Balckmagic Pocket Camera: What would be good lenses for it?

So, I've been out of the filmmaking loop for a while (not that I was really ever in it :P ), but last I checked a DSLR gave you the best bang for your buck!

Now, today I learned about the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera, and I'm simply blown away by the price and the image quality! Not so keen on the battery life, or that the SD cards it requires are God-awful expensive, but other than that it looks like a FABULOUS camera, and would serve me better than a DSLR would for sure!

My question, though, is that it uses an Active MFT mount, and I'm having some trouble finding some decent lenses for it. I found this Olympus one, but I would like a lens that could have more variety than just 17mm. Anybody have any good recommendations? I think I heard that the Pocket Camera can't use powered lenses but I'm not sure [UPDATE: On their site it says it can use electronic lenses, so yay!] - if anyone has any experience with this camera and lens type, please help me! :D

Also, what would be a good wide-angle lens? I can't remember how to tell focal lengths. Is it the smaller the number, the wider the shot, or reverse? :P

Thanks everyone!
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this, I.D.O.M.

ProRes rocks. Not bad for a $995 camera, a $1500 set of Samyang Cine Lenses, an old Nikon 50mm f1.4 ($145 on Amazon), a $429 Speedbooster, a $429 JuicedLink BM366, a $699 Rode NTG3 and a ~$271 Oktava Mk-012 Hyper.

$4468 is not a lot of money for camera, lenses and sound by Hollywood (or even indie) standards - heck, it's less than the cost of an 8-bit body-only C100.

BMPCC shooter Jae Solina has also shot a few short narratives with the camera (although his production values differ a little from Frank's :))

But this is pretty darned good, considering his near zero budget.
Last edited:
~$4500 isn't bad, but don't forget he's also using that much or more in terms of lighting & grip equipment. And then of course there's the part you can't buy - 20+ years experience in image production.

Jae Solina's stuff looks decent, even though it's clearly not as controlled as Glencairn's work. But what I notice most about it is that as the image quality gets better on stuff like this the other aspects - like the writing and acting - really start to be more noticeable when they fall short in comparison. Glencairn's has a few moments in the acting that bothered me (although honestly I think they could be improved in the edit) but overall it's decent and on a level with the production value. Solina's stuff on the other hand looks much better than the story/acting seems to warrant.

I think we're starting to cross a threshold here where decent image quality becomes just a baseline requirement rather than a goal in and of itself. Solina's in his early 20's - in a few years we'll have kids graduating from high school with 3-4 years of experience shooting on BM cameras and grading in Resolve. They'll probably still be making films about two teenage hitmen fighting in the local park, but they'll look like hollywood productions to the average viewer. Maybe this will start to shift some of the focus away from the cameras and tech and more towards things like story and acting.