Blackmagic URSA Mini Pro 12K price drop

ahalpert said:
Why? They could probably make great cine lenses for a great price and find a market. I just think it would be crazy to use a new proprietary mount
Click to expand...

I think it would be a waste of time...super saturated out there already.

They make lots of great hardware besides cameras and should focus on that.

But if anything, a fixed-camcorder to go along with their TV broadcast equipment/suite stuff would be cool. They just released their new studio cameras, maybe something along those lines with a built-in zoom lens over a MFT chip.
 
I mentioned the price drop to Brawley on facebook and he thinks this was always the intended price but that they charged a premium when they first announced it so they wouldn't get overwhelmed by demand. he said that a new sensor fab has a much lower yield initially, and by now they're probably able to get a lot more keepers and ship more volume
 
lol, there was no demand, IMO.

It was a $10K camera with a PL mount that only provided BRAW that was mostly only fully supported in Resolve 12 months ago at this time when it was shipping.
 
DLD said:
Canon won't license fully functioning RF mounts to anyone because that's how Canon makes its living. In which case, BMD might as well stick with either the PL or "whatever you want" mount in their "pro" sector models.

As to the price reduction, I have a hunch that BMD has a pretty good idea what Canon is going to show off at the NAB. The rumors have been circulating - and recirculating and recirculating - about several 8K cameras for quite a while. BMD might as well move some inventory before October.

Sony could spring a surprise or two also.
Click to expand...

But Canon sells glass. A lot of it and having more mounts out there for the glass means more people will buy their glass. Part of why Canon is doing well and Panasonic not so much is because for years now a lot of GH4 and GH5 users were buying EF glass to use on Speedboosters. Most cinema cameras had EF mounts as well and the huge flood of BMD camera owners typically bought EF glass. Canon 100% benefitted from that greatly and sold a lot more lenses than they likely would have.

Now having the Tamron and Sigmas producing lenses may impact Canon sales so its a balance act they need to play. Larger support for RF mounts on camera bodies would be huge. Totally opening up 3rd party manufacturing of RF lenses could hurt them.

With that said its happening if they like it or not. Even Rokinon now has a set of primes with autofocus and electronic communication with the RF mount. Reverse engineered or not the competition is already there. They might be better off licensing the mount and at least making some money off whats going to happen anyway.

Given its almost 100% backwards compatibility with EF glass cinema cameras going RF mount likely makes the most sense.
 
ahalpert said:
I mentioned the price drop to Brawley on facebook and he thinks this was always the intended price but that they charged a premium when they first announced it so they wouldn't get overwhelmed by demand. he said that a new sensor fab has a much lower yield initially, and by now they're probably able to get a lot more keepers and ship more volume
Click to expand...

Thats the sort of thing one doesn't say out loud and should keep to themselves.
 
Bob Loblaw said:
Ouch for all the people who paid $10K for it. This is an extreme price drop.
Click to expand...

This^. The industry always talks about Canon & Sony "cannibalizing" cameras with so many new releases. I sort of feel like BM has taken this to a whole new level. Sustainability ???
 
Doesn't Rokinon only have 2 lenses so far for RF? And frankly, if 3rd parties can't get the same AF performance on RF as they can on FE, it's going to make a big difference for which lenses people choose to buy and it's going to continue to be an advantage of the E-mount ecosystem
 
Actually saw this the other month...although it's unclear why, Samyang (Rokinon) already stopped producing RF lenses:

https://www.canonrumors.com/samyang-...-mount-lenses/

Regardless, the third-party RF market is extremely small (it was a different time years ago) for mostly independent filmmakers as professional photographers will use almost nothing but Canon, and most videographers will want the best lenses for DPAF and IBIS performance (which communicate with the sensor).

And Canon will have more RF options for a few hundred bucks that do this so in my mind it's like what's the point for everyone else?

Like that $199 50mm...stellar lens for the price.
 
scorsesefan said:
Yes, BM has always been square with their customers. They've had lengthy delays with some camera production (BMP 4K) but that was due to their small workforce/production capacities...
Click to expand...

Some delays were kind of bad but I think a lot of that perception was due to how open BMD has always been about what is coming. Other companies wouldn't announce a new product until it was a 100% guarantee that production could deliver and it was ready. BMD was always a lot more up front and likely told all of us details a bit too early. Earlier than they likely should have.

Some viewed that as caring for their customers and in some ways it did but it also results in frustration when those same customers are holding off buying a new camera and its delayed. Either method results in frustration. Typical manufacturing deals with frustration by those that bought a camera and are frustrated a new one suddenly came out. The frustration happens after the new camera release and by those who already spent the money and the rest of us kind of ignore in a "sucks to be you" kind of way. The BMD way is to have a wider range of frustration before the release and we all feel the pain equally. That equal share of pain makes for more unified discussion (complaints) online.
 
NorBro said:
Actually saw this the other month...although it's unclear why, Samyang (Rokinon) already stopped producing RF lenses:

https://www.canonrumors.com/samyang-...-mount-lenses/

Regardless, the third-party RF market is extremely small (it was a different time years ago) for mostly independent filmmakers as professional photographers will use almost nothing but Canon, and most videographers will want the best lenses for DPAF and IBIS performance (which communicate with the sensor).

And Canon will have more RF options for a few hundred bucks that do this so in my mind it's like what's the point for everyone else?

Like that $199 50mm...stellar lens for the price.
Click to expand...

To be fair EF lenses work great on RF cameras. Like almost 100% perfectly. 3rd parties can stick with the EF mount for now with what they know and have perfected and that does not need to prevent any photographer or videographer or film maker from not using those lenses. Tamron and Sigma can just stick to EF for now for example. I just got a new Canon R6 yesterday and my Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2 works 100% flawlessly with the cheap Viltrox EF to RF adapter. There are not as many compatibility issues with 3rd party adapters going from EF to RF since they are both Canon mounts and have similar communication.

Fully manual lenses like the Rokinon Cine lenses have very little reason to bother with the RF mount.
 
But you said you haven't used it that much yet because you're swamped? If you're interested, you'll eventually learn the video AF will suffer on certain adapted EF models.

As far as photography, adapting for stills is easy and most people don't need the hit ratio of demanding sports use cases, but photographers always seem to either use the best gear there is or stick with their very trusted old gear, nothing in between, lol.

But I feel like a lot of RF users will really want shiny Canon RF glass (and there's still the whole IS/IBIS thing in some of the RF lenses).
 
NorBro said:
But you said you haven't used it that much yet because you're swamped? If you're interested, you'll eventually learn the video AF will suffer on certain adapted EF models.

As far as photography, adapting for stills is easy and most people don't need the hit ratio of demanding sports use cases, but photographers always seem to either use the best gear there is or stick with their very trusted old gear, nothing in between, lol.

But I feel like a lot of RF users will really want shiny Canon RF glass (and there's still the whole IS/IBIS thing in some of the RF lenses).
Click to expand...

I'm sure that is the case for older lenses but newer lenses can be made with the EF to RF adapting in mind. Part of why I bought a Tamron G2 lens was to use the Tap updating device to update the firmware myself vs sending it in. A lot can be fixed with firmware.

I'm sure there is some compatibility but that doesn't mean the mount conversion isn't capable of 100% perfection. Just that some lenses were not utilizing that mount the best way. That can change now knowing that many new EF lenses will likely be used on a RF mount.

Besides a lot of video only users might be more interested in fully manual cine lenses anyway which are not a problem at all. There is almost no point for Rokinon to spend the money on a RF mount version when it provides zero value over the EF version of the lens.

Their 85mm autofocus lens has reviewed very high with photographers but I'm not sure a lot of people want to trust it over a more reputable company. I have read a few user reviews that also say the lens works great and after five months the electronics just stopped working. That part kind of scares people. It looks many years for Tamron and Sigma to build a reputation of being a solid alternative and yet there are still some that just don't trust it.
 
I'm mostly biased...I will want the new tech/glass on my new camera even if the difference is minimal in most cases. It's part of the acquisition syndrome.
 
Thomas Smet said:
To be fair EF lenses work great on RF cameras. Like almost 100% perfectly. 3rd parties can stick with the EF mount for now with what they know and have perfected and that does not need to prevent any photographer or videographer or film maker from not using those lenses. Tamron and Sigma can just stick to EF for now for example. I just got a new Canon R6 yesterday and my Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2 works 100% flawlessly with the cheap Viltrox EF to RF adapter. There are not as many compatibility issues with 3rd party adapters going from EF to RF since they are both Canon mounts and have similar communication.

Fully manual lenses like the Rokinon Cine lenses have very little reason to bother with the RF mount.
Click to expand...

short flange distance = greater lens design flexibility. but i agree that they can keep doing everything they were doing in EF and it'll work great on RF

and with AF Rokinons (or perhaps just electronic Rokinons generally), I can get in-body distortion/CA/vignetting correction. Maybe you don't want to avail yourself of in-body corrections, but they definitely make me more willing to use my Samyangs wide open
 
NorBro said:
I'm mostly biased...I will want the new tech/glass on my new camera even if the difference is minimal in most cases. It's part of the acquisition syndrome.
Click to expand...

I too suffer from GAS.

In the past year I finally upgrade my GH4 to a P4k, then a Canon M6 mk2 and now a Canon R6. Also finally moved away from m43 glass and bought f2.8 EF zooms. I see no end in sight either. I also would prefer to go the RF route if at all possible. Someday I likely will. But for now my Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2 is performing as well for a $1,000 lens as the Canon RF version for $2,600. Perhaps the Rf is better but I'm not sure one can truly say its $1,600 better.

Typically moving to a new system gained a lot of benefits. The move from Canon FD to Canon EF was pretty huge for example. This time its more or less the same with a shorter flange distance and a few more contact points to send extra data like OS position and the cool Canon control ring that be set to control different aspects of the camera. Image wise FF glass for EF and RF can be identical and the AF motor of the lens still dictates speed more than the mount itself. The RF 85mm f2 lens for example has much slower AF than many other 85mm EF lenses.

Outside of the extra potential contact points the only potential advantage to RF glass is size but I'm not sure we are actually seeing that happen yet to a great extent. The Canon f2.8s are still pretty large.

The other reason I don't think 3rd party lens makers should just dump EF is because there are still la ton of EF bodies out there used by professionals. Eventually they may upgrade to a RF body but for now they 5D mkIV they invested in likely does what they need. Those users cannot use RF glass at all. So if Tamron and Sigma want to sell more copies of a new lens design they will likely still support EF for now. Canon wants their customers to upgrade to a RF body to sell new bodies and lenses but Tamron and Sigma do not have the same interest. They are perfectly fine if a good chunk of the Canon user base stays with their EF bodies for now. Even if photographers do dip their toes into RF they may have multiple cameras and an already huge collection of solid EF glass. That glass is suddenly not garbage and I think EF on RF is going to be a reality for some time.
 
ahalpert said:
short flange distance = greater lens design flexibility. but i agree that they can keep doing everything they were doing in EF and it'll work great on RF

and with AF Rokinons (or perhaps just electronic Rokinons generally), I can get in-body distortion/CA/vignetting correction. Maybe you don't want to avail yourself of in-body corrections, but they definitely make me more willing to use my Samyangs wide open
Click to expand...

Very true. Funny how Panasonic was criticized for years for in camera corrections and now its kind of becoming a norm for everyone else. Its those corrections why I'm concerned Canon is starting to cut more corners wit their lens designs. The 24-240 RF for example has some of the worse barrel distortion ever. With corrections it gets back to a decent level. Granted super zooms are ever far from perfect but I think the lower budget RF lenses are going to take more advantage of those corrections to keep the lens cost down.
 
Thomas Smet said:
... But Canon sells glass. A lot of it and having more mounts out there for the glass means more people will buy their glass.
Click to expand...
That's a legitimate argument but, if one looks what is happening on the hybrid consumer market in general and Canon's share of global sales in particular, it's pretty difficult to suggest they change course. They're happy with the status quo. No soup, I mean AF, for you!

PS. They're also likely to make cine glass with AF, similar to Sony's 16-35, and they're likely betting on muscling Red and ARRI out of the high end production as well.

PPS. Canon's low end all-in-one zooms are basically made for the sub-$1,000 camera niche.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top