Ursa mini...is this the end of blackmagic?

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, AaronChicago said:

Here are 2 videos I shot earlier this summer:

The intro and performance were shot with the 4.6K on this one:

I have 2 other videos done that I can't post yet but here are a couple of frame grabs:

 

 

 

I like it... Good work. This is what it's really about. 

[IronFilm]

16 hours ago, Ed_David said:

I just cant see them selling many of these

BMD can't make them fast enough to keep up with demand!! That doesn't sound like "not selling many".

 

And as others said, display store demos are damaged all the freaking time :-/

[Damphousse]

On 8/28/2016 at 10:48 AM, DBounce said:

Of course I see the iq of the pocket... I owned two of them. But they are not the best to work with. If you were so convinced, why did you sell? Or have you now forgotten all that was wrong with the BMs?  How about that low-light Performance? Remember the fantastic audio quality? Loved the image stabilization?... Exactly!

 

Um... yeah.  Metabones EF to BMPCC speedbooster and Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM work great on my BMPCC.  Just remember to turn IS on and zoom the lens all the way out to telephoto BEFORE you turn the BMPCC on.  My handheld stuff looks great compared to the jitter stuff I see all over the web.

Don't native M43 lenses with OIS work right out of the box?

BMPCC has its issues.  No need to make up fake ones.

[tugela]

On ‎8‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 11:10 AM, Kino said:

BMD's problem has always been quality control. Sadly, they seem to have only gotten worse with the Ursa Mini 4K and 4.6K. They don't learn from their past mistakes in rushing cameras out before they are ready. I think it has something to do with the fact that they source parts and do not manufacture their own circuits and sensors as with RED and the electronics conglomerates (Sony, Panasonic, Canon). They are a small camera operation (setting aside their post-production business, which is much older and more established) and offer niche budget products to indie filmmakers and videographers. I'm sure they will continue to focus on this market as opposed to producing cameras for larger productions, which require extensive service arrangements and logistical support.

I shoot with the BMPC-4K and I had a 4.6K on preorder last year. Once I learned about all the problems, I cancelled it just before they shipped it to me. Currently, it's just too much of a risk. Perhaps when they have figured out all the problems, I can be confident in ordering one again.

As for the price/performance, there is nothing even close . . .

The problem with them is that they announce and hype products long before they are ready, so that they can earn brownie points by being "first". But then there are delays, and finally a mad rush to push stuff out the door when it becomes clear that competitors who have more conventional development timelines are about to enter the market.

In that kind of environment QC is not a super high priority unfortunately.

14 hours ago, IronFilm said:

BMD can't make them fast enough to keep up with demand!! That doesn't sound like "not selling many".

 

And as others said, display store demos are damaged all the freaking time :-/

Only when they are flimsy designs to start with.

You expect a pro product to be built like a tank, particularly if it has a minimalist design.

[independent]

Give Blackmagic credit. First, they're a relatively tiny manufacturing operation. They deadlifted their chances of success in a tough market. Samsung left, for crying out loud. Digital bolex, done. A few others tried too, and failed. 

Blackmagic brought innovative products at an accessible price point - many of us are direct beneficiaries of that. Years ago, I replaced my red scarlet with the fresh BMCC, which had a better overall image with far less fuss. And the camera was ready to shoot at a cost 1/10th of the price of the red scarlet, which itself was the cheapest real cinema camera at the time.

And even if you don't like their prroducts, you still benefitted indirectly from that. Blackmagic is an industry disrupter. They put a lot of pressure on a lot of companies (Red immediately responded with a failed 4K for 4K campaign) and raised the quality and features of competing products. 

Don't forget the fact that Blackmagic also offered a class grading software free with Davinci resolve (again disrupting the industry) as well as integrating a NLE into it (again disrupting the industry). 

All their moves have helped the independent filmmaker. 

Yes, they've had delays (not nearly as bad as RED) and some minor flaws (that other companies had too), but these are the growing pains of a small company. They don't have the resources that Canon and Sony have for QC and supply chain management. If they raised prices that would obviously help, but they're intentionally pricing their stuff very aggressively.

They're probably operating at a loss or very slim margins to stay in the game. If they go under...that would be a painful loss. Because they are approaching products with an intelligence and practicality that are sorely lacking in the competition. 

The ursa mini 4.6k is not for extreme low-light situations, or autofocus, or drone work, but for traditional filmmaking, there is nothing out there that provides a comparable image at its price point. 

This forum has a lot of dslr/mirrorless users, who complain a ton about their image. What's funny, so many of their complaints are answered....with blackmagic cameras. Color science, simple straightforward menus, no overheating, motion cadence, filmic, thick codecs, etc. It's all right there. 

 

[tugela]

I think it is more probable that their camera division operates at a loss, but it's value comes in leveraging other sectors of the company.

[John Brawley]

On 8/28/2016 at 11:10 AM, Kino said:

 I think it has something to do with the fact that they source parts and do not manufacture their own circuits and sensors as with RED and the electronics conglomerates (Sony, Panasonic, Canon).

Yeah, you'd be 100% wrong there. But carry on...

On 8/28/2016 at 4:21 AM, Ed_David said:

I just cant see them selling many of these.

 

 

They seem to have sold thousands of them.  Mostly they're still backordered.

7 hours ago, tugela said:

I think it is more probable that their camera division operates at a loss, but it's value comes in leveraging other sectors of the company.

Such as...?

Resolve...?  Oh wait, you get that included with the camera...

Monitors ?  Converters ?  I think you're stretching a pretty long bow....

JB

[IronFilm]

9 hours ago, tugela said:

The problem with them is that they announce and hype products long before they are ready, so that they can earn brownie points by being "first". But then there are delays, and finally a mad rush to push stuff out the door when it becomes clear that competitors who have more conventional development timelines are about to enter the market.

In that kind of environment QC is not a super high priority unfortunately.

What "conventional timeline" product has even matched their original BMCC in terms of specs and price?

None!!

There has been no such rush due to that like you claim by BMD. As they're still well out in front as pioneers  (Kinefinity being perhaps the only close example, but only at the higher end of BMD's product range).

[John Brawley]

On 8/28/2016 at 11:06 AM, DBounce said:

Yeah, delays are to be expected, but I have not forgotten the black sun incident... didn't they just throw in the towel on that one? 

Resolve has a post solution for the Black Hole issue, which is great because there are other cameras that have the same problem.  I wa shooting MAC moving lights on a film four days ago with Alexa's and guess what.....they too suffer from black hole sun.

On 8/28/2016 at 8:48 AM, DBounce said:

 Loved the image stabilization?... Exactly! And that's just the pocket.

IS lenses work great on the pocket ?

JB

[tugela]

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

What "conventional timeline" product has even matched their original BMCC in terms of specs and price?

None!!

There has been no such rush due to that like you claim by BMD. As they're still well out in front as pioneers  (Kinefinity being perhaps the only close example, but only at the higher end of BMD's product range).

BM announces products way before they can actually sell them, a year or more in some cases. Most other manufacturers announce them when they are about to start shipping shortly. The point of doing this is pretty obvious: so they can claim bragging rights of being first, when reality is maybe not so much.

An example of the mad rush would be the 4K camera, which was rushed into market when it became clear the Panasonic were about to release the GH4 IIRC. Then there were a few others that were rushed onto the market so they could be sold before BM made their next "amazing" announcement at NAB, lol (presumably because no one would buy the "old" camera after the "new" one is announced).

6 hours ago, John Brawley said:

 

Such as...?

Resolve...?  Oh wait, you get that included with the camera...

Monitors ?  Converters ?  I think you're stretching a pretty long bow....

JB

Such as all the other stuff they make, much of which has much higher margins than these cameras.

People buy Resolve without buying a camera you know. If there were no cameras they probably would sell very few stand alone copies. By selling cameras it creates a buzz and market awareness of their other products, most of which likely have healthy margins. In essence it is a form of free advertising. If you buy one of their products (for example, a camera) you are much more likely to buy other related products they produce as well. This is what is called brand awareness and brand loyalty. The cameras serve the purpose of promoting the company as a serious player in the production field, something that would be WAY harder to do if they were just selling the sorts of things they originally sold.

The cameras themselves on the other hand are priced low, which means that margins are low, which in turn means that in order to break even on manufacturing and R&D they need to sell a LOT of them. A small operation like BM is unlikely to be able to achieve the sots of volumes that would be required for that.

[Hanriverprod]

Footage I see online of um 4.6k has the magenta issue, whether it is an overall tint, in the corners, or splotches. I'm not sure to what degree they have resolved it, but even some of the new footage popping up has shots with one of this issue. They say don't shoot over 5.6 or use the 2k window on the sensor to avoid some of these issues. 

I asked my dp if he could shoot on a blackmagic camera. He said no. He said he shot a production using their 4k cinema camera and that there was too many issues with it like overall noise and fpn. Besides the pocket cameras, blackmagic has a pretty bad rep with production people in Korea.

[Phil A]

I think what BMD does is amazing. There's a huge gap between the segment of 8bit 4:2:0 cams (Sony, Samsung, DSLRs, etc.) und then the high end with RED, ARRI, Sony FS7/F5, etc. There are workarounds like F3 with external recorder, C500 with external recorder, etc. but they are the only ones making affordable cameras with high end images/codecs that are actually somewhat integrated and don't need to rig them together with x different devices.

I think the UM4.6k is great piece of technic but I'm wondering if BMD aren't spreading their R&D too thin with the amount of product lines. You get the BMCC with 3 mounts (EF, PL & MFT, S16), the BMPCC (MFT, S16), the BMPC4k with 2 mounts (EF & PL, APSC), the BMMCC (MFT, S16), the Ursa witht he 4k turrent (Only EF?, APSC), the Ursa Mini in 4k (EF & PL, APSC) and 4.6k (EF & PL, APSC) and the studio stuff. I can see how it gives customers choice but wonder if it would make sense from an economic point to trim it down a bit, after all there's economies of scale at work when it comes to quality vs price vs production numbers.

I'd love to see an update to their middel segment in the future, i.e. the BMCC and BMPC4k. The image out of these is great and they still have the size that DSLR-shooters feel home at when upgrading (the Ursa Mini isn't that Mini in my opinion). If the BMCC would come with exchangeable batteries (Sony L?) and a 60p framerate, who would say no? I'd love that sensor, like many people I don't actually need 4k but most 1080p recording cameras fall short because of lower than 1080p resolution with moire and aliasing.

I'm still on the fence if I want to buy a BMMCC or not. If it had the 2.5k sensor it would be a no brainer. But with the 1080p sensor I'm afraid of moire because I really want to shoot raw.

[AaronChicago]

21 minutes ago, Phil A said:

I think what BMD does is amazing. There's a huge gap between the segment of 8bit 4:2:0 cams (Sony, Samsung, DSLRs, etc.) und then the high end with RED, ARRI, Sony FS7/F5, etc. There are workarounds like F3 with external recorder, C500 with external recorder, etc. but they are the only ones making affordable cameras with high end images/codecs that are actually somewhat integrated and don't need to rig them together with x different devices.

I think the UM4.6k is great piece of technic but I'm wondering if BMD aren't spreading their R&D too thin with the amount of product lines. You get the BMCC with 3 mounts (EF, PL & MFT, S16), the BMPCC (MFT, S16), the BMPC4k with 2 mounts (EF & PL, APSC), the BMMCC (MFT, S16), the Ursa witht he 4k turrent (Only EF?, APSC), the Ursa Mini in 4k (EF & PL, APSC) and 4.6k (EF & PL, APSC) and the studio stuff. I can see how it gives customers choice but wonder if it would make sense from an economic point to trim it down a bit, after all there's economies of scale at work when it comes to quality vs price vs production numbers.

I'd love to see an update to their middel segment in the future, i.e. the BMCC and BMPC4k. The image out of these is great and they still have the size that DSLR-shooters feel home at when upgrading (the Ursa Mini isn't that Mini in my opinion). If the BMCC would come with exchangeable batteries (Sony L?) and a 60p framerate, who would say no? I'd love that sensor, like many people I don't actually need 4k but most 1080p recording cameras fall short because of lower than 1080p resolution with moire and aliasing.

I'm still on the fence if I want to buy a BMMCC or not. If it had the 2.5k sensor it would be a no brainer. But with the 1080p sensor I'm afraid of moire because I really want to shoot raw.

I've been pushing this for a while on BMD's forum. A combo of the BMPCC, and BMCC. DSLR sized body. Canon battery. Tilt screen. CFast 2.0.

[Kino]

10 hours ago, John Brawley said:

Yeah, you'd be 100% wrong there. But carry on...

Oh really? So BMD manufactures their own sensors and circuits and does not source them, as in the case of the 4.6k sensor from Fairchild imaging?

http://www.fairchildimaging.com/catalog/focal-plane-arrays/scmos/ltn4625a

As for the black hole fix in Resolve, it does not work on partially obstructed light sources or when you have a shot of the sun through leaves, for example. Moving objects and scattered highlights (the sun reflecting off water) are also difficult or impossible to fix using this tool.

Otherwise, when the sun is clear of the horizon, it can really save a shot (it's still not a perfect solution, however). We should also note that the Ursa Mini 4k has solved the problem and no longer has the black sun that afflicts our BMPC-4K cameras.

 

[IronFilm]

2 hours ago, Phil A said:

I think the UM4.6k is great piece of technic but I'm wondering if BMD aren't spreading their R&D too thin with the amount of product lines. You get the BMCC with 3 mounts (EF, PL & MFT, S16), the BMPCC (MFT, S16), the BMPC4k with 2 mounts (EF & PL, APSC), the BMMCC (MFT, S16), the Ursa witht he 4k turrent (Only EF?, APSC), the Ursa Mini in 4k (EF & PL, APSC) and 4.6k (EF & PL, APSC) and the studio stuff. I can see how it gives customers choice but wonder if it would make sense from an economic point to trim it down a bit, after all there's economies of scale at work when it comes to quality vs price vs production numbers.

 

They share general sensors, and camera software between lots of those cameras. 

Which helps reduce the R&D costs per camera by a significant amount. 

A good next step would be if they did a base mount (such as Sony FZ or Kinefinity sub-PL mount) as a common mount across their cameras. 

As I blogged about here:

http://ironfilm.co.nz/what-if-kinefinitys-kinemount-became-a-universal-cinema-mount/

 

1 minute ago, Kino said:

Oh really? So BMD manufactures their own sensors and circuits and does not source them, as in the case of the 4.6k sensor from Fairchild imaging?

What he means is the other companies do that as well.

[John Brawley]

Neither RED nor ARRI make their own sensors. They have them outsourced and made to their specifications. Just like BM do with their 4.6k sensor. 

BM make their own circuit boards.  They don't outsource them.  Then make them from scratch.  They make the physical bodies themselves.  They rely on commodity items for the chips and screens but they manufacture more than most other companies in house.  They have an active policy of not outsourcing.  

You're just guessing or making things up when pass mis-informed opinion as fact.   Maybe think about qualifying your guesses next time so those reading will understand that you're guessing or making something up.

How does anyone know what the margins are for Blackmagic ? A company that don't tend to outsource but do tend to keep as much as they can in-house.  Just like the first post that posited that few would sell when thousands have already been sold. It's just guessing at best, and most are way off.

They're doing fine.  Compare them to AJA and the Cion.  Similar sized company to BM, they made a camera based on the same sensor package, but one that was considered to be the much better camera.  Look how well that went for them.  Why is it that Cion failed ? Everyone who was a "pro" breathed a sigh of relief that a "real" camera would be made and yet...

Axiom ? That was going to show everyone how an open source market/ ML style approach would make a camera right ? Show those Blackmagic clowns how to do a camera OS.  Look how grindingly slow that's been going because Canon didn't do all the heavy lifting on the sensor front end.

or DB ? Why did they fail ? Again, they have an apparently loyal following and unique features.

Again it failed. 

Panavison have failed at least twice to launch a new camera to replace the Genesis.

Dalsa, who everyone forgets made the first 4K cinema camera have gone out of making cameras.  

Aaton went bust trying to make a digital cinema camera.

Ikonoscope went bust using the same DB sensor.

You armchair quarterbacks are all posting guesses but you actually have no idea what it actually takes to make a camera from scratch.  I sure don't but I know that after seeing Blackmagic do it up close for the last few years it's way more complex and intricate than I ever imagined. I know that when I ask about a feature or aspect that I like or don't like of the engineering team they've spent a long time already thinking about it or trying to get past the hurdle. 

Making and developing cameras is a very expensive game and there's no way it would be some kind of loss leader.  It's just way too expensive.

At least they're still in the game and offering choices.  They continue to innovate, and I think if you look at their first efforts, compared to now, they obviously listen to what their customers want even if it doesn't appear to be so.  

They have certainly hit some pretty big bumps in the road too but they are still here and trying to compete with the big boys, something a lot of others have failed to do.

I find the "qc" issue hasn't hit me.  I guess I'm lucky or maybe I don't expect to have my camera working or repairable after dropping it but in years of using all the BM cameras I have on commercial and paying jobs, I've not run into most of the problems that are cited as being their weakness. I mean honestly the camera doesn't overheat and yet it's constantly written as a problem on review sites or in the mythology.  

In the early days of RED they had to educate their users about how to get the most from their cameras and how to shoot RAW.  

I think BM need to do the same thing because you still get people who have no idea about a RAW workflow stumbling into using RAW for the first time after having only shot 8bit 4:2:0 previously.  

This community more than "pros" is where BM cameras do the most for filmmakers.  Which other big box company gives you ProRes or even 10bit ?

JB

 

 

 

[Jonesy Jones]

29 minutes ago, John Brawley said:

Neither RED nor ARRI make their own sensors. They have them outsourced and made to their specifications. Just like BM do with their 4.6k sensor. 

BM make their own circuit boards.  They don't outsource them.  Then make them from scratch.  They make the physical bodies themselves.  They rely on commodity items for the chips and screens but they manufacture more than most other companies in house.  They have an active policy of not outsourcing.  

You're just guessing or making things up when pass mis-informed opinion as fact.   Maybe think about qualifying your guesses next time so those reading will understand that you're guessing or making something up.

How does anyone know what the margins are for Blackmagic ? A company that don't tend to outsource but do tend to keep as much as they can in-house.  Just like the first post that posited that few would sell when thousands have already been sold. It's just guessing at best, and most are way off.

They're doing fine.  Compare them to AJA and the Cion.  Similar sized company to BM, they made a camera based on the same sensor package, but one that was considered to be the much better camera.  Look how well that went for them.  Why is it that Cion failed ? Everyone who was a "pro" breathed a sigh of relief that a "real" camera would be made and yet...

Axiom ? That was going to show everyone how an open source market/ ML style approach would make a camera right ? Show those Blackmagic clowns how to do a camera OS.  Look how grindingly slow that's been going because Canon didn't do all the heavy lifting on the sensor front end.

or DB ? Why did they fail ? Again, they have an apparently loyal following and unique features.

Again it failed. 

Panavison have failed at least twice to launch a new camera to replace the Genesis.

Dalsa, who everyone forgets made the first 4K cinema camera have gone out of making cameras.  

Aaton went bust trying to make a digital cinema camera.

Ikonoscope went bust using the same DB sensor.

You armchair quarterbacks are all posting guesses but you actually have no idea what it actually takes to make a camera from scratch.  I sure don't but I know that after seeing Blackmagic do it up close for the last few years it's way more complex and intricate than I ever imagined. I know that when I ask about a feature or aspect that I like or don't like of the engineering team they've spent a long time already thinking about it or trying to get past the hurdle. 

Making and developing cameras is a very expensive game and there's no way it would be some kind of loss leader.  It's just way too expensive.

At least they're still in the game and offering choices.  They continue to innovate, and I think if you look at their first efforts, compared to now, they obviously listen to what their customers want even if it doesn't appear to be so.  

They have certainly hit some pretty big bumps in the road too but they are still here and trying to compete with the big boys, something a lot of others have failed to do.

I find the "qc" issue hasn't hit me.  I guess I'm lucky or maybe I don't expect to have my camera working or repairable after dropping it but in years of using all the BM cameras I have on commercial and paying jobs, I've not run into most of the problems that are cited as being their weakness. I mean honestly the camera doesn't overheat and yet it's constantly written as a problem on review sites or in the mythology.  

In the early days of RED they had to educate their users about how to get the most from their cameras and how to shoot RAW.  

I think BM need to do the same thing because you still get people who have no idea about a RAW workflow stumbling into using RAW for the first time after having only shot 8bit 4:2:0 previously.  

This community more than "pros" is where BM cameras do the most for filmmakers.  Which other big box company gives you ProRes or even 10bit ?

JB

 

 

 

Thank you JB. I always appreciate your insights and wonder where you find the time, but I am very grateful. I'm sure BM is as well, and thousands of BM users. I don't think all of the negative Nelly's out there realize what their options would become if Blackmagic dropped out of the camera making business. It was disheartening to not see any camera announcements from them this year at NAB, but if that is only because they are going to wait until they are closer to delivery then I think that is a very good thing.

Regardless, even when a camera or spec or feature change doesn't meet my expectations I try to stay positive because I am thankful for companies that are truly trying to create a win/win relationship. We get great tools, they make money. When companies fall short trying to create great tools, it's a bummer but it happens, and I still support said company. I love the effort. However, when companies purposely handicap tools to make more money, that is frustrating and I prefer not to support that kind of company. BM seems to tow the line of win/win as good as any. Aputure is another one of those companies. These companies deserve, and need our support even though they are flawed at times. 

To the BM and Aputures of the industry I say thank you, as well as all the John Brawley's and positive thinkers. We have it really good. Really good. God bless.

[Mattias Burling]

Well said John. Had similar feelings in the 5Div and xc15 threads where people say it should have this and that at no cost.

Many don't seem to realize that huge companies like Canon has loads of engineers thats already thought about every single thing the negative nanceies go on about. They have decided to leave things out for a reason. And the reason is not that they are "idiots", " conservative" or what have you. 

 

[Kino]

1 hour ago, John Brawley said:

Neither RED nor ARRI make their own sensors. They have them outsourced and made to their specifications. Just like BM do with their 4.6k sensor. 

BM make their own circuit boards.  They don't outsource them.  Then make them from scratch.  They make the physical bodies themselves.  They rely on commodity items for the chips and screens but they manufacture more than most other companies in house.  They have an active policy of not outsourcing.  

You're just guessing or making things up when pass mis-informed opinion as fact.   Maybe think about qualifying your guesses next time so those reading will understand that you're guessing or making something up.

BMD outsources more than most of the companies I listed as manufacturing their own sensors: Sony, Canon and Panasonic.

I never mentioned ARRI, and what I claimed about Blackmagic I backed up with a link to the Fairchild sensor at the heart of the Ursa Mini 4.6k. RED also does not use off-the-shelf sensors or "modified" sensors like the Fairchild. They design their own, which is then manufactured exclusively for them. There is a huge difference.

I have no need to guess about BMD's manufacturing, when I already received two cameras from them with dust and particles behind the sensor protector glass. Perhaps next time you are in their factory you can mention this problem since I know others have seen it as well.

Maybe they will listen to you considering your close relationship with the company . . .

[John Brawley]

My mistake.  You know it all.  They just rock up to the sensor drive though and get a Big Mac sensor meal to go.

JB.