Pyxis 12K Camera

[Scott Pickering]

In the next few years or so, Id like to shoot a feature with a small crew here in the Fraser Valley BC. My main issue is finding ways to shoot at specific locations, which may scuttle doing the feature if this isn't solved. Whether we are allowed to shoot in a store location, or have to fabricate one somehow on a set, I havent figured out yet. Once that is figured out, and the money to shoot becomes available, I'll be looking for a small crew and non union actors. This is a very low budget film, so most of it will take place inside or around a store location. I might end up doing the camera work myself, but also hiring a boom operator and a lighting person to work with myself on DOP work. I have a friend who works in the Industry in Vancouver, and he has offered help for this feature. For now the script is being worked on, and will continue to do so up to the point of preproduction. I might end up directing as well, or co directing with my friend. I have a pretty clear vision of what Im after as far as the story and what I'd like from the actors.

That all aside, I've been looking at the up and coming Blackmagic Pyxis 12K to shoot this feature with (since Im very low budget), and it seems to fit the bill. Im aware of the reliability of Black Magic cameras while in use on productions, but Im not sure the company has made strides to improve this area today? I will be using the 12K mode, as the final file will be in 8K for delivery. Im aware 8K is not a well used standard, but at least Youtube has accepted its use. If the film ever did well enough to bring in some money, I'd consider getting a film out print in either 35mm or even 65mm.

I know there really is no lens that will resolve 12K, and may even struggle for 8K. Someone suggested 160 lines per mm for 12K in what the lenses would need to resolve. But they also said the softer look you'd get in 12K with most lenses (it sharpens up downrezzing to 8K), gives a film like look. The Pyxis 12K uses the same full frame sensor as the Cine 12K. This sensor claims to have 16 stops of dynamic range, and the color off these sensors is very good as well. I think most lenses resolve around 50 lines per mm. Im thinking to get the L mount version for auto focus at times when I need that, especially when its just me shooting and Im in the shot. I dont know if there are any recommended L mount lenses anyone would suggest? I have read to really make use of the sensor I'd have to use expensive CINE lenses. I could also shoot in anamorphic to use the full sensor for better resolution, but Im not sure what is not too expensive to get for this camera? I'd probably have to get the PL mount if I went that route. Is there such a thing as PL mount autofocus lenses? Im not aware if there is. I dont think PL uses any contacts either. Has Adobe Premiere Pro improved its RAW conversion for BM, or is it still worse then Resolve? What lenses, whether spherical or anamorphic, would be recommended for the 12K? Which lenses give a cinematic look (I know these two questions are not the same result). I might use a Fuji XH-2 for secondary camera work (in 8K), since I own this camera.

Any comments on Blackmagic 12K cameras for their use or output? I'll probably get a few 4TB CF Express B cards for daily shooting.

[Aapo Lettinen]

not knowing about the current reliability of Blackmagic cameras but would guess they are better now than in past days. In 2021 we had two Ursa Mini G2 's straight from factory and one of them did not turn on out of the box, completely bricked and had to be sent back for replacement. The replacement worked but was a bit unreliable at times. It improved however when there was some, ehm, theatre blood incident with the camera completely splashed and some of it got under the buttons etc. It was sticky after that but reliability bumped to full 100%, never had any issues with it anymore except the buttons being a bit sticky now 🤣

so back in the day they seemingly did not test the cameras in the factory, just put them in the box and let the customer do the quality control. I would guess they nowadays have someone to check that the cameras at least turn on before they are shipped as people would kind of expect that 😅

If the shoot is next year and you don't have tons of other stuff to shoot before that, I would maybe wait for half a year to see how other people like the 12K before purchasing. you will need it couple of months before shoot to ensure that it can be replaced if needed etc. but over half a year or close to a year is too much I think. when the budget and funding is secured then would be good time to proceed with the camera purchase.

-------

For best possible lens options and super affordable shooting I would choose the L-mount version as you can use very wide range of lens adapters with it and there is autofocus lenses and cheap stills zooms etc available. I have shot low budget stuff for some years with Panasonic S5 and Atomos combo and have pretty good PL mount adapter for it and basic quality NikonF and EF adapters too. I normally use oct18 Lomos with the PL adapter and if necessary switch to Nikon AI-S lenses or L-mount zooms if needed.  PL adapter would be very useful if you have proper lenses for it, saves lots of time when having sturdy mount with proper locking and good lens mechanics. just ensure the PL adapter is mounted very firmly with additional support so that it stays in place firmly and it will work great. If needing some lens option which cannot be sourced or afforded in PL you would just quickly remove the adapter and mount some L-mount lens or Nikon lens or EF lens to get the focal length or range etc you need. then switch back to PL when shooting basic focal length dialogue stuff or other stuff where pl lenses would be most useful

Edited June 17, 2025 by Aapo Lettinen

[Geffen Avraham]

My original BMPCC died after a few months. They sent me a replacement and it has been working great for over 10 years.

[Tyler Purcell]

Hey Scott, 

So we have a 12k URSA Cine (similar camera) and it's a pretty good camera. I have an OG 12k URSA as well that we use as a "B" cam and will probably wind up with a Pyxis 12k eventually up the road, seeing as I feel they'll have stocking problems for a while. I'll just wait for one to show up used. 

The 12k imagers aren't 12k worth of resolution, they are more like 8k at full res. This is because they have white pixels which create the luminance channel and those pixels add a bit of complication to the actual theoretical resolution of the camera. Having done a shit ton of tests on our original 12k, I have determined that it's closer to 8k actually, but most likely less than 8k rather than more. This test was done semi-scientifically using high resolution lenses between multiple 8k cameras and the URSA. Sadly, those lenses are not available for me to test the 12k Cine with, so I don't have numbers, but suffice to say, it's the same pixel structure on the full frame version. 

The 12k imager shot in 12k and reduced to 8k works great. I've tested this workflow and it's fine. Just edit in 1080p or 4k and upses at the end in Resolve, you'll be happy. 12:1 is the happiest medium for compression in 12k. If you have to use 9k mode (S35 due to lenses), I would reduce the compression as it makes an inverse effect on aliasing and you may see some aliasing. I have done lots of tests on various formats, I have found the higher the res, the more you can deal with the noise floor AND the higher the compression can be. Even 18:1 is not bad for things like interviews, you'll never see it in 12k. 

In terms of lenses, the last thing I'd ever do is shoot with sharp glass. I would use something like the DZO Arles VV lenses. This is what I will be buying myself in the very near future, mixed with a vintage S35mm zoom lens like a Angeneuix 25-250, HP or HR. This is really to me the way these very sharp imagers need to be shot, so help compensate for how damned crisp they are. You absolutely want soft lenses and you absolutely want manual lenses. The 12k imagers may have auto focus some day, but not this year I was told. They may not offer it at all and NEVER on PL mount. With PL lenses, you would simply run the DJI focus pro for AF or Tilta Nucleus for manual. I prefer the Nucleus because I love the handles, they fit nicely with the URSA body for shoulder mount work and the new MKII controller is great for an assistant. 

I went with the CINE over the Piyxis for 5 reasons: 1) Imager refresh rate on the Pyxis is much slower. Readout on the CINE can be lower than 10ms by adjusting the 12k frame size to 1.85:1, but on the Pyxis, it's 19ms in that same mode. 2) The Pyxis doesn't have the higher frame rates in high res mode, only lower resolutions. 3) The Pyxis does not have interchangeable lens mounts and probably won't. 4) The Pyxis uses an all new battery system, it does not work with standard Sony batteries. So suddenly you're investing in chargers, batteries, the whole 9 yards. 5) Internal ND was a flat-out must for me, no way was I going to invest in an "A" camera without it. A B camera, ok not a big deal, but A camera SHOULD have it. 

Plus and I know this may sound silly, but that big assistant display on the Cine is absolutely a game changer. Thus far on every shoot I've worked on with it, the directors flat out love the display. They want to be to the side of the camera, not looking over the operators shoulder, so now you don't need to have another monitor, you literally have one already on the camera. It's such a great idea and I just flat out love it. I have the EVF as well, which is excellent, it's already considered the best EVF for that price range ever made. They come with the extension for rear operation AND multiple cables so if you damage one, your kit will have more. 

Having shot video with both the Pyxis and the Cine 12k, I have to say I vastly prefer the Cine over the Pyxis in day to day use. Where the Pyxis isn't bad, I feel the issues I mentioned above, kinda relegate it to a B or C camera. The fact the touch display is not coverable and does not fold out, makes the camera an accessory hog. You literally can't use it without attaching an EVF or monitor. Now you've used up all your attachment ports on the body, so you're buying cheese plate to attach anything. Now your camera is much larger because it's in a cage, etc. Eventually, it will wind up being the same size as the cine anyway, once you add all the tools required to actually shoot anything. So in my world, why not just start big? Where I will buy a Pyxis as I said earlier, it would be for quick pickups and such, where no accessories are needed. 

In terms of storage, we have tested multiple cards from a few vendors, the OWC Ultra cards and of course Angelbird are the best ones. Lexar professional does have a new CFExpress 4.0 card that we've briefly tested, which also performs well. We have confirmed that all 3 cards, in 1TB and 2TB variants, can record all formats no problem outside of 12k Q0 higher than 24fps. That's really the only limitation. We also noticed at full 220fps on the CINE, it would only shoot for 15 minutes before overheating the card, but I doubt anyone would really need that functionality. So the CFExpress works great, no problems at all. You can also record to external USB storage, but it's a lot slower, you're relegated to 9k at most and even then, limited bandwidth stuff. On the 2TB cards, at 12:1 12k 1.85:1, you can get around 2hrs of time, that's not bad at all. I'd say it's probably where you'd be most of the time. So you don't NEED the 4TB cards really. 

In terms of post, learn resolve, get a good computer and just do all post in resolve. I can't imagine touching an adobe product in 2025, there just is no reason anymore. I have to support Premiere for multiple clients and its such a dog shit program that requires rendering for any changes to your timeline if you have effects, it bogs everything down and you're constantly running into brick walls with resolution limitations and scaling, amongst other things like color science which sucks. Na, just use Resolve. The camera comes with a studio license. Forget Premiere exists. 

Let me know if you have any questions. 

 

Edited June 17, 2025 by Tyler Purcell

[Scott Pickering]

Thanks for your thoughts guys. Good info too Tyler. Looking at the Cine 12K, the body itself is only 3 grand more here in Canada, but its the accessories you have to buy to use the Cine 12K which is killing it for me. And its only in EF or PL mount. The batteries on the Pyxis are fairly common (BP-U) and cheap enough, and the chargers arent much. I already have some CF-E B cards that I use on my Fuji camera. Lenses are easy to find when using L mount (many adapters). When going the Cine, the prices of the needed accessories ramps up the price to basically double. The Pyxis is more budget friendly. Hard to say what camera they'll put out in a couple years time.

If you were using the 12K camera, to get the best 8K image, would you let the camera downrez to 8K right off the bat, or is it better to downrez in Resolve? How soft is the sensor really? Any links to tests I could look at?

Another question I'll ask which has nothing to do with gear. When paying your crew/ actors, what is the recommended way of giving them payment, if this is really a low budget film? This might be out of pocket for this. Or do you absolutely recommend registering a company for the 1 year it would be operating? It wouldnt be incorporated of course. This whole feature may be a one off, as no future plans to make more films down the road, unless somehow this first film does make money. But it may not make any. Its just a labor of love to do this project. 

[Tyler Purcell]

1 hour ago, Scott Pickering said:

Thanks for your thoughts guys. Good info too Tyler. Looking at the Cine 12K, the body itself is only 3 grand more here in Canada, but its the accessories you have to buy to use the Cine 12K which is killing it for me. And its only in EF or PL mount. The batteries on the Pyxis are fairly common (BP-U) and cheap enough, and the chargers arent much. I already have some CF-E B cards that I use on my Fuji camera. Lenses are easy to find when using L mount (many adapters). When going the Cine, the prices of the needed accessories ramps up the price to basically double. The Pyxis is more budget friendly. Hard to say what camera they'll put out in a couple years time.

You probably wanna be in PL mount honestly, I think you'll find dealing with L mount lenses to be a real problem. I've tried in vain to use still format EF lenses (same problem as L lenses) and they just aren't workable in my opinion. So if you're gonna be doing cine primes anyway, might as well go with PL, there really isn't that much of a cost difference and you're probably more likely going to get full frame coverage whatever you get, rather than stuck to S35 or even MFT. 

The BP-U batteries are common, but the one for the Pyxis is special due to the power requirements. Once the camera comes out, there are going to be a lot of very unhappy customers until they figure this out. Your ol' batteries will not run the camera for more than a few minutes, probably less than 20. Core SWX has worked with Blackmagic to create a special battery for the Pyxis called the Nano U-98X. So I have 98, 150 and 360 batteries for my Cine and the 98's last like an hour or so with all the displays on, so the BP-U battery may be the same, so not a long time. Plus you can't run a plate very easily, it blocks the card ports, which makes it very troublesome. The whole thing is a poor design for cinema where you need power for wireless, power for monitors, power for FIZ and want the camera to sit on for the day. This is why we bought the 360 batteries, those things will run half a day no problem. 

In terms of cards, the only ones that work are the OWC Ultra, Angelbird PRO SE and Lexar Professional Diamond (all 4.0 cards), no other cards that I know of actually work. They'll over heat and drop frames. Remember, the bandwidth is WAY higher than any other camera you can use those cards with. 

1 hour ago, Scott Pickering said:

If you were using the 12K camera, to get the best 8K image, would you let the camera downrez to 8K right off the bat, or is it better to downrez in Resolve? How soft is the sensor really? Any links to tests I could look at?

I'd shoot 12:1 compression in 12k 1.85:1, edit in 2k or 4k and then upses at the end to 8k. All you do is change the sequence settings to 8k and it automatically makes it all 8k. 

It's softer than an Alexa which is very strange, but that's a good thing. I haven't done any camera tests yet, we've been shooting some commercial stuff and I don't have any footage, been handing it over to the clients. I have some stuff we shot at Cinegear and some stuff we shot at an open house that's just unlit b-roll, but we'll be doing a real shoot shortly, just need to get my ducks in a row and get it done. I'll have something to show of it next month for sure. 

1 hour ago, Scott Pickering said:

Another question I'll ask which has nothing to do with gear. When paying your crew/ actors, what is the recommended way of giving them payment, if this is really a low budget film? This might be out of pocket for this. Or do you absolutely recommend registering a company for the 1 year it would be operating? It wouldnt be incorporated of course. This whole feature may be a one off, as no future plans to make more films down the road, unless somehow this first film does make money. But it may not make any. Its just a labor of love to do this project. 

I wouldn't worry about the LLC unless you think the film will get picked up and be sold. You NEED an LLC for liability reasons if that's the case. If you're doing it for fun and don't care if anyone sees it, then no bother. But be very careful, because if you make something really good and you don't have that LLC, if you don't have all the right paperwork and don't do E&O, you may get into some trouble IF the film does well. If it's just for fun, no sweat, don't bother. 

[Aapo Lettinen]

I would get the LLC for insurance etc responsibility reasons if something happens during the production which could potentially create huge costs. You don't want to be personally responsible financially if someone is injured or a set burning down etc during production.

Financial risk in case a project fails somehow other way is another reason like if the production stopped midway and cannot be finished, the debt goes to the company which is bankcrupted and you will walk away without your personal savings and 401k harmed

[Scott Pickering]

I'd have to do a sole proprietorship as we don't have LLCs in Canada.

[Mark Dunn]

59 minutes ago, Scott Pickering said:

I'd have to do a sole proprietorship as we don't have LLCs in Canada.

Corporation?

https://gowlingwlg.com/en-gb/insights-resources/guides/2023/doing-business-in-canada-business-structures#pt3

[Tyler Purcell]

3 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

I'd have to do a sole proprietorship as we don't have LLCs in Canada.

Oh interesting, so sole proprietorship is similar to LLC then. 

[Scott Pickering]

Tyler. You've seen lots of work in 65/70mm. If shooting in 12k and downrezzing in post to 8k, what lenses are going to give you the look in terms of rez as a 5/70 print?

[Tyler Purcell]

10 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

Tyler. You've seen lots of work in 65/70mm. If shooting in 12k and downrezzing in post to 8k, what lenses are going to give you the look in terms of rez as a 5/70 print?

Well 5 perf 70mm doesn't have nearly the resolution of the 12k blackmagic camera, not even close. This is due to issues with film in general, the float of the film, the slight fluctuations with flange. The scanning process and film itself, where it does retain a lot of information, can't really present that information to the user in a perfect way. The 12k imager, in open gate 12k mode, is probably around 8,000 lines of resolution, which is really good. Are you going to find lenses that can reproduce that? Probably not, in fact I'd say it's not even worth doing. The reason why you shoot in 12k, it's because you want 8000 lines, it's because you want to have no aliasing, the edges on objects are flawless. Hair for instance, you can actually see detail, it's shocking. But the imager is still not very sharp, it's not like an overly sharpened Sony camera for instance. Na, the imager is pretty neutral honestly. I will be posting some samples soon, but I need to shoot more material. 

I really like the DZO Arles, I think they will resolve PLENTY of resolution honestly. I haven't bought them, but I've tried them and I was blown away. I made a mistake buying CP2 super speeds, wrong lenses for the camera. They aren't pretty, they just work. 

Edited June 19, 2025 by Tyler Purcell

[Scott Pickering]

Sirui Venus T2.9 1.6x 5-Lens Kit with Hard Case (35/50/75/100/150mm, L-Mount)

 

Tyler (or anyone)- whats your thoughts on these lenses if using anamorphics and resolving power?

[Tyler Purcell]

10 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

Sirui Venus T2.9 1.6x 5-Lens Kit with Hard Case (35/50/75/100/150mm, L-Mount)

The Siruri anamorphic lenses are ok, but they're not sharp. I've shot with them before, they are very nice, well made and low distortion, but when looking at the finished results (final footage) we see not much resolution. Clearly nowhere near as sharp as our CP2's. 

I also find the T2.9 is a bit slow. The blackmagic cameras need a lot of light, gotta think of them as fixed 800 ISO cameras, so you need fast lenses for dark scenes. You do not want to increase the ISO to compensate. 

[Scott Pickering]

Any recommendations for anamorphic lenses with 1.6x squeeze that won't break the bank?

Edited June 21, 2025 by Scott Pickering

[Tyler Purcell]

3 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

Any recommendations for anamorphic lenses with 1.6x squeeze that won't break the bank?

Sadly, there really isn't much that's either expensive OR slow. You basically pay for quality. This is why I don't much care for anamorphic and simply go spherical on everything. 

[Scott Pickering]

On 6/18/2025 at 10:24 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

I really like the DZO Arles, I think they will resolve PLENTY of resolution honestly. I haven't bought them, but I've tried them and I was blown away. I made a mistake buying CP2 super speeds, wrong lenses for the camera. They aren't pretty, they just work. 

Im starting to swing going the more expensive route on this. I might just jump for the Ursa 17K camera. That brings up a question on lenses. Do the above that you mention resolve enough for that 17K sensor to be useful? And do they cover the wide sensor as well? What about Canon EF lenses? I've seen video samples from the 17K camera and worked with them a little to see how the workflow goes. And Im blown away at the image quality and depth to the image. Its very 3D and wide shots with very tiny people in it really makes large format video shine.

And on a different note- for a B&W film out (Cinestill) to actual 35mm B&W negative film, what resolution do I need to be at for scope 35mm? Its the full academy frame of course. I'd just squeeze the digital video file (converted to B&W of course) and they can put it on the film that way. Or should I just keep the video in color and let the B&W film do the B&W conversion?

Edited September 20, 2025 by Scott Pickering

[Tyler Purcell]

6 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

Im starting to swing going the more expensive route on this. I might just jump for the Ursa 17K camera. That brings up a question on lenses. Do the above that you mention resolve enough for that 17K sensor to be useful? And do they cover the wide sensor as well? What about Canon EF lenses? I've seen video samples from the 17K camera and worked with them a little to see how the workflow goes. And Im blown away at the image quality and depth to the image. Its very 3D and wide shots with very tiny people in it really makes large format video shine.

SO what a great question! The guys at CineD made a fantastic webpage that you can literally type in the imager size AND it will show you what lenses cover it. 

Supposedly the DZO primes (outside of a hand full of wider lenses) cover the 17k almost completely, which is crazy. It really made me think twice about maybe splurging for the 17k used someday. 

https://www.cined.com/lens-coverage-tool/

The one reason I went with the 12k was mainly because the VistaVision look is what I'm after, not the widescreen look. Also, the 12k has a MUCH faster imager refresh, you can get it down way below the Alexa 35 in 8k mode 1.85:1. With a higher bitrate record, that's a pretty stellar image, indiscernible from the 12k. 

The 17k also, can't record to CFExpress cards. This is a HUGE problem because Blackmagics fancy little 8 and 16TB module is limited to 10G speeds for offloading. So even if you buy their fancy reader, it's going to be 1/3rd the transfer speed as the CFExpress cards. That's nuts for such a fast card and a huge issue Blackmagic need to solve at NAB next year. So imagine a 17k camera, where you have WAY bigger file sizes and suddenly it takes you HOURS to get the media off the 8 or 16TB module, that doesn't work in any way shape or form for professional workflows. Also, the DIT's won't like that either. So CFExpress is by far the way to go and the 12k is the only camera of the two which can use that module. 

 

6 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

And on a different note- for a B&W film out (Cinestill) to actual 35mm B&W negative film, what resolution do I need to be at for scope 35mm? Its the full academy frame of course. I'd just squeeze the digital video file (converted to B&W of course) and they can put it on the film that way. Or should I just keep the video in color and let the B&W film do the B&W conversion?

What's the application? Like a theatrical print? 

[Scott Pickering]

54 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

The 17k also, can't record to CFExpress cards.

What's the application? Like a theatrical print? 

I thought I saw a conversion thing from Blackmagic that allowed CF Express cards to be plugged in there? I could be wrong, but I remember seeing something for that.

Application is to rescan the B&W negative to get the look of true B&W film, and scanned in 8K.

[Tyler Purcell]

4 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

I thought I saw a conversion thing from Blackmagic that allowed CF Express cards to be plugged in there? I could be wrong, but I remember seeing something for that.

Yea if you look at the website, it says the 17k only comes with the 8TB module. 

The CFExpress module can't run the high bandwidth of the 17K. 

4 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

Application is to rescan the B&W negative to get the look of true B&W film, and scanned in 8K.

So laser record to 4 perf 35mm internegative and then scan that. 

The Arri Laser goes to intermediate stock like separation film and panchromatic. So you can record right out to Black and White no problem. This is the best and highest quality way because you get a nice internegative which is very fine grain. You can also record to camera negative, but only on CRT recorders which are more costly to use and you'd of course, have more grain. 

The best a recorder can do is 4k currently, so you'd be dong a greater than 4k scan, but 8k no way. 

[Scott Pickering]

I dont want it on a color interneg film to be honest. Cinestill can output to actual 5222 B&W stock, so you get the tones, and film grain of actual B&W film. Interneg kind of defeats trying to get the B&W film look for those dream sequences in my film. I might even output to 16mm instead of 35mm for a more exaggerated effect. I haven't decided yet. My film is still a few years off, if not sooner, and all depends on if I can lock down the shooting locations I'll need to use. If not, then my project is basically shelved.

[Tyler Purcell]

19 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

I dont want it on a color interneg film to be honest. Cinestill can output to actual 5222 B&W stock, so you get the tones, and film grain of actual B&W film. Interneg kind of defeats trying to get the B&W film look for those dream sequences in my film. I might even output to 16mm instead of 35mm for a more exaggerated effect. I haven't decided yet. My film is still a few years off, if not sooner, and all depends on if I can lock down the shooting locations I'll need to use. If not, then my project is basically shelved.

Yea, sorry if I was confusing. I was referring to black and white intermediate stock. It will be grain free tho... so yea 5222 is the way to go, but that would be a CRT recorder and MUCH more money. But yes if you want to retain that grain, by far the way to roll. With 16mm, you're not going to get as good of a record out unless you were using intermediate stock, which would be limited in resolution of course. 

[Scott Pickering]

Since all they are doing is producing the image onto a high rez TV, and filming that with the camera, could I technically not do the same thing myself? I have an 8k tv that is 65 inch and it has many modes for color from dull to high contrast and all in-between. It would save me the cost to get a lab to do it. I could even transfer the whole film that way. Anyone do this themselves and what were your results? My TV surely has the rez for it.

[Scott Pickering]

Another question. You mentioned DZO lenses on the 17K. What about Sigma Aiza lenses? Or using the EF mount and adapters, what about Pentax 67 or 645 lenses, or even Mamiya 645 lenses? Any good EF lenses? Which lenses have the best color, as i find lens coatings on some lenses can muddy the colors a bit. Going Pentax 67 or 645 lens could be a fairly cheap option, though I dont know if they'd resolve a 17k sensor.

[Tyler Purcell]

18 hours ago, Scott Pickering said:

Since all they are doing is producing the image onto a high rez TV, and filming that with the camera, could I technically not do the same thing myself? I have an 8k tv that is 65 inch and it has many modes for color from dull to high contrast and all in-between. It would save me the cost to get a lab to do it. I could even transfer the whole film that way. Anyone do this themselves and what were your results? My TV surely has the rez for it.

TV's are hard to shoot unless you have an animation camera and some sort of frame by frame controller. We tried it without those things and the results were poor because motion picture cameras don't actually hold the same crystal clock consistency as a digital system. So we tested on the URSA 12k and got great results. Then we switched over to the film camera with all the same settings and the first shot was good, but every shot after that had cadence issues because it fell out of sync. It's incredible how far the film camera fell off and this is common with every camera I've ever worked on. So yea, you need to capture it frame by frame. Would it be anywhere near as good as a CRT recorder? No, for sure not in sharpness or moire, which is a very common issue when shooting displays. In fact, it's part of the reason I wasn't happy with my record out test from our HDR 4k color grading monitor. 

Today there are some pretty cool low cost OLED displays and drivers which should work a lot better due to their brightness and pixel density. However, developing the recorder is labor time that is grossly expensive in the end and a very heavy compromise.