Thread: URSA Mini Pro?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1 URSA Mini Pro? 
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    22
    I'm a newbie on the BMC. I'm shooting a 15 minute short to use to see if I can get interested backers to back the story as a feature film. I figure it going to take a good six days to film - (17 page script.) there are some FX scenes. I'm going to be using two Sigma Cine T2 EF mount Lens.

    I have a few camera choices to go with;

    1. URSA Mini Pro 4.6
    2. C200
    3. EVA1

    Any feedback would be great
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    There are a couple of pretty healthy forums at dvxuser for the C200 and EVA1.
    Here is a great place for BM info.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Asyndeton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    270
    If you're doing some VFX you might want to take advantage of the UMP's higher-quality codecs. But hard to say otherwise without knowing the details of your story and budget.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    313
    Well it comes down to this I think.
    Are you going to light your scenes? Go UMP if you like the image. Which will give you the best quality and image.
    If you are unable to light and are using available light to light your scenes go C200. (I dont like the EVA1 image, so for me that ones is out)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    49
    I am not really a fan of Canon Cameras. Even the images from the C200 looks a bit like from a DSLR ... Canon 5D Mark III. On the other side the image I get from my BMMCC looks "closer to digital film". I had projects with Arri and RED and I love my little BMMCC. I donīt know anything abbout the Ursa Mini Pro. All I can say is that I love the Color Science behind those Blackmagic camera more than anything that comes from Canon or sony or Panasonic or whatever.

    The best way to choose is to gp to vimeo.. and type C200 and watch a lot of footage and see if you like the image. Same with EVA and Ursa MiniPro.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Taikonaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,684
    The C200 is rated at 13 stops. While manufacturers interpretion varies, for me it looks like the C200 has less DR than the Mini 4.6k. Thats said the C200 looks to be a very versatile camera.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    22
    thanks
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    1,734
    The C200 is rated at up to 15 stops via CRL on paper. Whether it hits that mark, I don't know, but just FYI.

    "The EOS C200 Digital Cinema Camera offers a variety of professional workflows. The camera's new Cinema RAW Light format provides professional shooters with the widest dynamic range and highest color fidelity for post production work. Using Canon's CRD software and Canon RAW Light codec with up to 15 stops of dynamic range is achievable."

    https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/p...a-eos/eos-c200

    (Under 'Professional Workflow')
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member DPStewart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    The Puget Sound
    Posts
    3,295
    Honestly - I don't think there is really much difference between these 3 cameras.
    They are certainly far more alike than they are different.

    I'd say consult with whomever will be doing your post. If they are more familiar or comfortable with the footage from one of these cameras - then use that one.

    If you're doing it all yourself and you haven't used any of these cameras before - then flip a coin.
    Cameras: Blackmagic Cinema Camera, Blackmagic Pocket Camera (x2), Panasonic GH2 (x2), Sony RX100 ii, Canon 6D, Canon T2i,
    Mics: Sennheiser, AKG, Shure, Sanken, Audio-Technica, Audix
    Lights: Every Chinese clone you can imagine
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    I've shot with the C300 ii and the Ursa Mini 4.6k / Pro, and dynamic range felt similiar between the two. I believe the C200 is similar to the C300 ii in that regard. I'd say that if you thought you might make use of the Canon autofocus (which is lovely by the way) or were going to have some low light stuff, the C200 would be a no brainer over the Ursa Mini Pro. I haven't personally shot with the EVA1. Honestly, all three should be fine for cinema or FX work, but I'd say the C200 and UMP are more geared since they can shoot RAW.

    If you have a skilled colorist and are shooting raw, that image wise you should be able to get whatever look you want out of either camera. If you don't have a skilled colorist (or are coloring yourself), then use whatever camera you think will get you the closest look you are going for without too much work. For instance, I found that it was always super easy to get Red Dragon footage (especially with the IPP2 workflow) to a place that I liked, whereas I always had to wrestle with Ursa Mini colors. A lot of people love the stock Blackmagic color science though. I find the stock Ursa Mini 4.6k lut to be awful to work with, so I usually color space transform into log c or red IPP2 and work from there.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Mosaic R3 OLPF for Ursa Mini & Ursa Mini Pro
    By hawk in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-17-2018, 08:58 AM
  2. Ursa > Ursa Mini Pro offer - EXPIRES March 31, 2017
    By Matthew Bennett in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-15-2017, 11:48 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-10-2016, 07:22 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-09-2016, 04:53 PM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-09-2015, 03:48 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •