies, not reality TV!

If the GH4k went with more of the look the GH2 had, that would indeed be interesting.

Even the 5D raw image will still be leagues ahead of the GH4k image in many areas including DR.

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply
Kaleb

Please enough with the "film" look and not a "film" look

BLACK MAGIC you still have supporters they just gave two fingers to all the haters out there doubted them despite updates and actual footage .

I do not doubt that price drop and urge was due to coming competition but it is what it is and i salute black magic for being a continious game changers.

February 10, 2014

1
Reply
JAYE

Well the GH2 was an amazing little camera. The GH3's sensor produces an image that looks like Sony cameras, which is to be expected... being a Sony sensor in the first place. All footage needs to be treated and graded to get a cinematic look if that's what you're after. But with Sony... I'm sorry, it looks like an infomercial no matter what you do to it. The F3, FS100, FS700 or the GH3, no matter how you light and grade it... it looks cheesy to me.

February 10, 2014

1
Reply
Kaleb

Post some examples of you achieving this film look you speak of, then tell us how it was achieved. You bring absolutely nothing to the conversation without citing examples or demonstrating credibility. Just more meaningless talk.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
ArchiCine

LAUGHS @ the comment sony has no film look. The Sony F65 IS THE FINEST and best digital camera around in terms of dynamic range in the world today, Also the sony f55 and f5 are amazing peices of technology also. So again tell us how you figure sony has a soap day tv look , better yet post some before and after examples instead of blabbering about nothing .

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply
JAYE

If you think an F3 looks cheesy you should get your eyes checked.

February 10, 2014

1
Reply

All in the color grade. I own and use (2) GH2s, the GH3, the BMCC (m43), and BMPCC for different purposes, and the only difference I can see in terms of "film look" versus "video look" is that I can get cinematic results faster and easier in post with the Blackmagic cameras. The Panasonics can make a very nice image too, they just take a little more time and effort to coax it out of the files.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

(oh and lenses and lighting matter more than the cameras anyway)

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

I agree with everything you just wrote!

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
marklondon

We're allowed to agree with each other in the comments, Mark? This'll never work. Madness :-)

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

The nicest footage I've seen from GH's were made with Leica and Voightlander lens.

February 10, 2014

-2
Reply
Gene (not the 3...

Kaleb, check out the GH3 teaser trailer for my next TV episode and let me if it looks cinematic or not. Thanks! http://youtu.be/Rok11azSfLI

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Cal

oops, let me *know* if...

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Cal

No it doesn't.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Steve

Not at all

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply
Birdman

Sorry, Cal. I don't mean to be harsh. I'm only saying this because you asked, but I have to agree with Steve and Birdman. Cinematic can mean different things to different people but, if you mean it the way I think you do, the answer is no. I'd say it suffers mostly from poor lighting, exposure and grading. A better grade may help spruce it up a bit but there's not much you can do about the lighting and exposure.

Perhaps this is your best work to date, which may be why you're proud of it. In all honesty, you're going to have to start looking at your work with a more discerning eye because I'm afraid these images just don't look as good as you seem to think they do. Again, I'm only trying to be helpful.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Brian

I don't know what commenters here are looking for. That footage looked very good. We have camera users critiquing camera users in this blog. We don't have the audience watching the shows critiquing. We need to be careful we aren't splitting hairs four ways---which is a common practice at this blog.

February 10, 2014

1
Reply
Gene (not the 3...

Gene, Cal asked the question in a manner that invites the cinematographer's perspective. The story might be engaging as hell but that's not what he inquired about. I didn't like the way it looked and I tried to tell him why. It's the nicest thing I can do for him. Of course, he should take it with a grain of salt but I'd be doing him a disservice by trying to spare his feelings when I assume he wanted honest feedback. It's not the worst I've seen but it's not that good, either. Obviously, you think differently. All I can say is: Cal, don't listen to Gene. You need to step it up, buddy.

Sorry if this is a dupe comment but NFS seems to be acting funky with my usual email address.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Brian

The term 'filmic' has changed. Old filmic is gone. It's all new now. I don't think we need to keep trying to make our new cameras look like old cameras.

I get what you're saying. But I still think we all need to consider what the 'outside' world is thinking and not keep hanging on to what we are used to. We need to do like the REO Speedwagon song says, roll with the changes.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Gene (not the 3...

35mm film still looks far superior to even the best digital camera. New is cheaper and easier, but it does not look better.

February 11, 2014

1
Reply
stewe

What I noticed immediately was that it looked like it was sharpened too much electronically. Either in camera or in post. This over-sharpening destroys any kind of film look, it always looks like (bad) video.
If your lenses aren't that sharp, then shoot softer images, it doesn't matter, but do never electronically sharpen your images!
First thing to do if you want any kind of film look is finding the "sharpness" slider in your camera and setting it to the lowest level possible!

February 11, 2014

0
Reply
Heiko

Also, a lot of it has to do with lenses. The kit lenses on the GH2/GH3 look overly crisp and digital. Swap those out for some vintage Nikkor lenses and everything goes back to normal...

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

listen to luke he knows best lol

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

I agree with Luke! My BMPC and my Nikkors are all I need.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Dan

Well, I used to have vintage glass when I shot with the GH2. I loved it, it seriously looked amazing for what it was. After that, I tested out the GH3 EXTENSIVELY, with all kinds of vintage / Zeiss glass, like I did with the GH2. Did not like the look, at all. The sensor is fundamentally different and the motion looks like a soap opera, that's just the way it is. Some things just can't be helped with grading or lighting unfortunately.

RED, BMPC, Alexa... those cameras just have the *mojo*.

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Kaleb

Didn't use the GH3, here's hoping they fix that in the GH4 though!

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

February 10, 2014

0
Reply

The GH4 sounds really nice with 4K video at 4:2:0 internal 8 bit quality. Yet when I compare that to the BMPC which offers 4K in 12-13 bit raw or alternatively 4K in ProRess 4:2:2 10 bit, the difference in image quality between both camera's will be obvious to most professionals. The form factor is another thing though, I think that is where the GH4 has it's strength. I use the GH2 for 2 years now, and it's very small and handy for certain jobs where a big camera is just too clumsy or too heavy.

Erwin

February 10, 2014

0
Reply
Erwin

The GH2 might make up the difference with battery life, a time remaining gauge, a media remaining gauge, and hackability.

February 10, 2014

-1
Reply

Pages