New Ursa Mini 4k - Black hole in the Sun?

Will the new Ursa Mini 4K not 4.6k have the black hole in the sun? I know it is a BM Sensor so, I am evaluating this as it is the same price point as the older body style. Thanks BM Community.

I think the 4K sensor is an off the shelf one, and is the same one used in the URSA.
It too has the black sun defect but there's a very easy removal tool in DaVinci Resolve 12 to remove the black sun.

The 4.6k sensor does not have it.

but there's a very easy removal tool in DaVinci Resolve 12 to remove the black sun.

... which immediately locks you to either Windows or Mac.

but there's a very easy removal tool in DaVinci Resolve 12 to remove the black sun.

... which immediately locks you to either Windows or Mac.

Or Linux, so you are not really locked into anything

Or Linux, so you are not really locked into anything

I'd better know _how_ the black sun phenomenon is detected by the plugin.

Thanks everyone...

I'd better know _how_ the black sun phenomenon is detected by the plugin.

It's built into DaVinci, it's not an external plugin.

Actually black sun removal in Resolve works like magic. One click and it's all gone.

So it's not a big issue then?
I keep hearing from different people they will insist on going for the 4,6K because the 4K have the "black sun" problem.

I on the other hand, don't have the luxury of spending twice the money just to deal with that in-camera. I don't care about the resolution increase.

No this has never been a problem anyway even before if you know a touch of after effects or whatever/ the interest/deciding factor between the 4k and 4.6k must be dynamic range and native ISO as these are very different and worth paying more for - but really the 4k is a very good camera still

It's twofold.
I personally would like the 4K EF and use my stock of EF lenses for my personal projects.

The company would want the PL + B4 mount for live productions. Still, 4K.
Thinking 4K because of 'save money where possible'.


I'm not too familiar with dynamic range and all that, as I've never owned or used a camera like this. My closest reference is my Canon DSLR.

I'm not too familiar with dynamic range and all that, as I've never owned or used a camera like this. My closest reference is my Canon DSLR.

If you're a colorist, then dynamic range should mean a lot to you, as that is a colorists best friend (besides a well produced shot). 3 stops of DR is not something to shake off. That's actually a pretty massive difference, again, especially if you are a colorist.

The difference goes beyond the DR and resolution though.

The optional rolling/global shutter options on the 4.6 is a big feature. Also you have more resolution options / windows (including a 3K anamorphic option). The difference in ISO 800 vs 400 is also a big plus for the new sensor, especially if the new sensor does not suffer from any FPN.

It's hard to say just how much better things are between the two cameras until they're released; however, the 4.6K sensor will be worth every extra penny. If you can afford it that is. If not, the 4K option is still an amazing camera at a tremendous deal.

Simply put, for $2K more you get:

-4.6K vs 4K
-Sensor size is closer to a true S35
-switchable global/rolling shutter
-ISO 800 vs 400
-More recording/resolution options
-15 stops of DR vs 12 stops

Correct me if I have forgotten anything

So it's not a big issue then?
I keep hearing from different people they will insist on going for the 4,6K because the 4K have the "black sun" problem.

Actually it is, if you shoot a lot of events and concerts. Every light on stage, every bokeh is a black dot. And in these case black sun removal tool doesn't always works (sometimes the whole frame becomes white). And it's not so convenient sticking every project to resolve to correct it.

If you're a colorist, then dynamic range should mean a lot to you, as that is a colorists best friend (besides a well produced shot).

A well produced shot is much more important for a colorist, as is a shot captured with a lot of detail. For most cinematographers, dynamic range is a crutch rather than an asset. For a good cinematographer, it's definitely an asset.

It's hard to say just how much better things are between the two cameras until they're released; however, the 4.6K sensor will be worth every extra penny. If you can afford it that is. If not, the 4K option is still an amazing camera at a tremendous deal.

Agreed. From what Marco Solorio wrote regarding his evaluation version, the color rendering with the 4.6K sensor is pretty amazing. That alone is reason enough to get the 4.6K version of the Mini if it fits your budget.

If you're a colorist, then dynamic range should mean a lot to you, as that is a colorists best friend (besides a well produced shot).

A well produced shot is much more important for a colorist, as is a shot captured with a lot of detail. For most cinematographers, dynamic range is a crutch rather than an asset. For a good cinematographer, it's definitely an asset.

I did make mention in my previous post that a well produced shot is important (realistically its ESSENTIAL) but even a well produced shot can benefit from higher DR for a colorist. Just gives you extra flexibility in the shadows and highlights should you need to push/pull any of these to dial in the final look.

One statement that a previous poster made was

I'm not too familiar with dynamic range and all that, as I've never owned or used a camera like this. My closest reference is my Canon DSLR.

and his signature mentioned he was a colorist.

I am a colorist, and have been working almost exclusively with that for 9 years. But that doesn't render me a genius when it comes to technical camera talk.

I wrote wrong. I do know what dynamic range is when it comes in terms of a digital file on my timeline, and my monitor. But I don't know what it means in terms of stops and native ISO, thus my questions regarding this.


Thanks for your answers. It made me smarter and I have something to think about. Looks like funding the upgrade will require quite a bit more than what we originally had hoped for, 4,6K vs 4K.

Either way, I'm looking forward to see material shot on both versions, and will obviously need to rent both to see what will work in our situation.

As for my personal use I will still consider 4K. My personal economy is not infinite I see it as an investment for documenting family milestones (kids, holidays, personal projects and all that) just like my dad did when he got a state of the art Hi-8 and later on BetaSP.

Jake Stark has tested his URSA Mini 4K and it appears not to exhibit the black sun effect. See for yourself in the included video:

http://www.hybridcamerarevolution.com/2 ... s-46k.html

He also tested the Mini on the Ronin. Technically works, but better not to have the external battery mounted on the back as his film shows. Hardly a showstopper.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think the Ronin actually has a 12V P-tap on it that could power the camera at the expense of battery life

Most of the gimbals do, especially the higher end ones.

Depends on the weight of the lens...you can always slide the camera back a bit.

Or hang weights somehow

I agree though, it would be easier to use a lightweight lens when on the gimbal. The Mini is certainly smaller than the URSA, but it's no Micro.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Removing the battery from back probably* makes the balancing of the gimbal just more difficult / not possible. The battery is heavy and acts as counter weight for the lens. without the battery, the camera needs to come much further back.

*depends of camera weight and weight distribution, but the camera is light and I assume the weight is about evenly distributed. Smaller lens would help though.

It depends on how long the production camera is, and how long the sled on the gimbal is. Generally, you WANT to remove the battery from the back of the camera, because it makes the camera shorter and allows you to pull the weight back more. That's a good thing, especially if you're using it hand held as opposed to on an Easyrig or something along those lines. You want to keep the weight closer to you, or else you're just adding more leverage to your arms, which just tires out your arms that much more quickly.

For a full-sized Ronin, I'm going to guess that it will do quite nicely without the battery attached to the camera, based on the (admittedly brief) time I had working with one. But then... I've actually had one hands on. When you account for the need for a follow focus motor and rods to mount it on, you have more reasons to move the camera as far back as it will go on the gimbal. Adding the battery might well make the camera front heavy due to the extra length.

I'm not certain of this obviously, since I haven't had a chance to try my Mini on my Helix yet, which is hardly surprising since BMD hasn't actually started shipping them to customers yet.

Can anyone confirm if the Ursa Mini 4K still has fixed pattern noise issue?

So far every beta tester / production unit has confirmed that the FPN still exists but not as bad as previously.

Can anyone confirm if the Ursa Mini 4K still has fixed pattern noise issue?

As Brawley and many others have mentioned, EVERY camera will exhibit FPN depending on the shooting conditions and it obviously varies by camera.

Thanks Dustin and Tyler.

I guess what I wanted to know is the FPN comparison with the previous BMPC 4K camera.

If it's less pronounced then the better.