Would you choose a Canon C200 over the Ursa Mini Pro NOW?

**Denjin Zaboga** · 04-12-2018, 05:00 PM

Would you choose a Canon C200 over the Ursa Mini Pro now that the new C200 firmware has been released?

**DPStewart** · 04-12-2018, 05:02 PM

No.

I love Canon Cameras. But the Blackmagic cameras ALWAYS beat them at the various PRICE BRACKETS.

I'd want a C700 over the URSA Mini Pro... but look at the price difference...$25,000.

**Alex.Mitchell** · 04-12-2018, 05:21 PM

How to start a flame war in one simple step...

Seriously though, they’re different machines and they appeal to people with different experiences and needs in the industry. Deciding which one to use is a fairly personal process.

**Denjin Zaboga** · 04-12-2018, 05:25 PM

Need: Independent film and VFX heavy workflow, indoors and outdoors. Thank you.

This style of filming:

**Denjin Zaboga** · 04-12-2018, 09:00 PM

How does Canon Rawlight compare with DNG?

**polaroid22** · 04-13-2018, 12:39 AM

It depends if you willl light your images or shoot when there is enough light get the ump. If you shoot in the dark events etc take the c200.

**Andrey Blanco** · 04-13-2018, 04:56 AM

Ursa mini is not a bad camera but the c200 is a lot better is almost every front:
Dynamic Range, Weight, Battery Consumtion, Low Light, pre amps.

I recalled when I bought an URSA mini a while a go I like the camera in general but the FPN was really bad at ISO 800. And the thing was huge.

**polaroid22** · 04-13-2018, 05:57 AM

Not sure if the c200 has more dr then the ump. The ump has a better image though and is also cleaner/ less noise.

**Andrey Blanco** · 04-13-2018, 06:25 AM

Originally Posted by polaroid22

Not sure if the c200 has more dr then the ump. The ump has a better image though and is also cleaner/ less noise.

are you joking right?

I had done 12,800 iso on the c200 in total darkness and is sparking clean. ISO 800 on the Ursa mini is unusable is low light situations.

Dynamic Range is an arguable topic but I prefer Canon C300-C200 Color Science.

**fahnon** · 04-13-2018, 09:36 AM

I owned the UM4.6k (non-pro) and am now on the C200. I still have all my raw UM46 footage and compared it to the C200 raw and they're very close in terms of DR and the color science, while different, is great on both (really great actually). Honestly the image quality among the best cameras in this price segment is so close that I think it comes down to what works best for you in terms of ergonomics, support, workflow and personal preference. If you are a one man band or small crew in uncontrolled conditions, the auto-focus, ISO performance, 10-stops of ND, small/light battery options and size/weight make the C200 clearly superior IMO. If you need an easy broadcast codec, then the UMP is clearly superior in terms of workflow as the C200 needs transcoding or an external recorder to get the codec you need.

I had issues with the QC and support I received from BMD at the time I owned that camera, so that alone had made me gun-shy about having a BMD camera as my most expensive, workhorse body. I've heard they have improved, so maybe I'll consider their next generation of high-end camera, but honestly the C200/UMP/EVA-1/FS7 are so feature rich and that I'm not sure what features I'll need that will justify me spending thousands on a new camera system (and likely new media and support) until 8k delivery becomes a thing.

One thing is for sure: Canon would not have released a raw-shooting camera for $7,500 if it weren't for BMD making raw a feature you didn't have to pay at least $20k for.