Blackmagic URSA Mini Pro 12K price drop
- Thread starter rob norton
- Start date
rob norton
Veteran
Are you eyeing anything next or will you completely let your market decide? I don't see why the f55 can't keep going for another 10 years!
I am asking myself the same question. I shot this clip yesterday with the F55, still feels capable of good 4K.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Nice looking footage but I would prefer better highlight handling if you are keeping it for 10 more years! 
Would the BM allow more grace in this area?
Would the BM allow more grace in this area?Thanks Bassman. If I get the Ursa I probably wouldn't use the F55, at least that would be my expectation. On the highlight handling, nothing is clipped in the above source footage, there is lots of latitude to adjust with. Since I exposed for Cine EI-2500 there are 7 stops above middle gray available and with a functional raw control pane, the highlight rolloff can be adjusted to suit the look you want, so I have to take the blame for highlight handling. I think that is one area that is probably a strength relative to BM.
Attachments
Bassman2003
Veteran
I am not saying you did anything wrong, it just looks like the sensor is struggling with the top areas of the pickup as well as the concrete. Maybe the exposure could be set lower but I like the look of the mids. My comparison would be a scene where nothing looks like it is bothering the sensor. White trucks in the direct sun are difficult no doubt. I am probably too picky but I am always looking for cameras that handle these areas gracefully even though they do not show as clipped in the scopes.
No, you are not being too picky. Here's something to remember. Sensors, are linear. With 16 bit linear raw, each stop brighter represents a doubling of code values corresponding to the doubling of light. So with linear raw, if it's not clipped, you've captured all the nuance. But it could still look flat or bothered. A solution is to identify a narrow range of code values and increase the contrast within that range, expanding it for differentiation.
I regraded parts of the clip as a demonstration, slowed it down to 24 fps since it was recorded at 60, and as soon as YouTube can finish processing it I will put up the link.
I regraded parts of the clip as a demonstration, slowed it down to 24 fps since it was recorded at 60, and as soon as YouTube can finish processing it I will put up the link.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
if anyone is interested in seriously extending the life of their F55 I have an R5 16-bit RAW recorder and a couple of 512GB AXM cards I'd like to sell. I upgraded to the R7 to get 120 fps 4K, but other than that, the R5 is just as good and has been sitting on the shelf. Time to find it a new home.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Tom, thanks for the 2nd clip. But, I have to say, it looks like you flattened out the highlights to compensate for the sensor/camera not being able to handle the scene. I prefer the viberance of the 1st clip but long for the highlights to have stayed in check. Probably a case of another digital camera that needs its highlights protected when shooting and the mids brought up in post. I would be interested to see how the BM would have handled the same scene, out of camera and after RAW processing.
Wait for the next, it's uploading. I appreciate that you express a preference for the vibrancy of the 1st clip. The clip uploading now is matched to the first with the same vibrancy.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Excellent job of recovery! Looks very nice. Points to the importance of fat codecs to "fix" the camera shortcomings!
sleekmedia
Well-known member
Honestly unless your clients have a direct need for very high resolution (8k and above), I would just stick with the F55. I find all of my clients personally want anywhere between a 1080p, 2k, or 4k delivery (max) so 5K or 6k on my RED's are plenty to gain a little benefit of re-framing and downsampling compression to clean up noise if it is present and crispin up the image. I have shot on Monstro plenty and find very little visual difference (maybe slightly more perceived sharpness) between that and the 5k resolution that my Gemini produces outside of the benefit of cropping and re-framing in post. The monstro (8k) or (12k) from the Ursa is better if you are going to deliver prints along with video, but with Adobe's new resize feature in photoshop I have been able to pull stills from my Gemini and Komodo with great success editing and finishing them in Lightroom. However, most often I find myself shooting prints on my A7r IV with adapted cinema lenses (to match the look of the commercial) where we have a second set-up strictly for photography which produces much better detail than any cinema camera, so again I see not much benefit to 12k resolution outside of VFX work. Not a single one of my clients has ever complained about lack of sharpness or limited resolution from my 4K delivery's while shooting on 5-6k sensors. If anything I find slightly less sharp cameras to be more filmic in their rendering and I wouldn't be surprised if that would be the case with the Ursa12k vs. your F55. I don't know what lens and f-stop you used on the F55 clip but I found your 4k delivery to be plenty sharp and actually looks quite well for a camera with such age. I know many that still use F55 and Alexa Classic for the reasons mentioned above as if it ain't broke, and the clients don't complain, why change? This is another reason I love shooting talent with my Gemini as skins micro-contrast is crisp but not too detailed where it can begin to feel harsh and require lots of diffusion not to feel as "digital" on 8k cameras and above I find large amounts of resolution to also be a problem in post where your file sizes and render times will be double that of a 4k-6k camera shooting the same RAW and that is coming from a guy with high end computers and drives for editting. You will spend more money in drive space and your time trust me and I despise "resolution marketing" for this reason as I see prosumers buying higher resolution cameras then posting about why their 2015 MacBook Pro can't handle it. If you really need a second camera or plan on selling the F55 for a new A-cam, for this reason I would highly recommend the BMD Pocket 6K pro (if your really want BRAW) or the A7siii or even an FX6 or FX9 in which I think you could keep the F55 as your over the shoulder cam or sticks cam and use the next camera you buy to intercut with the F55 for even more options. Considering the small sensor height, extremely small pixel pitch (2.2 microns), BRAW (not the greatest but not bad) and overabundance of unnecessary resolution with the Ursa12k, I think you would be just as happy if not more with some of those other cameras I mentioned above. The A7siii is seriously no slouch and the dynamic range and cleanliness of the image and sharpness has impressed me. I am not sure how much you have used Braw or Canon Raw/MXF files but they are not fun to play with and REDcode Raw edits about 3 times as fast. If you are not afraid to come over to the RED dark side (gasp) you can get a RED Scarlet-w, Dragon-x, and even now Gemini for 8-15k as a kit and IMO they all destroy any of the cameras mentioned above in terms of RAW quality and flexibility in post. Just my opinion for what its worth.
Bob Loblaw
Active member
The Ursa 12K isn’t just a 12K camera, it’s also an 8K or 4K S35 camera. It’s also a 6K or 4K S16 camera. This camera allows full frame RAW at various resolution. The dynamic range drop from changing resolution is slight, in fact CineD shows that the Ursa 12K matches the FX6 in dynamic range in both 8K & 4K. The oversized S35 sensor & pixel density creates a look that is very similar to full frame. Not to mention BRAW, which I personally rank right next to Redcode RAW as being the best RAW flavored codecs (or any codec) on the market. You claim that BRAW is not fun to play with, but I’ve played with editing & grading 12K BRAW on my two year old laptop with ease. I often work with 6K BRAW in Avid & Baselight without issue.
I’m not saying that the Ursa 12K is for everyone, and in an industry where you often get hired based on brand recognition then buying a Sony, or Canon, or Red would be more profitable. But if I were shooting projects where I had control over camera choice (keeping it at or under $10K,) I would choose the Ursa 12K based on how much I personally love the image quality, the sheer number of options it provides, the frame rates, the ease of use, and (especially now) price.
Last edited:
There are enough affordable third party manual lenses. That's basically the Chinese territory with DZO, Laowa,SIRUI, Pergear, Mitakon, etc. And Samyang/Rokinon/Xeen isn't far behind, albeit also going for the higher tiers.
What BMD ought to consider is either an on-body or an external LiDAR auto focus system, which would cover some of the gap between the manual glass and the on-sensor AF (PD/CD) from Canon and Sony. If they can do an on-body design like many a smartphone, then could conceivably combine that with its own lens brand. But staying universal is probably better.
The other option for them is an MFT fixed lens "cinema" camera. A 25-50mm fixed should work for most interior shots..
What BMD ought to consider is either an on-body or an external LiDAR auto focus system, which would cover some of the gap between the manual glass and the on-sensor AF (PD/CD) from Canon and Sony. If they can do an on-body design like many a smartphone, then could conceivably combine that with its own lens brand. But staying universal is probably better.
The other option for them is an MFT fixed lens "cinema" camera. A 25-50mm fixed should work for most interior shots..
I appreciate all your points. My clients, none of them are demanding even 4K. The lens I used above was the 85mm T2.0 from the Sony SCL-PK6/F CineAlta PL mount primes six-pack, shot at T4.5 180° shutter at 60 FPS. I do have the Pocket 6K also and shoot BRAW. As for the Red dark side, I admit I have always been afraid to come over to that side. They just are not the value proposition at a low price. Red value is in prestige and reputation and collaboration. Of course, the F55 was never a cheap system, but it was years ago, and nearly the only 4K game in town along with the F65 and Canon 1DC, the cheapest thing out there was $10K for the 1DC and that was 24 FPS only and mjpeg codec. The F55 I bought in 2013 and got years of use, not always profitable but it was mine. I never rented it out. Those are all great cameras that you mentioned and everything true about the 12K but I want it anyway. With the price cut to $5995, it undercuts nearly everything that shoots 8K but uses all my lenses that I already own, the PL primes set, Red 300mm T2.9 Pro Prime, all my EF glass, whereas Canon forces me into RF mount and Sony E mount and that makes anything from BMD and especially the P6K a bargain that uses all my glass instead of having to rebuy the same focal lengths in the RF mount or E mount. And then there's frame rates, 8K120 FPS, 12K 75 FPS, 7.5ms rolling shutter @ 8K, and the final nails in the coffin, internal ND and BRAW and media type choices. That's where the value is for me. With Alpha 1 or A7SIII or FX3/FX6 the camera price is only the starting point and from that moment working paycheck to paycheck for new lenses and accessories, batteries, memory cards to go with it. With the 12K for $6K I have everything I need already from the F55 and P6K, USB 3.1 SSD memory cards, lenses, mounts, mattebox, shoulder mount, detachable plate, V-Mount batteries, I'm kitted. I'm sounding like Thomas Smet here giving all the reasons, but they do add up for me. In the final analysis, do I need the 12K? No but it arrives tomorrow anyway.
rogar-Mark-14(DBG):^And this, sums it up perfectly for me.