thebrothersthre3

I remember people thinking the P4K wouldn't need IR cut filters. Not sure if Blackmagic was saying that or what. Nothing is mentioned on the Official BMD Pocket 4k page. I think its less pronounced than on the URSA mini but you definitely still need it. Lots of stuff comes up on google about it.

Yeah that's the amazing thing about BM RAW as well as REDcode, you can get RAW files smaller than prores. That'll be the downfall for RAW on the R5 for many, probably huge files especially in 8K

I am sure a lot of bad footage you see online from blackmagic cameras is from people not using IR cut filters. All blackmagic cameras even the Pocket cameras need them. Another issue is just white balance that is off. Unless shooting RAW if you rely on a faulty auto white balance or simply don't manually white balance correctly you will have funky colors. I've seen plenty Canon footage that looks pretty whacky that I attribute to bad WB, same with Fuji. One of the huge advantages of RAW, probably the biggest for me at least. Honestly that is one of my big issues with Black Magic. Their reasons for not including IR cut filters built in are stupid. Thankfully you can install one in the Ursa mini without having to use ones you put infront of the lens.

when you referred to Sony being the most accurate is that just from personal experience?

@Django Check out this list https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/ TBH I am really confused as the Fuji's are up at the top directly followed by Sony. How can they both be super color accurate while both being very different?

I personally don't see why Sony couldn't put out an A7S3 with full frame 10 bit 422 4k. People wouldn't suddenly not buy the FX9. Will people stop buying the C500 and C300 when the R5 comes out? The R5 can do 10 bit and RAW like both those cameras plus it does even higher resolutions.

typical Canon Sony discussion

Thats a good deal man. Mine was $1600 but its PL and the rear SDI's are dead. Still got the front one though so no biggie.

The Ursa’s that go cheaper usually seem to be PL which is a bit crippling if you are trying to keep things cheap. That said it’s still a high cost/performance ratio. It’s really nice to have Prores 422 at different resolutions with high dynamic range

The 1DX MK3 form factor is different though. DSLR body which makes for weird rigging, no internal ND's. I wish Canon had that sensor/specs in a cine body at that price point. The 1DX MK3, C500 MK2, C300 MK3, and the soon to come Canon R5 all have great specs though. The work I do is really low end though and Canon doesn't offer anything in a price range that makes sense for me. The EOS R is affordable but it just would really be a step down in many ways even if the color science is much better. Thats good to hear. I have to work on my color correction skills.

Well the C500 mk2 is 16,000 while the Ursa G2 is 6,000, a little more than twice the price. You can find used Ursa Mini pro 4.6k (with BRAW) for around $3500 these days though. In that price range the C200 is the competitor not the C500. The C200 RAW files are big though and it has no intermediate 10 bit codec and less dynamic range. The C200 also doesn't have some pro features like time code. It also goes for more used, usually $4500 upwards. One of the things that sold me on getting the URSA besides the crazy cheap price($1600) was after seeing some footage from it that I was editing. It was just shot in prores LT 1080p, but the files looked really good. That said it was under nice lighting conditions so it wasn't really a good test of color. Honestly after hearing what you've had to say about the URSA, I am pretty disappointed. I've heard a lot of people say the URSA comes close to an Alexa but it sounds like that was all hype.

I don't think its really that easy to match a Pocket 4k or any other camera. Canon comes close color wise but even they have some funky stuff going on. Sure its not a vlogging camera. However throw the thing on your shoulder and you'll get great images. There is almost no rolling shutter. Certainly for vlogging some type of software stabilization would be ideal. Would need to be super advanced though, doubt anything will come close by 2025. Something like an Osmo pocket but with a larger sensor seems more attainable. But vlogging isn't really my thing. But again I think what I asked for is a pretty tall order. Arri Alexa image in an DJI osmo body with canon PDAF, with high frame rates, resolutions, and usable 25,000 iso image. If that is available in 2025 I promise I won't be complaining one bit lol.

I don't know, the Arri Alexa came out 10 years ago and I'd probably still rather own that than any other camera at its price point....

Black Magic doesn't have a camera that can match something 3x its price, no. But a cinema camera is more than just color. Ergonomics have a lot to do with it. My reasons for purchasing an Ursa were many. Low rolling shutter at high resolutions, high speed at high resolutions, incredibly cheap price point (used at $1600), really good dynamic range, RAW at all frame rates and resolutions. Of course I was told by many it has great color science which maybe isn't true. I think both of you are just running in circles at this point. Informing a person by saying "this is better and I know due to my experience", is often a poor way to convince someone. Its kind of like my dad saying "listen to me because I am your father", (older more experienced). If something is definitively true it should be able to be proven by scientific means. Maybe Super8 simply doesn't have the technical knowledge to explain his opinion. That of course doesn't mean he is wrong. A colorist just needs to know what looks good and how to achieve it, having the technical background to prove it isn't needed. I can say gravity exists and be right without being able to explain how and why. I certainly know how to expose an image and use a camera, but if you were to ask how that camera works my knowledge is very limited.

To put things into perspective digital only caught up to feel (arguably) since the Arri Alexa came out 2010. No other company has really been able to top Arri in terms of color reproduction and dynamic range to this day. I'd say probably the best overall camera on the market is the C300 MK3 and even that doesn't have the convenient compressed RAW that Black magic or Red have, it has less dynamic range than an Arri (significantly less in the highlights), not as good color reproduction, and is a relatively large camera. It has auto focus going for it and is definitely smaller and more ergonomic than a rigged up Arri and of course way less expensive. But again its not checking all the boxes I'd want. I'd also say most of the stuff I want or need has been around for years just not all in one small package. I'd still say film is superior if you have the money and resources.

Are you kidding ? The C500 mk2 doesn’t come close to the A7s in low light, doesn’t have arri dynamic range, doesn’t have arri color, doesn’t have 4k 120p, no compressed Raw and is a huge camera certainly not Osmo size... Again at some point you hit a law of diminishing returns, we aren’t there yet though.

The tech for an ideal cameras is out there for me it just needs to be combined. Arri color Arri Dynamic range Canon PDAF Sony lowlight RED or BM RAW Just advance things so all that tech can be put in a small body say like an Osmo pocket(could be bigger but you get the idea) with a nice built in ff 28-70 2.8 equivalent, oh yeah with 4k 120fps and 2k up to 240fps 😄😄😄

They may not even do an A7s3 could just be an A74 considering they already have an A7r4

What’s the downside of using something like lut calc to transform say slog to arri log.

Probably the biggest deterrent for me from the EOS R was the rolling shutter. Subpar high ISO performance and lack of 10 bit internal or full frame 4k was also a bummer. Do you have any experience with old Blackmagic cameras? A lot of people rave about the color from the original Pocket (1080p version). Some of what you say sounds a bit over the top but at the end the day the majority of the industry seems to agree with you as Arri is the golden standard next to Canon, for high end work that is(if the Oscars are a good example of high end)

The Sigma FP has internal RAW

The Sony A7S3 oh wait nevermind...

The FX9 should be doing internal RAW. Makes no sense that it can't in that huge ass body. Incredibly stupid imho

I think all they need to sell is an A73 with 10 bit 4k 24p and 8 bit 4k 60p. If the a7s3 or whatever they call it is priced around $2500 and the R6 is around $4-5000 it will sell well due to the price alone. People will also buy it over the S1/S1H simply for the Auto focus. Now what I'd really like to see from Sony is something with the low light performance of the original A7S, combined with 10 bit and 4k 60p and internal NDs.

spam.....