FS7: I hate to bring this up but.... why does not everyone go for the URSA MINI PRO?

It is so much more at play when it comes to the Ursa camera that no one is talking about, such as motion cadence. If we are going after the 24p filmic look, then I've yet to to be drawn into that fantasy with the lower grade sony's, panasonic's or canon's. Not even the c300 mark II's give me the motion that black magic gives. I've noticed people use the bm hand held with good lens choices and point them at subjects and I get a certain feeling that none of the other mentioned cameras give me. I think this is why we are always trying to put these cameras on gambles and make them look more cinematic, due to the fact they need more compensation to try and mimic a look and feel that a true cinema camera gives u naturally. Nothing digital gives me the feeling when watching it as a f35, Alexa, or black magic. The closest thing ever was the gh2 hacked ironically. It seems like the newer sensors are looking more and more generic and digital then older sensors for some odd reason. Even in the best examples of the fs7's and a7s II the footage and motion looks frail in comparison to the ursa mini pro. Functionality for image trade off. I choose the image at this point. No one is wrong in their choice, as it is your choice, so let's not try and defend our choice to make ourselves feel more at peace about a decision that we chose to make.
 
NorBro said:
I'm surprised you went with the FS7 II. Not surprised because it's not worthy, but because you soundred pretty convinced on the UMP and/or the EVA1 at some point.

Nevertheless, it seems like you narrowed it down to what's best for you/your business at this time.
Click to expand...

Believe me I am just as surprised! :D

EVA1? I didn’t want to be stuck with an EF mount or have to perform surgery to have PL. Maybe EVA2? I like the VariCam look. Both Ursa and Eva systems borrow from FS7’s design. FS7 seems to borrow from Aaton. I do like the “cat on a shoulder” philosophy. :)
 
JRJphoto said:
Believe me I am just as surprised! :D

EVA1? I didn’t want to be stuck with an EF mount or have to perform surgery to have PL. Maybe EVA2? I like the VariCam look. Both Ursa and Eva systems borrow from FS7’s design. FS7 seems to borrow from Aaton. I do like the “cat on a shoulder” philosophy. :)
Click to expand...


I wish the FS7 followed the “cat on a shoulder” philosophy. :)
 
James0b57 said:
View attachment 131735
The cat is in the box now. It will live forever.
Click to expand...

This is how you know engineers are the only ones designing cameras now. They seem to only enlist the opinions of we who use the equipment in the field after the camera has been designed and will only make tweaks. Instead of letting us be a part of the actual design process. If it were up to us, I’m positive cameras would be much more ergonomic.

My FS7M2 is just like a “cat on a shoulder” after a bit of rigging. It desperately needs the XDCA (or similar) and brick batteries for counterbalance; especially for shoulder mounting. Otherwise, it’s a great workout for the arms!
 
"Cat on a shoulder" is fine for big heavy cameras with film magazines. The heavy magazines gave it a proper balance and stayed out of the way in that configuration (so did the massive batteries and vintage power hungry electronics in broadcast cameras)Today, productions with variety of, mostly super light weight (drone, gimbal, run and gun) , setups call for different convention. I agree with you that most of these boxes are anti-ergonomic but IMO with all the modern production requirements, the camera design should go this direction. The key is to keep it small and light enough ...none of the boxes mentioned above are small and light enough. The manufacturers still seem to follow the model "sell the cameras by pound(or kilo)" but they will get it eventually. Robust does not have to mean heavy and big metal brick....
xc15.jpg
 
Last edited:
It should absolutely go in this direction. I much prefer to have the option to make my camera into a big heavy shoulder rig or build it small for camcorder-like handheld or gimbal use; whatever is appropriate. It’s great to not be stuck with a huge film camera that can only ever be huge.

Until they can make those boxes small and light enough: That XC15 always seemed kinda fantastic in a medium format photography ergonomics sort of way. Affixed lens camcorders absolutely have their place. My DVX200 is the go-to, but I love how small I can rig my FS7M2 so it’s taking over. I can shoot all day with a light FS7 build and lightweight sticks. Just slightly heavier than DVX200 but the tradeoff is superior image quality.
 
Making the lens detachable on the XC15 would surely take the cake (but possibly cannibalize the C series camera sales) Such are the corporate ways....
 
Last edited:
The most ergonomic, easiest to shoot with, perfectly balanced, and versatile camera I have ever used is the Z450. The only thing it lacks is a big sensor, and if it had that, then it wouldn't be able to have many of the other features that make it such a great camera. I'm sure it is as close to a perfect camera as I will ever use.
Sony-PXW-Z450-002.jpg
 
Doug Jensen said:
The most ergonomic, easiest to shoot with, perfectly balanced, and versatile camera I have ever used is the Z450. The only thing it lacks is a big sensor, and if it had that, then it wouldn't be able to have many of the other features that make it such a great camera. I'm sure it is as close to a perfect camera as I will ever use.
View attachment 131771
Click to expand...
That form factor is history just like the film cameras. It's not coming back and it shouldn't IMO. Do you really want to spend more on another camera that can be used on a gimbal or a drone?
 
optitek said:
That form factor is history just like the film cameras. It's not coming back and it shouldn't IMO. Do you really want to spend more on another camera that can be used on a gimbal or a drone?
Click to expand...

I would. That fits the VAST majority of my shooting style and I don't use gimbals or drones, so why would I want to sacrifice the useability and convenience and speed offered by this design for the ability to use it in a way that I don't, but then have to build it up to make it into the form factor I need(but still really isn't)?
 
Yes of course the legacy is in the 50 years of using these. Broadcast stations will not revise their gear overnight. There is no reason to do that. But in the other sectors that have shorter product cycles it is history already. It also is typical that in those sectors there are individuals- dare I say, with 20-30 years of experience that will hang on to these. All that does not change the fact that the shoulder mounted camcorders are not compatible with many current setups commonly used in narrative, live, event, documentary, wildlife.... Since there are better solutions for these genres available today -that is what is getting more popular and will continue to take over the shoulder mount camcorder...
 
I mostly disagree. Shoulder mount is not coming back because it never went away. They exist as broadcast cams foremost and many of the other uses were adaptations. I do agree there are better solutions for other genres, always something smaller, faster, more convenient that speak to their favor but it works both ways.
 
Doug Jensen said:
The only thing it lacks is a big sensor, and if it had that, then it wouldn't be able to have many of the other features that make it such a great camera. I'm sure it is as close to a perfect camera as I will ever use.
View attachment 131771
Click to expand...

In the rush to cinema cameras people have forgotten just how versatile a 2/3" inch camera was. FWIW I always liked the Arri 416 - lovely piece of engineering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top