Difference between v1 Ursa 4K, v2 Ursa 4K, and Ursa Mini 4K?

i'm still a bit confused on which camera to buy!
a used Ursa can go for $3500-ish, but the form-factor of the mini is VERY alluring.

I've seen the Ursa specs and i'm still a bit confused as to what the difference is between the the v1 4K and v2 4K... is there even a v2? (i'm not talking about the 4.6K Ursa)

things i'm specifically looking at:
Native ISO
Frame Rates (both in Raw 3:1 and other)

I've heard that the Mini has Native ISO of 800, but is that just for the 4.6k?

Ursa V2 has support for higher frame rates (120FPS as opposed to 80 on the V1) and less fixed pattern noise issues I think, though never tried the v1.

As for form factor, I much prefer the URSA. It's not actually that big (my first thought was how small it was) but it is heavy as hell. And the button and connector layout is the primary reason I bought it - plus the audio meters that are visible accross a room.

I never understood the fuss about the mini, it was the most boring camera announced at NAB to me. There are already plenty of cameras available for that form factor.

does the v2 sensor have a Native ISO 400 too?

If you didn't understand the fuss, then either you don't understand cameras or you aren't at all familiar with the cinema camera market.

Now for Adam, the big question is really about what you need. Most of the people who are more interested in the Mini than in the full-sized Ursa are looking for a more compact Ursa, or an Ursa like camera that is easier to use in a one person operation.

The Ursa can record higher frame rates, and has an upgradeable sensor. The mini is quite a bit lighter, trading off cooling and an upgradable sensor for smaller size and lower cost.

The 4k models share a sensor, with the v2 sensor offering higher frame rates and hopefully better FPN calibration. The v2 sensor is really what got people excited about the mini, especially when you compare it to other cameras that supposedly have similar dynamic range... Like the Canon c300mk2.

does the v2 sensor have a Native ISO 400 too?

Yes, yes it does, but excellent test footage has been shot at 800, with noise reduction applied in post, results were very a clean image.

I never understood the fuss about the mini, it was the most boring camera announced at NAB to me. There are already plenty of cameras available for that form factor.

This seems a bit misguided to me.

It's not so much about the form factor, as a whole, but rather it's about the form factor for a BMD cinema camera. It's not that we see the form factor as innovation (although you could argue BMDs version is).

Yes this form-factor has existed for a while, but not within the BMD lineup. Not to mention its a magnesium body, apposed to the plastic body style that is generally used with this style.

The big fuss is that you can now get Ursa-performance (half the frame-rates) in an ENG style form factor.

I would also argue to say that half the "fuss" about the mini is the new 4.6K sensor.

I would also argue to say that half the "fuss" about the mini is the new 4.6K sensor.

That's arguably well more than half of the fuss. The rest is clearly the price...

I would also argue to say that half the "fuss" about the mini is the new 4.6K sensor.

That's arguably well more than half of the fuss. The rest is clearly the price...

I would agree....I was trying to be delicate lol.