BMPCC 4K

[eraizgn]

Hello guys,

Ive just wanted to know, What do you think about Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K?  Is there anyone has chance to use that camera? Any experiences?
I am huge fan of magic lantern of course, She saved my ass many times thanks to you guys! Ive been thinking to buy Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera, so let me know your thoughts.

[Lars Steenhoff]

If you need RAW and 4k and don't need autofocus its great for the price.

If you need RAW and 4k and autofocus I would get the Canon c200.

[KelvinK]

BMPCC4k has auto-focus actually, it hasn't continuous AF.

Literally, in a price range, if you need RAW there's no other alternative.

[eraizgn]

If you need RAW and 4k and don't need autofocus its great for the price.

If you need RAW and 4k and autofocus I would get the Canon c200.

Hmm I didnot like c200, bcoz of codec, used that for test.
I have DJI wireless follow focus, never used with mark 5
It could be best couple with that?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eraizgn]

Literally, in a price range, if you need RAW there's no other alternative.

Right?

Actually I dont need 4k, just need to upgrade my cameras. When I got the job and going to shoot with mark 5d3 with that price, getting lots of weirds questions and viewers. Thats why and 1250 usd is great for 4k raw with 13 dynamic range.

So confused again :/





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KelvinK]

Right now only reason to get 5D3 only if you're going for photo as well. For video BMPCC4K is superior to 5D, only the problem you may have with BM - bad battery life. Keep in mind, if you will get 5D3 it will used, you never know when you will have too many hot pixels with it. Also, you're getting full version of Resolve with BM.

[Tyronetheterrible]

Right now only reason to get 5D3 only if you're going for photo as well. For video BMPCC4K is superior to 5D, only the problem you may have with BM - bad battery life. Keep in mind, if you will get 5D3 it will used, you never know when you will have too many hot pixels with it. Also, you're getting full version of Resolve with BM.

Innocent question here: Are there any other ways in which the BMPCC4K is superior in video quality to 5D3 w/ Magic Lantern?

Apart from the differences in dynamic range, the 5D3 has a full-frame sensor, better low-light capabilities (maybe?), can record in 14-bit lossless, can also achieve 4K through crop_rec, as well as achieve dual ISO through the dual_iso.mo.

Software reliability aside, I too have been debating with myself on whether or not to invest my money in a 5D3 as opposed to a BMPCC4K from a purely video quality standpoint.

[Lars Steenhoff]

They still have a different look, at least they use the same batteries 

[Dmytro_ua]

Are there any other ways in which the BMPCC4K is superior in video quality to 5D3 w/ Magic Lantern?

I don't have BMPCC4K and use 5d3 for video.
I think the main advantage of BMPCC4K should be real time preview and playback of the recorded video, as Video RAW is native in this camera. It should have this feature.
Playback in 5d3 right now is almost unusable.

[allemyr]

Hi,

Isn't choosing BMPCC 4k a easy choice? Shure I love the 5D3 with video and photo capability. But that BMD camera is pretty awesome in low light for example, smashes most RED sensors in comparision.
Shure its a way smaller sensor, but as a little help there should be a metabones adapter if you have many EF compatible lenses. But for me because of the workflow in color is premade by the manufacture thats a huge plus! What ever editor you will choose to work with there will be a input setting for it in the camera raw panel. Nothing to guess by yourself and learn just watch from good sources and you will solve that in hours not years

Watch many youtube videos, I think PotatoJets is pretty good, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3W4-mUBhUA

Shure 5D3 is very good, but that BMDPCC 4k is better then you think or what I thought first

[eraizgn]

only the problem you may have with BM - bad battery life.

news : BMPCC 4K Firmware Update to Fix Battery Issues and More 

[eraizgn]

Hi,

Isn't choosing BMPCC 4k a easy choice? Shure I love the 5D3 with video and photo capability. But that BMD camera is pretty awesome in low light for example, smashes most RED sensors in comparision.
Shure its a way smaller sensor, but as a little help there should be a metabones adapter if you have many EF compatible lenses. But for me because of the workflow in color is premade by the manufacture thats a huge plus! What ever editor you will choose to work with there will be a input setting for it in the camera raw panel. Nothing to guess by yourself and learn just watch from good sources and you will solve that in hours not years

Watch many youtube videos, I think PotatoJets is pretty good, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3W4-mUBhUA

Shure 5D3 is very good, but that BMDPCC 4k is better then you think or what I thought first

You're right man! Ive just watched the video that you shared. It has been compared with Red Camera and its only 1.300usd. I love too much ML and saved me many times, its the one of them
https://player.vimeo.com/video/242401462

But when I go to shooting with 5d3, I face with awkward situation thats why want to buy a new camera, and BMPCC seems fit.

[nikki]

I shoot on super 16mm film and the 5d ..There is a huge difference for me ..the 5d3 colors full frame low light...

(This is the only digital camera I use and I worked with all of them )

[littlebobbytables]

Innocent question here: Are there any other ways in which the BMPCC4K is superior in video quality to 5D3 w/ Magic Lantern?

Apart from the differences in dynamic range, the 5D3 has a full-frame sensor, better low-light capabilities (maybe?), can record in 14-bit lossless, can also achieve 4K through crop_rec, as well as achieve dual ISO through the dual_iso.mo.

Software reliability aside, I too have been debating with myself on whether or not to invest my money in a 5D3 as opposed to a BMPCC4K from a purely video quality standpoint.

I own a bmpcc4k and still own my 50D with ML. Have not used ML on a 5D3. The only way my 50D(and probably the 5D3) is better is the ability to take higher resolution pictures than 8 MegaPixels and maybe the colors(mainly skintones) a bit, the quality and strength of the physical body, and the ability to tinker. Other than that the pocket is better or nearly equal in every way imho. You can get larger than aps-c look with a cheap speedbooster knock-off and close-ish to full frame with a with an XL speedbooster.

It's not just about the specs and capabilities, it's about the workflow and reliability. If you do video and want a very good camera that just works for a lot of scenario's, the pocket is great. You can use it casually with a kit lens, onboard audio, with a baked in and good looking video LUT to lower bitrate prores footage on sd cards that can be edited on a laptop, which is what I did on holiday just now. The disadvantage the 5D3 has here is the raw conversion workflow, reliability is less of an issue.

But you can easily build up the pocket and use it in a pro environment, both for cinema as for studio or event coverage, knowing it will perform and will not let you down. The disadvantage with the 5D3 is the reliability, workflow, codec capabilities, resolutions, framerates, connection options, onboard audio, interface options...

If you like the tinkering and the alpha and the bleeding edge, ML is awesome. If you want to just go and shoot and stop worrying, grab a Pocket. It's crazy how much peace of mind it has given me.

[nikki]

I own a bmpcc4k and still own my 50D with ML. Have not used ML on a 5D3. The only way my 50D(and probably the 5D3) is better is the ability to take higher resolution pictures than 8 MegaPixels and maybe the colors(mainly skintones) a bit, the quality and strength of the physical body, and the ability to tinker. Other than that the pocket is better or nearly equal in every way imho. You can get larger than aps-c look with a cheap speedbooster knock-off and close-ish to full frame with a with an XL speedbooster.

It's not just about the specs and capabilities, it's about the workflow and reliability. If you do video and want a very good camera that just works for a lot of scenario's, the pocket is great. You can use it casually with a kit lens, onboard audio, with a baked in and good looking video LUT to lower bitrate prores footage on sd cards that can be edited on a laptop, which is what I did on holiday just now. The disadvantage the 5D3 has here is the raw conversion workflow, reliability is less of an issue.

But you can easily build up the pocket and use it in a pro environment, both for cinema as for studio or event coverage, knowing it will perform and will not let you down. The disadvantage with the 5D3 is the reliability, workflow, codec capabilities, resolutions, framerates, connection options, onboard audio, interface options...

If you like the tinkering and the alpha and the bleeding edge, ML is awesome. If you want to just go and shoot and stop worrying, grab a Pocket. It's crazy how much peace of mind it has given me.

I just want to post that the disadvantages listed on this post  are the opposite from my experience and these are actually the advantages of the 5d3 with ml
Also another huge advantage is that you have a world class still camera

But the choice is up to the individual and their needs

[littlebobbytables]

I just want to post that the disadvantages listed on this post  are the opposite from my experience and these are actually the advantages of the 5d3 with ml
Also another huge advantage is that you have a world class still camera

But the choice is up to the individual and their needs

While I fully agree on the stills camera bit, I do want to challenge you on the disadvantages you think are advantages, let's go over them:
- 5D3 is raw video: Okay, this is clearly also an advantage, but the p4k also has raw if you want to use it. The disadvantage is that the 5D3 only has raw video and quite compressed h264(only at 1080p if I'm not mistaken). The p4k has a range of options in between, depending on your needs for that shoot, and they're all just as reliable.
- While I cannot comment on the 5D3 ML reliability, it is my experience with my 50D with ML that you sometimes run into issues. Nothing that a battery pull or reboot won't fix, but it is there nonetheless. This is not the case with the p4k.
- Workflow: Sometimes, when you need quick turn-around time, having a light prores file(with optional baked in LUT) is nicer than having raw files.
- Codec capabilities: Again, p4k can do many flavors of prores, as well as avid, as well as raw compressed and uncompressed, and BM Raw in the future. 5D3 only has h264 and RAW.
- Resolutions: If I'm not mistaken, the 5D3 cannot go full cinema 4k at 24fps (with liveview), and the 4k resolutions are only in crop_rec mode, not full sensor. The p4k can do 4k60 and with a speedbooster will have a larger 'effective' sensor.
- Framerates: The p4k can do 60p and 120p. The 5D3 will, unfortunately, probably never be able to go over 60p.
- Connectivity: The p4k has xlr, external power and USB-C for charging and data storage, things the 5D3 will never have.
- Onboard audio: I would argue the onboard stereo mics of the p4k are better, but that's maybe subjective.
- The (touch) user interface is exceptionally nice to use and fast, and has all sorts of nice features.

Another thing I'd like to mention is this: Thanks to ML the 5d3 has a lot of really cool features, but you cannot use all of them at the same time: You cannot get the highest 4k resolutions with audio and nice liveview and nice on-screen tools like zebra's etc.

I love what ML has done to boost these cameras in features, and I don't want to start a fight, but we should not be blind to the fact that they are not as complete or as stable as a product that was designed for (raw) video from the start, nor should we hide the facts from new users who might be deciding a purchase over this. But I'd love to know what you think.

[Tyronetheterrible]

While I fully agree on the stills camera bit, I do want to challenge you on the disadvantages you think are advantages, let's go over them:
- 5D3 is raw video: Okay, this is clearly also an advantage, but the p4k also has raw if you want to use it. The disadvantage is that the 5D3 only has raw video and quite compressed h264(only at 1080p if I'm not mistaken). The p4k has a range of options in between, depending on your needs for that shoot, and they're all just as reliable.
- While I cannot comment on the 5D3 ML reliability, it is my experience with my 50D with ML that you sometimes run into issues. Nothing that a battery pull or reboot won't fix, but it is there nonetheless. This is not the case with the p4k.
- Workflow: Sometimes, when you need quick turn-around time, having a light prores file(with optional baked in LUT) is nicer than having raw files.
- Codec capabilities: Again, p4k can do many flavors of prores, as well as avid, as well as raw compressed and uncompressed, and BM Raw in the future. 5D3 only has h264 and RAW.
- Resolutions: If I'm not mistaken, the 5D3 cannot go full cinema 4k at 24fps (with liveview), and the 4k resolutions are only in crop_rec mode, not full sensor. The p4k can do 4k60 and with a speedbooster will have a larger 'effective' sensor.
- Framerates: The p4k can do 60p and 120p. The 5D3 will, unfortunately, probably never be able to go over 60p.
- Connectivity: The p4k has xlr, external power and USB-C for charging and data storage, things the 5D3 will never have.
- Onboard audio: I would argue the onboard stereo mics of the p4k are better, but that's maybe subjective.
- The (touch) user interface is exceptionally nice to use and fast, and has all sorts of nice features.

Another thing I'd like to mention is this: Thanks to ML the 5d3 has a lot of really cool features, but you cannot use all of them at the same time: You cannot get the highest 4k resolutions with audio and nice liveview and nice on-screen tools like zebra's etc.

I love what ML has done to boost these cameras in features, and I don't want to start a fight, but we should not be blind to the fact that they are not as complete or as stable as a product that was designed for (raw) video from the start, nor should we hide the facts from new users who might be deciding a purchase over this. But I'd love to know what you think.

@littlebobbytables
Do you think that 5D3's full-frame sensor and low-light capabilities, along with recording at 14-bit, put the 5D3 at an advantage over P4K, at least in the realm of strictly 1080p video quality?

[littlebobbytables]

@littlebobbytables
Do you think that 5D3's full-frame sensor and low-light capabilities, along with recording at 14-bit, put the 5D3 at an advantage over P4K, at least in the realm of strictly 1080p video quality?

Yes, the 5D3's sensor is larger. With a speedbooster you can get close(around 1.2 crop factor with an xl speedbooster I believe), but not full-frame. The low light is something I cannot objectively compare, as I cannot find reliable data on it and I don't have both to compare, but the BMPCC4K is pretty darn good in low-light with it's dual ISO. In terms of bit depth, yes I guess the 14-bit has an advantage as well, but this is much more theoretical than practical. You really need to be pushing your image in post a lot before you'll see differences... Remember, with normal shots and grading people are having issues seeing the difference between 8-bit and anything higher. When comparing 1080p video, keep in mind also that on the p4k it will downsample from 4k to deliver a much sharper 1080p, bypassing or 'fixing' some of the issues a bayer sensor gives you.

[joemoorephoto]

A few more wins for the BM is it's awesome color science, BRAW, and it's beautiful highlight roll-off. You can get the roll-off there with ML, but BM renders that transition SO much better than Canon, even on their cinema line

[zerocool22]

A few more wins for the BM is it's awesome color science, BRAW, and it's beautiful highlight roll-off. You can get the roll-off there with ML, but BM renders that transition SO much better than Canon, even on their cinema line

I like the rolloff of my 5D III RAW better then my ursa mini pro, let alone my pocket 4K. I also like the color science of canon more. But thats just personal taste offcourse.

[adrjork]

Hi guys, also I have a little doubt about switching from 5D3 to BMPCC4K, and also I'm searching for answers...
I bought 5D3 ONLY because I could mod it with MagicLantern! Because my FIRST need was working in RAW, and the second main need was working in low-light condition without noise (and full frame sensor helps to maintain low ISO and low noise).

Now, I's true that BMPCC4K has a tiny sensor, but it seems that its native ISOs are 400 ISO (and 3200 in Dual-ISO). So, if I'm right, this should mean that BMPCC4K at 400 ISO should take at least the same amount of light of the 5D3 at 100 ISO, without taking more noise!
Q: Do you think it's right, or not?

Second: 14bit Unconpressed RAW is fantastic but 5D3's dynamic range is narrow, while 12bit BM RAW 3:1 is better used by the superior dynamic range of BMPCC4K.
Q: Do you agree?

Third: shallow DoF... Obviously 5D3 + a good F/1.4 lens can reach easily a shallow DoF, but you should reach a very similar result with BMPCC4K + Voigtländer F/0.95 lenses!
Q: Possible?

If the answer to all 3 questions is YES, then there are NO reasons – to me – not to switch to BMPCC4K: lighter RAW, faster workflow, lighter/smaller camera and accessories, better dynamic range, no need for external monitor (5" on-board!)

Is there any other advantage of having full frame?

Thanks

[Dmytro_ua]

Is there any other advantage of having full frame?

I'm not sure about your questions as I don't have BMPCC4K.
But the main difference is that you get a great professional camera (5d3) not only for video, but also for stills.

[adrjork]

I'm not sure about your questions as I don't have BMPCC4K.
But the main difference is that you get a great professional camera (5d3) not only for video, but also for stills.

Thanks Dmytro for your reply. Yes, of course 5D3 is a great still camera (anyway, I noticed that I take very-very few still in my work).
So mainly I'm interested into a comparison between 5D3+ML vs BMPCC4K in video-only territory.

[Dmytro_ua]

I'm interested into a comparison between 5D3+ML vs BMPCC4K in video-only territory.

Don't forget about Silent Pic Mode for timelapses. (Stills for video) 

[adrjork]

Don't forget about Silent Pic Mode for timelapses. (Stills for video) 

Eh... That's a point for 5D3!

[andy kh]

micro four third a big no for me.i am a owner of both 5d mark iii and bmpcc(not 4k) micro four third very bad in low light and too much crop factor.  i test my camera only once and never touch it again for the last couple of years.i choose to use my 650D instead of bmpcc for a short film some years back

5D III a professional stil camera, its a full frame much better in low light, better battery life

[adrjork]

micro four third a big no for me.i am a owner of both 5d mark iii and bmpcc(not 4k) micro four third very bad in low light [...] 5D III [...] its a full frame much better in low light, better battery life

Thanks Andy for your reply. That's fundamental for me: if BMPCC4K can't beat 5D3 in low-light/noise (in spite of BM native 400+3200 ISO) or at least equivalent, then I remain with 5D3!

[jpegmasterjesse]

Just shot a shirt film on bmpcc4k - amazed by the low light. i thought the crop would be a deal breaker but with a relatively cheap booster we really didn't lose significant sharpness. Battery life is kind of a bummer but there are some good workarounds available.

[andy kh]

Just shot a shirt film on bmpcc4k - amazed by the low light. i thought the crop would be a deal breaker but with a relatively cheap booster we really didn't lose significant sharpness. Battery life is kind of a bummer but there are some good workarounds available.

my 550D and 650D were amazed in lowllght until i bought a 70D. my 70D was amazed until i bought a 5D mark III. your BMPCC 4k wil not be amazed once you compare with a 5D mark III

[jpegmasterjesse]

I don't know if I'd be so sure. I've shot on the 5D3 before and as I recall it got pretty noisy at 1600 and fell apart at 3200. The BMPCC is clean at very high ISOs. I'd have to see a shoot-off to know for sure though.

[adrjork]

I've shot on the 5D3 before and as I recall it got pretty noisy at 1600 and fell apart at 3200. The BMPCC is clean at very high ISOs.

That's exactly my point: I'm sure that 5D3's FF sensor captures more light than a mFT sensor, that's obvious, BUT 5D3' sensor is less noisy only at low ISO (ideally 100, max 800), while BMPCC4K has native 400+3200 ISO that should mean that even if I need to push up the ISO to capture the same amount of light of 5D3, I should anyway obtain a less noisy image than 5D3. For example: let say that to obtain two images with the same amount of light, 5D3 is set at 1600 ISO, while BMPCC4K is set at 3200 ISO or even more, and the result should theoretically be that BMPCC4K captures less noise.

Could it be?

[Deadcode]

That's exactly my point: I'm sure that 5D3's FF sensor captures more light than a mFT sensor, that's obvious, BUT 5D3' sensor is less noisy only at low ISO (ideally 100, max 800), while BMPCC4K has native 400+3200 ISO that should mean that even if I need to push up the ISO to capture the same amount of light of 5D3, I should anyway obtain a less noisy image than 5D3. For example: let say that to obtain two images with the same amount of light, 5D3 is set at 1600 ISO, while BMPCC4K is set at 3200 ISO or even more, and the result should theoretically be that BMPCC4K captures less noise.

Could it be?

No. Both image will be equally bright with the same lens at same aperture with the same ISO with the same shutter speed. And dont forget, you can put a speedbooster to the BMPCC4K. In almost any technical way to BMPCC4K is superior. It's just much more fun to shoot with the 5D and there are a lot of pain in the a** dealing with the BMPCC4K shortcomings.

Theoretically yes, FF will capture 4 times more light than mFT sensor. But a 21Mp fullframe sensor from 2012  with pixel bining for video is no match to m43 sensor from 2018. For video of course.

Choose BMPCC4K for work, rig it up till 4000 usd price range, and you will have a mini-Alexa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCT9k81vp-g
Or choose 5DIII for fun shooting experience + stills

[squig]

my 550D and 650D were amazed in lowllght until i bought a 70D. my 70D was amazed until i bought a 5D mark III. your BMPCC 4k wil not be amazed once you compare with a 5D mark III

Says the guy who hasn't thoroughly tested one. I own both. With a speed booster, the BMPCC 4K is just as capable as the 5D in low light, if not more so, with no fixed pattern noise and more dynamic range.

[squig]

Innocent question here: Are there any other ways in which the BMPCC4K is superior in video quality to 5D3 w/ Magic Lantern?

Apart from the differences in dynamic range, the 5D3 has a full-frame sensor, better low-light capabilities (maybe?), can record in 14-bit lossless, can also achieve 4K through crop_rec, as well as achieve dual ISO through the dual_iso.mo.

Software reliability aside, I too have been debating with myself on whether or not to invest my money in a 5D3 as opposed to a BMPCC4K from a purely video quality standpoint.

Check my previous post on low light. Crop mode comes with a huge rolling shutter penalty, and dual ISO introduces aliasing and takes a lot of time to post-process. The 5D3 does upscale to 4K nicely. I use a 1/8 black promist filter with the P4K to take the digital edge off.

[adrjork]

With a speed booster, the BMPCC 4K is just as capable as the 5D in low light.

Q: shallow DoF. I use 5D3 mainly with f/1.4 primes to obtain a good shallow DoF (I usually don't use wide lenses, so in my case, I'd use Speedbooster only for increasing the "speed").
Now, let say we have two scenario: 1. BMPCC4K + SpeedBooster + f/1.4 EF lens, 2. BMPCC4K + f/0.95 mFT lens. Which of these two options can go closer to the percentage of in-focus/out-of-focus of 5D3 + f/1.4 EF lens? Are the two options equally close?

[Deadcode]

Q: shallow DoF. I use 5D3 mainly with f/1.4 primes to obtain a good shallow DoF (I usually don't use wide lenses, so in my case, I'd use Speedbooster only for increasing the "speed").
Now, let say we have two scenario: 1. BMPCC4K + SpeedBooster + f/1.4 EF lens, 2. BMPCC4K + f/0.95 mFT lens. Which of these two options can go closer to the percentage of in-focus/out-of-focus of 5D3 + f/1.4 EF lens? Are the two options equally close?

BMPCC4K with 0.64x speedbooster can give you 1.19x crop over fullframe. Which means a 50mm F1.4 will look like a 60mm F1.7 with T0.95 brightness. So the answer is: yes, the look will be pretty close. As a sony user i can't imagine how hard can be to film a moving subject without AF @ wide open, but that's not my problem

[squig]

Q: shallow DoF. I use 5D3 mainly with f/1.4 primes to obtain a good shallow DoF (I usually don't use wide lenses, so in my case, I'd use Speedbooster only for increasing the "speed").
Now, let say we have two scenario: 1. BMPCC4K + SpeedBooster + f/1.4 EF lens, 2. BMPCC4K + f/0.95 mFT lens. Which of these two options can go closer to the percentage of in-focus/out-of-focus of 5D3 + f/1.4 EF lens? Are the two options equally close?

It depends which speed booster you're using, I have a 0.71x Viltrox which is a 1.35x crop DCI (1.44x UHD). With a 0.64x speed booster it's a 1.22x crop DCI. https://www.metabones.com/article/of/SpeedBooster_for_BMPCC_4K I almost never shoot any shallower than f/2.8. I haven't done the math, but with either speed booster an f/1.2 lens would be close, I'd go with a de-clicked f/0.95 lens to be exact.

[adrjork]

Thanks Squig and Deadcode for your replies.

After a while I decide to keep my 5D3s instead of switching to BMPCC4K. I'll share my thoughts here, hoping it could be useful for someone else in my same conditions (and to clarify myself too).
Giving that low-light and noise performances are roughly equivalent on both cameras, for my way of working (and for the fact that I'm a generic artist, not a specific pro) I see 3 PROs and 3 CONs in switching from 5D3 to BMPCC4K:

PROs:

1. Weight and size: BMPCC4K is smaller and lighter than 5D3, its 5" screen can (often) replace an external monitor, and very-fast mFT lenses (that give same speed performance than SpeedBooster+FF-lenses) are compact and light as well. That means having at least 1 Kg less in your hands, and 2-to-3 Kg less in your bag (and this is not secondary for who has a good arthrosis

2. B-RAW: honestly MLV/CDNG workflow is a little nightmare: time consuming, storage consuming (with the price of my second RAID I could buy a complete set based on BMPCC4K!) B-RAW means having a quality-effective 3:1 file that requires 1/3 of the storage, can be directly drag into Davinci and is fast;

3. Dynamic Range: obviously improved over the 5D3 (never been a DR champion in comparison with other DSLRs)

CONs:

1. Selling 2 cameras to buy only one: in order to take the complete advantages of mFT set compactness and lightness – so, to buy BMPCC4K + mFT lens-set – I should sell both my two 5D3s and all my FF lenses. That means working with one single camera instead of two! And I must say that working with 2 cameras is a great thing in various situations;

2. 5D3 is a very good still camera: that means huge timelapse quality! And as I wrote above, being a generic artist means that my working "paradigm" depends on each different project and can strongly change from time to time. So having a camera that can also take good stills is a big advantage;

3. MagicLantern controls: it's not secondary that ML gives you a bunch of very detailed controls (and functions: see crop mode...) that lack on BMPCC4K. Obviously you can do the job anyway, but things like the spirit level or the customizable cropmarks helped my work really a lot. In order to minimize this lacks on BMPCC4K, I could buy a full featured external monitor, but it starts to go in the opposite direction than "cutting ballast"...

FINAL THOUGHTS:

All 3 PROs represent improvements, that means BMPCC4K and 5D3 do the same things but BMPCC4K can do them a bit better/easy.
Instead all 3 CONs are lacks! That means 5D3 can do things that BMPCC4K can't do! THIS is the answer. That's why I remain with my 5D3s.

Eventually, I could opt for a compromise: selling only one 5D3 (and adding 1K€ more...) in order to buy the BMPCC4K body-only (no mFT lenses) + SpeedBooster. In this way I could keep one 5D3 + one BMPCC4K and sharing le FF lenses between the two. But I remember that I bought my second 5D3 (with many sacrifices) just because it was discontinued, and once my first camera broke down, I would have lost the best/only camera for ML. So, again, for the moment I'll keep my 5D3s

[Camoncamera]

Says the guy who hasn't thoroughly tested one. I own both. With a speed booster, the BMPCC 4K is just as capable as the 5D in low light, if not more so, with no fixed pattern noise and more dynamic range.

Are you saying the 5DIII has fixed pattern noise or that the BMPCC 4K doesn't like many other BMD cameras?

[Camoncamera]

Right now only reason to get 5D3 only if you're going for photo as well. For video BMPCC4K is superior to 5D, only the problem you may have with BM - bad battery life. Keep in mind, if you will get 5D3 it will used, you never know when you will have too many hot pixels with it. Also, you're getting full version of Resolve with BM.

But an used 5D II is also cheaper than a BMPCC4K? Besides I still think 5D RAW looks better than Blackmagic. The only problem is that 5D RAW in 4K seems to be a gimmick at best and not really usable?