Some guy sold his Ursa Mini Pro to buy an FS7

[Robin R Probyn]

Well... after the 8th firmware revision at least

 

 

But the wish was there from V1 .. :)

[David Peterson]

 

The Ursa Mini Pro 4.6k allows you to enter metadata remotely from an iPad app via bluetooth. And in regards to the syncing files bit, tentacle sync + it's software does this perfectly.

 

That being said, I completely agree with you that slating, file management and syncing between audio recorders and our cameras is still a bloody mess.

URSA Mini has a timecode input, you don't even need to use Tentacle's software to sync the files together. It should be bloody easy, not a bloody mess.

[David Peterson]

It should not be that difficult to make a new version of a ipad slate app which would just send the same data to the metadata fields of the camera files, for example on ursa mini.

 

the main problem with metadata is that the camera dept guys generally don't have much time to edit them and add descriptions etc. because they need to concentrate to the current/next shot being made.

the task must also be possible to do fully remotely without any need to use the camera even for a second (that would basically stop all the shooting for a moment every time the metadata would need to be edited in camera so it must be able to be done remotely by someone who does not have anything else to do at that moment)

It would thus be easiest having an additional person who is fully concentrating to metadata editing only (someone who is positioned near the director and script supervisor. maybe an assistant script supervisor who would be hired for only this metadata task? or an additional assistant editor hired for the task?

 

audio recordist generally names the audio files with shot and take number based on the slate data he/she sees on the monitor so the audio is easy to find with current workflows without camera metadata altered. if the slate is correct of course.

 

Multi camera shoots with remote metadata editing on all the cameras for every shot?

I don't know how much this is actually done nowadays, do others have experience with for example 2 or 3 camera movie shoots with very detailed metadata for editing purposes applied in camera?

If your sound department is greater than one person (as otherwise, it is unreasonable to expect so much from them) then yeah they'll be uploading fairly detailed notes. But they'll be sound focused. The script supervisor would be entering other kind of info, but if you're using say Timecode System's Blink Network & a 600 series recorder from Sound Devices this can all together with each other and using the Movie Slate app. The next step would be to get the Camera Department on the same page to talk with the Movie Slate app as well.

[David Peterson]

I'd rather have it not be so much an "app" as much as maybe a whole new slate which you can write on, as a normal slate, but which somehow reads what's written and wirelessly sends that data to the camera(s) and audio. It's a whole pipe-dream of course, but who knows, maybe one day as cameras get more "wireless" out of the box someone can make something. I don't think it should be an "App" as much as a piece of actual kit with easily changeable batteries, and relatively rugged.

That way it's less "metadata editing" as it is regular slating which also smartly communicates to the camera(s) and audio what the shot has been called so in post it all has the same names.

Smart slates can already take all the info in the audio recorder (such as take number, not just the current time) and have that displayed.

 

Assuming you're using some tech that supports that. For instance I'm a fan of the Timecode Systems Ultrasync One:

 

 

 

 

 

Thus the only missing part of the puzzle here is to get Blackmagic Design on board! Sooo close... yet so far! Someone should reach out to BMD? Get them to talk with the Movie Slate app developers and with Timecode Systems the company.

[David Peterson]

Okay, I'll give ya that. As good as the RED anyway, then. Alexa is really in a ballpark all by itself, from both a workflow and a color-science area. RED, in my mind, looks too digital - like an overpriced DSLR. Blackmagic produces much nicer images than the RED (and at a lot less the cost), but I have never been a fan of Blackmagic Design: they always seem to cut corners, and every one of their products I have bought has had major flaws.

 

I shot a local commercial once with an FS700, which is closely related to the other mid-lower-end professional Sony cameras. That camera was a dream to work with, and if I had the money to purchase, I'd probably pick the FS700 w/ 4k upgrade over the Ursa Mini Pro, despite the cameras age. The only Panasonic I have ever shot with is a GH4 and GH5 - both of which are standout mirrorless cameras for cinematography, well built, etc. My one experience with Blackmagic was not so good - the pocket camera. Horrid battery life, impossible to get anything remotely wide angle due to the odd sensor, fiddly SD cards to shoot on, etc.The Micro could be an upgrade to the pocket, given its use of external canon batteries and the ability to record externally - but would not invest in it now.

The good news is you can pick up a Sony FS700 secondhand for around US$1.5K ish! (add on an Atomos Shogun for FSraw 4K to ProResHQ 4K for only another US$600ish secondhand. Total cost? Barely over $2K if you hunt for it).

 

As for a BMPCC, why hate on it for having SD cards? The FS700 recorders to that as well! (so does the GH4 & GH5 you mentioned)

As for battery life with both the BMCC and BMPCC, you should always use external batteries (which are pretty cheap and easy to do) and only view the internal battery as a "bonus" feature (hey, it allows you to hotswap batteries! ;) )

 

Also, you might be getting the Micro Studio and Micro Cinema mixed up (the Micro Studio needs external recording, the Micro Cinema uses the same SD cards as a BMPCC would).

 

Oh, and is very very easy to get wide angle shots with any of those! (Pocket or Micro) Just get yourself a Tokina 11-20mm f2.8 + a focal reducer. Problem solved. Easy.

Edited February 9, 2018 by David Peterson

[David Peterson]

S16 is certainly a standard-sized sensor, but the need to put PL glass on a sub-$1,000 HD camera really kinda, I dunno, just seems overkill to me. It just seems to me, given the low price-point, they could have went m4/3, thus opening it up to pretty much any glass (keeping the same pixel count, it'd also be a killer low-light camera). Personal preference I guess, since so few people actually own Super 16 glass, escpailly those in the market for a pocket camera.

Errr.... the BMPCC (& Micro) *IS* a Micro Four Thirds mount camera!!! :-o

I use MFT lenses on my BMPCC all the time.

(and the fact people would use expensive S16 cine lenses on the BMPCC just shows what a damn fine camera it is, that people will even pair it with very nice glass)

 

 

 

 

As for the Pocket camera sensor size and glass, it CAN work of course. Pairing it with a 0.58x speedbooster can certainly retain wide angle on many wide lenses, like the Sigma 11-16. It just seems like it needs a lot of work to get there.

 

 

A "lot of work"?? I don't see what is so hard about just selecting the right lens (paired with a focal reducer)? That is after all a core job duty of the cinematographer!

 

(oh and you mean the Tokina, not the Sigma 11-16mm, that doesn't exist from Sigma)

 

 

Rokinon DS glass is made for the FF market, so it's probably actually a little softer than glass made for s35.

 

 

Some of Rokinon's lenses (especially on the wider end) are designed for S35/APS-C/DX, and not for FF35/FX. Such as their 16mm lens, which is top of my list to add next to my Rokinon Cine DS collection.

 

http://ironfilm.co.nz/rokinon-cine-lenses/

 

Errr.... the BMPCC (& Micro) *IS* a Micro Four Thirds mount camera!!! :-o

I use MFT lenses on my BMPCC all the time.

(and the fact people would use expensive S16 PL lenses on the BMPCC just shows what a damn fine camera it is, that people will even pair it with very nice glass)

[David Peterson]

I should have been clearer, my apologies. I meant that once the mount is chosen you can't swap it, which is why I'm stuck with PL.

 

The Canon C300mk1/mk2 also can't be user swappable mounts either.

 

 

 

Oh, no, it's because of the stupid PL mount. I need EF, I'm not rich.

 

Why not just buy the URSA Mini 4.6K (or even URSA Mini 4K... seeing as you were otherwise happy with it aside from the PL mount?!) in an EF mount?

Edited February 9, 2018 by David Peterson

[Samuel Berger]

This entire thread....lmao! 7 years later and I bought a Sony F55 out of curiosity. I think it's because my career doesn't hinge on a toy. I would still use a Canon professionally. WHO KNOWS?? I have been out of cinematography for so long that I don't even remember my own opinions. Apologies to everyone, don't hold me accountable for stuff I don't remember. 😁 @Tyler Purcell Do you still think Sony is unusable garbage? I wish I could remember, but I have been dealing with family illness for 6 years now. But It is interesting to see that I ended buying the same camera I formerly disparaged.

Are @Stuart Brereton and @Robin R Probyn still alive?

[Tyler Purcell]

The Venice II is pretty nice. 

The FX9 is pretty nice, tho I would wait till the MKII comes out. The MKI has a few odd issues that prohibit it from competing with the Burano. 

I think Sony has a few interesting options in the pipeline, but nothing radical. They really only have their extremely sensitive imager with excellent propriety noise reduction and that beautiful variable ND system. Their auto focus is good, but so is Canon's. 

Canon is about to kick their ass with the C400 and Red just dumped the pricing on the Komodo X to the same as the C400, which makes it very competitive, especially considering it has a global shutter and actually records 6k raw internally. 

 

 

[Samuel Berger]

28 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Canon is about to kick their ass with the C400 and Red just dumped the pricing on the Komodo X to the same as the C400, which makes it very competitive, especially considering it has a global shutter and actually records 6k raw internally. 

Yeah, I was totally going to get an FX6. The FX9 owners were all mad that Sony fixed a lot of the issues by releasing the FX6. I had always been anti-Sony but I did see good stuff out of the FX6 videos out there. In fact I'd been gearing up to get the C400, but the FX6 kept pulling me back.  Honestly just want to buy a camera and then no more for 10 years. This is actually why I don't get the FX6. Why? I hear the FX6 Mark II is in the works and coming soon. If I buy the C400, I don't have to be afraid of a Mark II being released before the year is through.

[Tyler Purcell]

8 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

. In fact I'd been gearing up to get the C400, but the FX6 kept pulling me back

The FX6 can't do 6k, which is a nice thing, it also really can't do raw. 

You wanna finish in 4k, so the key is to shoot 6k, so you have some wiggle room. The C400 kinda does 6k, but it's a hodge hodge mess of varying frame sizes which are all way off the scale of normalcy. In typical canon fashion, they kinda made up some faux resolutions that do the best job. It's sickening they still do this shit and consumers still buy it. Needless to say, it's a real conundrum. I was excited for the C400 until I noticed these and other issues. 

The C400 isn't even shipping FYI, so you've got a while. There must be some shortage of a chip because nobody is shipping anything new yet, it's all been delayed. 

 

 

[Samuel Berger]

8 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

The C400 isn't even shipping FYI, so you've got a while. There must be some shortage of a chip because nobody is shipping anything new yet, it's all been delayed. 

For real, what would you choose? And it can't be BMD because it doesn't have autofocus. I own the BMPCC and the BMPCC 6K. I love them. But they don't have the AF so I'm between Sony and Canon at this point. And I'm a Canon fan.

[Tyler Purcell]

2 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

For real, what would you choose? And it can't be BMD because it doesn't have autofocus. I own the BMPCC and the BMPCC 6K. I love them. But they don't have the AF so I'm between Sony and Canon at this point. And I'm a Canon fan.

What are you shooting where you need autofocus? 

[Samuel Berger]

10 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

What are you shooting where you need autofocus? 

A web series where I'm the only one shooting and have no dedicated focus puller.

[Tyler Purcell]

2 minutes ago, Samuel Berger said:

A web series where I'm the only one shooting and have no dedicated focus puller.

Who needs a focus puller with focus peaking? I mean auto focus doesn't really work for much. It's a cool gimmick, but without a touch screen system, you can't tell it who to focus on. Thus, if you want to do anything like a focus rack or even go between two or three different people, it doesn't work without some sort of tool to select the next subject. So on a set with a full crew, where you have a touch screen system to select focus points, then funny enough it works well. I have used both Canon's AF and Sony's AF quite bit and with object (in this case face) recognition, it works great, but you need to constantly tell it who and what to focus on unless you're only looking at a single subject. 

The main problem is the lens selection. With Sony, you can buy a cinema lens with their modern AF system integrated. With Canon you can't. You have to use stills lenses, which blows. I personally dislike having to turn a wheel on the camera body for electronic aperture. Sony puts it on the lens, along with a more standard zoom control, so they have a far superior system in my opinion over Canon. Nikon's purchase of Red, will probably garnish us a few really cool solutions in the near future, but nothing out for the next year or two. 

It's funny, the last shoot I did on an FX6, I just turned off all the AF stuff and felt it worked better. It was a lot easier to just use the focus aids, than it was to risk the AF. We never use the AF on our canon cameras outside of stills, it's a total joke. It'll focus on the background by accident sometimes and the viewfinder isn't sharp enough to see the difference. So you get the footage back and the face is blurry. Ohh and on some Canon cameras, you can't have AF AND peaking on! What a fucking joke. 

In the end, you need to prioritize what functions you think you'll use. 

I shoot mostly documentary, so for me AF may have a benefit in those situations where I need to quickly grab the camera and get that moment. However, for scripted, I feel it's a complete and utter waste of time and again, if you want a fast and sharp image, you're using fast primes anyway, so why would you by Sony AF primes over something cheaper? Their zooms are ok, but slow. 

[Samuel Berger]

29 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Their zooms are ok, but slow. 

Yeah, about that, I'll be shooting with only one zoom lens through the whole thing. But again, this is me buying a camera to last 10+ years, so if I eventually do anything that will require AF, I don't wanna be like "Ohhh nooo I should've gone with Sony/Canon!" a year or two down the line.

If it weren't for the AF, it would be a no-brainer, I'd choose BMD every time. But I'm also too old now to want to deal with focus pulling. I've been out of the game for 7 years at this point. If I can avoid 1) focus pulling and 2) ND filters I'm going with whatever.

 

Okay, pretend it's you and you own nothing else, and you can only choose Sony or Canon, what would you go for?

[Tyler Purcell]

6 minutes ago, Samuel Berger said:

Okay, pretend it's you and you own nothing else, and you can only choose Sony or Canon, what would you go for?

Sony for sure, their ecosystem is pretty good. 

Tho again, the camera shoots a pretty odd codec and it can be challenging for post. Most people transcode immediately, which means, you're now not working with original raw material. But if you're delivering and not doing post yourself, I guess it's not your job? I mostly do post, so for me, the codec is probably higher on the list. 

My list goes: 

1) Imager color science 
2) Imager refresh rate (Looking for somewhere under 8ms)
3) Resolution (6k minimal in my world, so you can crop in and stablize if need be and still get 4k) 
4) Dynamic range (14 stops minimal) 
5) Camera Codec (High quality compressed raw and/or Pro Res 4444) 
6) Good viewfinder system, no bloody displays only. 
7) Imager size (True 4x3 S35 preferred for running 2x anamorphic lenses) 
8 ) Menu system/ease of use
9) Card type (something not proprietary but fast) 
10) Overcranking modes (up to 120fps in 4k is about what I look for) 
11) Sensitivity (A clean 1600 ISO would be fine for me, higher ISO's just a benefit) 
12) Lens mount (Interchangeable preferred for PL and EF) 
13) Shape of the body (shoulder mount preferred) 
14) Good focus peaking system with zebras and waveform. (false color is fun, but I'd never use it) 
15) Built in ND filters (Nice to have, but not the end of the world) 
16) Battery type (V mount or AB, not proprietary) 
17) Connections; Mini or standard XLR, BNC 6G minimal. 

So if you look at that list, it's really the Blackmagic 12k Cine that meets any of these requirements. Nothing Sony really has in their lineup, will do this unless you go to the Venice II. 

The 12k cine will do 5ms refresh (Alexa is 4ms) at 8k mode, knock it down to 7k mode, you're under the 4ms refresh of the Alexa. 

When it comes out, it will dominate the market and I hope they add AF up the road. If you haven't seen it, you need to check it out. 

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicursacine

 

[Samuel Berger]

9 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Sony for sure, their ecosystem is pretty good. 

 

People reading this whole thread are going to think we're bipolar if they don't see the years leap between posts, haha

I know about the Ursa Cine 12K, but my budget won't allow it. With the viewfinder it's about 3 times what I'm able to spend, and if I were going that route, I might as well pick up a used Arri Alexa. Unless you think those are problematic due to age etc.

 

Actually I wish I hadn't said that, because I'm looking at used Alexas and they're not as impossible to afford as they once were. 

[Samuel Berger]

On 9/14/2024 at 4:21 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

The FX9 is pretty nice, tho I would wait till the MKII comes out. The MKI has a few odd issues that prohibit it from competing with the Burano. 

I just re-read this. I don't think Sony would intentionally release a cheap camera that could compete with the Burano.

[Tyler Purcell]

9 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

just re-read this. I don't think Sony would intentionally release a cheap camera that could compete with the Burano.

Eh, I have good reason to think it's coming at NAB next year. The Burano in my opinion is a toy due to its extremely slow imager refresh. The new camera will probably be 6k, but probably enable 6k internal recording. The Burano is an 8k camera, so different subsets of the industry. I bet the new FX9 will have the same imager as the Burano tho, just cropped in. 
 

10 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

People reading this whole thread are going to think we're bipolar if they don't see the years leap between posts, haha

LOL 

10 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

I know about the Ursa Cine 12K, but my budget won't allow it. With the viewfinder it's about 3 times what I'm able to spend, and if I were going that route, I might as well pick up a used Arri Alexa. Unless you think those are problematic due to age etc.

Yea, I was just giving an example of a camera that checks all the boxes for me. I think $16k USD for the entire kit, including 8TB of extremely high speed storage, isn't that bad. It's not a perfect solution, but it's not bad. 

Well, standard Alexa's aren't even 4k, including the mini. The only true 4k Alexa's are the LF's and the new 35. Neither of them are really affordable. Why people are shooting with old Alexa's is beyond me. They are impossible to get parts for when they break (cost wise) and they're extremely sensitive to things like unplugging live monitors. People blow up video boards all the time. At least the toy cameras, when they fail, you kinda go "oh well" and move on with your life. 

10 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

Actually I wish I hadn't said that, because I'm looking at used Alexas and they're not as impossible to afford as they once were. 

But old workflows, old cameras, the fact they have any value is beyond me. 
 

[Giray Izcan]

Hey good purchase. I am about to buy one too. I hope your family is alright.