URSA Mini 4.6k The Original™ Magenta Cast Issue

I have been on the Mini 4.6k waiting list since it was first announced and have been enthusiastically awaiting it's arrival. But after seeing the latest in newly released tests from Tom Majerski and Roman Alaivi, I must very regrettably, postpone its purchase. These new tests reveal a serious magenta cast in the corners that I did not see in the test that had been released by Captian Hook. If this cast is fixed, I will continue with its purchase, but if the camera is shipped with this anomaly, I will not be buying it. Below are screen grabs from Tom and Roman's tests that reveal this significant problem.

More screen grabs:

More screen grabs

Benton, thanks for pointing out the change in colour which I wasn't seeing on the first screen grabs. I still don't understand how the sensor can be the source of the colour. How could a sensor have a colour shift showing in the corners and not the centre of the sensor?

I thought this is due to the lens or filters if any were used. I think Tom or Roman said he used no ND, but maybe he has an UV/IR cut filter. I'm sure they'll comment when they can.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Rick, I certainly don't know what is causing the cast from two different people in what I assumed was two different cameras, but maybe it's the same camera? But ultimately for the end user like myself, it shouldn't really matter what the cause is, unless of course it's caused by a particular lens or filter that can be avoided, but that would be something that I have never ever seen on any other camera/lens combo, so I have my doubts that it's caused by the lens or a filter. (Especially since Tom and Roman used different lenses) Seeing this has shattered my hopes for this camera and I can only hope that BM has a fix for it. Because if this camera is stuck with this affliction, I will have to pass.

I believe they both stated that the magenta color cast was from the vintage lenses they used

Only Roman used vintage Canon FD glass. Tom used a Samyang (Rokinon) 35mm which is a very modern computer designed lens and a stellar performer.

Remember that the cameras are still in beta testing mode, and they're still working on the colour science for the sensor. You're better off waiting until the cameras have actually been released before making any judgements based off image quality and such.

This is why the camera is taking so long, so they can find all these little tiny glitches and fix them before it gets out to the public.

Remember that the cameras are still in beta testing mode, and they're still working on the colour science for the sensor. You're better off waiting until the cameras have actually been released before making any judgements based off image quality and such.

This is why the camera is taking so long, so they can find all these little tiny glitches and fix them before it gets out to the public.

Precisely! Which is why this is the best time to make comments and judgments, not after it's released. And if they knew about this issue, it's surprising that they released this footage with such a glaring problem. I believe this sort of feedback is exactly what they need and a critical part of the beta testing. And I do not consider this magenta cast a "tiny glitch". For me, this is like 100 flys just landed in the ointment and laid eggs!

And if they knew about this issue, it's surprising that they released this footage with such a glaring problem. I believe this sort of feedback is exactly what they need and a critical part of the beta testing. And I do not consider this magenta cast a "tiny glitch". For me, this is like 100 flys just landed in the ointment and laid eggs!

These cameras aren't final production cameras.

They don't have final shipping firmware either.

That's the point. We shoot with them and let them know what we see, notice and like. We're also allowed to share the footage as well.

It's something that has been noticed already. As I understand it's a combination of lens and sensor "shading".

To some degree it can be calibrated out (sensor shading). Shading correction is a part of the calibration process. And to some degree it's also lens related. You tend to get it on larger format sized sensors. Canon for example call this "peripheral lens correction"

The point being, these aren't finalised cameras with finalised firmware with shading correction. May I suggest you wait for shipping cameras before you judge....?

JB

Seeing this has shattered my hopes for this camera and I can only hope that BM has a fix for it.

I'm sorry you are feeling that way, and I can imagine it would be a bit disapointing given the amount of anticipation for the images off the new sense, but do you perhaps think that might be just a slight overreaction to a single fairly easily correctable issue (either at the source, in camera, or with automated or manual correction in post) on a pre-production sensor? I could perhaps see such a response being warranted if the final shipping camera, say, had 3+ stops less DR than claimed, but given the circumstances, I'm not sure hyperbolic statements and multiple explanation points will be all that conducive to helping ensure this issue is resolved. My advice? Take a deep breath, relax, and see what happens. As the poster below me says, it might already be fixed so I'd hate for you to get all stressed out over something like this.

The beta testers released the footage, not BMD, so we don't exactly know how old any of the footage is, and there could already be a fix ready.

I agree with Chris, it looks like you're slightly over reacting with this whole thing.
And as John said, it's not the final firmware and you can't make any decisions until the camera has officially been released because anything can change with it.

Never judge a final product based on preproduction product. Very silly attitude. I still eagerly await my Ursa Mini 4.6K PL.

To some degree it can be calibrated out (sensor shading). Shading correction is a part of the calibration process. And to some degree it's also lens related. You tend to get it on larger format sized sensors. Canon for example call this "peripheral lens correction"

The point being, these aren't finalised cameras with finalised firmware with shading correction. May I suggest you wait for shipping cameras before you judge....? JB

I was well aware that these were not finalized cameras and am heartened by John's explanation regarding sensor shading and calibration. But as for waiting to judge until the final production camera is shipped, or that I'm being silly or overreacting, I strongly disagree. Nothing was said when these clips were posted like "we're well aware of the magenta cast problem in the corners and rest assured it will be fix in the production versions". To the contrary, many or even most commenters were saying how wonderful it looked without even mentioning the magenta cast. So the potential buyer like me that notices this issue is suppose to not point it out and just assume Blackmagic will fix it before the final version ships? I don't think that's doing anyone any favors. The judgement / critique / feedback process should be applied throughout the evaluation period whenever clips are released.

I don't think anyone is saying the issue should at least be mentioned and pointed out. What seems to be the issue that I and perhaps others are getting at is that it really isn't constructive nor warranted to start threads with titles like "URSA Mini 4.6k Serious Magenta Cast Issue!!" with photo annotations proclaiming "SERIOUS Magenta cast!!," and go on to say things like:

Seeing this has shattered my hopes for this camera

it's surprising that they released this footage with such a glaring problem.

For me, this is like 100 flys just landed in the ointment and laid eggs!

I was so exited about this camera, now I'm not getting it until this is resolved! Blackmagic PLEASE FIX THIS!! This is the fly in the ointment ruining an otherwise stellar performer!

It just makes you sound, well, rather silly as others have mentioned. Sure, bring it up, but there's no need to panic at this stage--a calm and reasoned discussion will do far more to get to the bottom of the issue, if there is one, than a shrill and alarmist one. Even if so, its not like it isn't fixable in camera or in post through a variety of possible methods, whether BM implemented, third party or manual.

Remember...don't panic.

Apologies to you, Benton. I didn't think sensors could cause the magenta cast, but your astute observations are borne out by John Brawley's explanation. I thought, in my inexperience with these things, that any colour variation, not caused by chromatic aberration for example, in the corners would be a falloff in luminosity, and that was incorrect. I love learning about this stuff!

As I understand them, the directions or restrictions given to the beta testers are very simple and do not involve BMD reviewing or restricting any video footage, so BMD is well aware of the risks of flaws being published for the world to see. Sometimes the beta testers have commented on shortcomings, but their primary responsibility is providing feedback to BMD.

The fact that they are sharing footage is in response to the months long clamour for something in addition to CaptainHook's initial charming footage. So now we have quite a lot of footage in different situations to get an idea of what is to come. I encourage you to continue to point out any flaws you find, but allow for caveat that it is lightly graded and sometimes stress testing a beta camera with a beta sensor. Good to have all serious concerns corrected upon initial release and to do that I should think BMD needs to hear about the concerns from the testers and other sources.

I've seen that there are testers that do not post any footage and that is likely a decision based on their experiences recognizing the manufacturer is still formulating the camera recipe before the general public gets a taste of it. Right now, it tastes sour for you, but adding another ingredient to the recipe will sweeten it.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

that is likely a decision based on their experiences recognizing the manufacturer is still formulating the camera recipe before the general public gets a taste of it. Right now, it tastes sour for you, but adding another ingredient to the recipe will sweeten it.

Pure. Gold.

Again, Mr. Collins, all I'm saying is that I don't think anyone wants to see you stress out so much about a fixable problem on a preproduction sensor, and nor do we want to frighten others seeing such a seemingly alarming thread. We do of course want to see the issue addressed, but it is helpful if everyone keeps their cool at this point.

Plus, if Mr. Brawley thinks its gonna be okay, its probably gonna be okay. If he could shoot major stuff with the 4.6K as a stand in for an Alexa as A-cam, then it can't be that bad haha.

I can see where Benton is coming from with being worried about this issue. It's all well and good repeating "beta hardware and firmware", but is there any guarantee BM will fix it? I'd assume so, but I can understand why someone would be nervous with an order worth thousands on the line.

Is it bad?

Eh, too many extremes either way.

But yeah, it's GREAT to see this flaw and discuss it, and it's really great to hear John Brawley tell us that the issue is known and that there are fixes being developed for it.

I hadn't considered that the color science could change based on position across the sensor like that. Very interesting.

It also kinda gives an example of why predicting the timetable for a camera release is impossible.

A company like Canon is so huge, they are not just working on the next thing, theyre working on the next 3 things. That means they are developing technology in B and C that wont be offered in A.

When you have that kind of lead time, you can hit all your release dates perfectly.

I'm sure BM is future-ing too, but they are cramming their cameras full of right now technology, and that means they don't have 3 years to work on something.

It means the release schedule and the development schedule overlap in a big way.

So I'm glad they're taking the time to get it right, and making it the best it can be. The alternative would be to deliver a lesser product on time. That would be the wrong choice in my opinion.

I'll also say that this thread is fantastic because i didn't see the flaw when I looked at the footage. I should have. Or rather, I'd like to develop myself to the point where i should have LOL

This is a great education for me all the way around. Color science, sensor shading, a lesson in my own perception, and a glimpse into why things get delayed.

But I agree the sky is not falling, but this is an actual issue that needs fixing too. And they're already on it.

Quite a lot of info in this little exchange, Id say.

So I don't think beating up the OP is warranted, the issue IS real, and this is a great thread.

A company like Canon is so huge, they are not just working on the next thing, theyre working on the next 3 things. That means they are developing technology in B and C that wont be offered in A.

When you have that kind of lead time, you can hit all your release dates perfectly.

Actually, that's not true. When you're doing ANY sort of R&D, you're going to have a lot of unknowns that you can't predict, because you don't know them. That is just reality speaking. Companies like Canon and Sony hit their release dates because they wait until they actually know when their products will be ready for release before announcing release dates.

It's interesting that hooks footage didn't have it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think anyone is saying the issue should at least be mentioned and pointed out. What seems to be the issue that I and perhaps others are getting at is that it really isn't constructive nor warranted to start threads with titles like "URSA Mini 4.6k Serious Magenta Cast Issue!!" with photo annotations proclaiming "SERIOUS Magenta cast!!," and go on to say things like:

Seeing this has shattered my hopes for this camera

it's surprising that they released this footage with such a glaring problem.

For me, this is like 100 flys just landed in the ointment and laid eggs!

I was so exited about this camera, now I'm not getting it until this is resolved! Blackmagic PLEASE FIX THIS!! This is the fly in the ointment ruining an otherwise stellar performer!

It just makes you sound, well, rather silly as others have mentioned. Sure, bring it up, but there's no need to panic at this stage--a calm and reasoned discussion will do far more to get to the bottom of the issue, if there is one, than a shrill and alarmist one. Even if so, its not like it isn't fixable in camera or in post through a variety of possible methods, whether BM implemented, third party or manual.
Remember...don't panic.

My stated sentiments around seeing this cast, whether seen as an extreme reaction or being "silly" are still my gut truthful feelings. I am extremely critical of image quality and I call'em as it hits me. I also stated from the beginning that if they can fix it, I will continue with my purchase, which I very much hope will be the case. And the idea of fixing the problem in post is not very desirable as it adds to computer resources and may not work as transparently as desired. If my sensationalizing this critical color issue (IMO) helps to draw more attention toward getting it fixed in the best way possible, then this is a good thing for everyone, including Blackmagic. I'm a huge Blackmagic fan and own the BMCC and BMPCC, but I've also seen significant problems show up in delivered cameras such as Fixed Pattern Noise, Black Hole Sun and Audio Preamp issues, so if I rattle the cage a bit louder than what may seem necessary, it is not without precedent.

Actually, that's not true. When you're doing ANY sort of R&D, you're going to have a lot of unknowns that you can't predict, because you don't know them. That is just reality speaking. Companies like Canon and Sony hit their release dates because they wait until they actually know when their products will be ready for release before announcing release dates.

I think that's what I said. They work a lot longer ahead, so they hit release dates, and consequently, the technology is not as new.

I think that's what I said. They work a lot longer ahead, so they hit release dates, and consequently, the technology is not as new.

Somewhat... you just had the cause and effect backward. The technology is just as new; Canon developed a new sensor and a new codec for the C300MKII, but they released it pretty close when they said they would. The difference is that they waited until they knew approximately when the C300MKII would be in dealers' hands, rather than showing it at NAB for the sake of revealing it at NAB with the pretense that they thought they'd be shipping it in July when in reality they weren't even ready to start manufacturing them.

Goodness this is getting silly.

We all sign NDAs. One of the restrictions is talking publicly about exactly what we're talking about. I've already busted my NDA by addressing this earlier.

There's plenty of "flaws" in footage that 99.9% of people don't notice. We're asked not to discuss those but it doesn't mean they aren't known.

Just like most of the feature requests that start here are already on a list that we start.

JB

John, that's all obvious and logical. Too bad it has to be repeated over and over.

But I guess it does, and maybe BM should do that. I dunno.

I dont really care too much. I cant wait to see the camera, I hope it's soon.

Thanks for doing what you can to help.

It's difficult for those who see footage, not to comment. It's difficult for those beta testers creating footage to comment. Let's just continue to be patient and hope this all ends well. And it will end well. Remember this new URSA/Mini 4.6K sensor has been described as BMCC on steroids. Sounds mighty to me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Goodness this is getting silly.

We all sign NDAs. One of the restrictions is talking publicly about exactly what we're talking about. I've already busted my NDA by addressing this earlier.

There's plenty of "flaws" in footage that 99.9% of people don't notice. We're asked not to discuss those but it doesn't mean they aren't known.

Just like most of the feature requests that start here are already on a list that we start.

There you go again, always being logical. That has no place here

Seriously, I know there are quite a few people who appreciate your contributions, including me. I'm just trying to inject a bit of humor into the conversation

In my stills photography I get the same Magenta vignette, especially when using zooms, on modern Canon L glass as well as older glass, albeit much stronger. In raw I do things to the images to either lessen the vignette or make it stronger. Either way, having a vignette, having chromatic abberation is almost an artistic decision, rather than a technical error.

And the aberrations pointed out in the screenshots all appear to be due to the lens which is either taken care of in post because you had no other choice in lens or one made an error in lens choice, or the abberation is embraced for artistic reasons: the look was appropriate for the project. It's the difference between choosing Zeiss or Cooke. But if all you can afford are Canon-mount glass then you're stuck with either fixing it in post (easy to do with raw, which none of these films were shot in) or embracing the flaws out of necessity.

It's also interesting to note that Hook's 4.6K footage from an earlier sensor in April had none of these optical abberations. So, again, evidence to lens choice. Also, both Ronin and Tom have expressed they used old glass. Plus, preproduction firmware, plus no raw. Add to it that this is not clinical test footage. They gave the camera to guys to go run and play with. And you know what? The footage looks FINE. Even without expensive cinema glass, Hollywood lights and a crew. And we know Brawley's been using them in situations as an A camera along various types of Alexas on his latest job and I don't think the producers would allow that unless the footage with PL mount lenses looked FINE.

So calm down. And don't judge the cookie before it's cooked.

Never complain to early-beta footage you see on internet about a new sensor?
So, people that bought URSA 4K with V1 sensor what should say?

Bad news? Quick, shoot the messenger! I am a bit dumfounded by all the comments that I should ease off or not critically judge the image before the final version is released or better still that it looks FINE! I posted about this issue not just to potentially benefit me as a customer that has one on order, but for everyone that is looking forward to getting this camera. I stand by every critical word I wrote. The tests (yes, beta and not final) that have been posted for all to see, do have a SERIOUS MAGENTA CAST ISSUE (in some clips but not all). (this is seen with vintage FD glass and new Samyang glass, so the cause is not on fully on the lens) If you don't see it or it doesn't bother you, consider yourself lucky. But I'm willing to bet that there are at least a few of us that do care and it does bother significantly enough. And for those I'm keeping the light focused on this issue. If it gets resolved, fantastic! I will be the biggest cheerleader of this camera, as barring the magenta cast, it looks wonderful! As a result of this thread, I can at least take assurance that the powers that be are well aware of this issue too. Only time will tell if it will be addressed in a successful way.

Never complain to early-beta footage you see on internet about a new sensor?
So, people that bought URSA 4K with V1 sensor what should say?

First, I'm not sure how those two assertions are related. Second, as stated previously, I don't think anyone is saying that we shouldn't point out possible sensor aberrations. It's the alarmist and panicky tone it seems folks are taking issue with as being the most conducive to propagation of fear rather than productive discourse.

Keep calm and critique on....

Honestly, Mr. Collins, you may be entirely correct about this issue. However, by going about it in the manner you have, you reduced your credibility to something more akin to a fire and brimstone street preacher or a raving conspiracy nut, when everyone else, whether or not they agreed with you on the source of the issue being necessarily the sensor, kept their cool and handled the discussion in a rational, analytic matter instead of focusing, in a highly emotional manner, on a single specific issue. I know, for myself, I have had similar issues in certain areas, so I can't necessarily blame you for feeling a certain way, but I would at least hope that on a public forum such as this, we can all at least attempt to handle this a little more civilly and level-headedly, as folks like Mr. Brawley, Mr. Lang, Mr. Malik, and most of the others on this thread have.

Roman has released additional test footage yesterday on his Vimeo page. There's no magenta cast, vignette or any chromatic abberation that I can see. As suspected, it was an optical issue, not a sensor issue. Your reaction!!, being the topic and first post of this thread, was overstated and silly. I mentioned before this thread started that I thought some of the highlights in older test footage looked a bit pinkish but thought it was possibly due to the vintage lenses (as states by Roman) and a possible fast warming of the grade. And I said it about as calm as I said this just now. You getting offended to our overreacting to your overreaction is an overreaction. Stop overreacting. If anyone knows about problems with the sensor it's Blackmagic. I'm sure this post has helped pass knowledge along and I'm sure the powers-that-be who read it are very thankful for your submission. The Serious Issue is how!! you!! said!! it that freaked everyone out. You don't need hyperbole to report your findings. Just report it. We got it. We see it, too. Thank you.

Stop overreacting.

I do hear what you and Mr. Gerlach are saying, but from my perspective, it's a bit like telling someone that is having an allergic reaction to selfish not to react in such a dramatic way. It probably all comes down to perception and how it strikes each one of us differently. In this case, it genuinely hit me like a bad hangover! (oops, I did it again!) That is my honest and passionately felt report and I should be able to express it in the way it makes me feel. Through all of this, if the manner of my critique is seen as unnecessary hyperbole, it is strictly focused on this issue as I have and will continue to be respectful of everyone. Thanks for your feedback, it is appreciated.

In the post related to low-light footage shot by Roman, I stated my opinion on the magenta tint seen in Tom Majerski's beach video as probably a result of colour preferences. However, afterwards reflecting on my post and remembering an issue related to magenta vignetting seen with some cmos sensors, I probably dismissed a potential issue too quickly. This is not to say I now all of a sudden believe there to be an issue with the sensor!

The fact of the the matter is that [in my experience] it is ridiculous to assume that a problem exists without knowing all the possible variables. Conversely, I also believe it is vital to point out possible problems, even if it means crying wolf, because in the process real problems are uncovered. No use masking (sugar coating) issues; it will eventually be detrimental to everyone involved.

Again, I'm not saying there is a problem, but I do agree that people have a right to express their feelings and opinions (in the process being also respectful to others) freely.

In the post related to low-light footage shot by Roman, I stated my opinion on the magenta tint seen in Tom Majerski's beach video as probably a result of colour preferences. However, afterwards reflecting on my post and remembering an issue related to magenta vignetting seen with some cmos sensors, I probably dismissed a potential issue too quickly. This is not to say I now all of a sudden believe there to be an issue with the sensor!

The fact of the the matter is that [in my experience] it is ridiculous to assume that a problem exists without knowing all the possible variables. Conversely, I also believe it is vital to point out possible problems, even if it means crying wolf, because in the process real problems are uncovered. No use masking (sugar coating) issues; it will eventually be detrimental to everyone involved.

Again, I'm not saying there is a problem, but I do agree that people have a right to express their feelings and opinions (in the process being also respectful to others) freely.

Yea, its fine to highlight things which people notice in an image - I think its when people jump to conclusions as to the cause of the issue, that's when it can be problematic.

I think the same goes for when people express the severity of an issue too - some things might be a quick fix, some things might take longer - but unless you are actually working on the camera - its unfair to make a statement of fact on this.

In the post related to low-light footage shot by Roman, I stated my opinion on the magenta tint seen in Tom Majerski's beach video as probably a result of colour preferences. However, afterwards reflecting on my post and remembering an issue related to magenta vignetting seen with some cmos sensors, I probably dismissed a potential issue too quickly. This is not to say I now all of a sudden believe there to be an issue with the sensor!

The fact of the the matter is that [in my experience] it is ridiculous to assume that a problem exists without knowing all the possible variables. Conversely, I also believe it is vital to point out possible problems, even if it means crying wolf, because in the process real problems are uncovered. No use masking (sugar coating) issues; it will eventually be detrimental to everyone involved.

Again, I'm not saying there is a problem, but I do agree that people have a right to express their feelings and opinions (in the process being also respectful to others) freely.

Yea, its fine to highlight things which people notice in an image - I think its when people jump to conclusions as to the cause of the issue, that's when it can be problematic.

I think the same goes for when people express the severity of an issue too - some things might be a quick fix, some things might take longer - but unless you are actually working on the camera - its unfair to make a statement of fact on this.

Yes.

Yea, its fine to highlight things which people notice in an image - I think its when people jump to conclusions as to the cause of the issue, that's when it can be problematic.

I think the same goes for when people express the severity of an issue too - some things might be a quick fix, some things might take longer - but unless you are actually working on the camera - its unfair to make a statement of fact on this.

Expressing ones perceived severity of any issue is completely unrelated to wether it's a quick fix or not. While I'm sure everyone, including myself, would hope that it is an easy fix, but that doesn't change the perceived severity, wether it's mild or extreme. As far as jumping to any conclusions as to the cause of the magenta cast, I believe it was Roman that first suggested that is was due to the vintage Canon FD lenses he was using. But I don't necessarily see this as problematic, as it's certainly a possible factor. I think John Brawley probably hit it on the head when he said: "As I understand it's a combination of lens and sensor "shading". To some degree it can be calibrated out (sensor shading). Shading correction is a part of the calibration process. And to some degree it's also lens related. You tend to get it on larger format sized sensors. Canon for example call this "peripheral lens correction".

Anyway, I very much appreciate Tom and Roman's time in shooting and releasing their test footage. Without people like them doing this, we the end user would be in a much lesser position.

All this speculation about the Magenta cast is why you don't announce a camera before you are in production. I don't know why BM would allow any of the pre-production testers to ever release video from said cameras, no matter how good it is. Because until people can perform their own independent evaluations on production cameras (which I look forward to), it means close to nothing. And may do unwarranted damage to the camera's and company's reputation.

All this speculation about the Magenta cast is why you don't announce a camera before you are in production. I don't know why BM would allow any of the pre-production testers to ever release video from said cameras, no matter how good it is. Because until people can perform their own independent evaluations on production cameras (which I look forward to), it means close to nothing. And may do unwarranted damage to the camera's and company's reputation.

I tend to agree with you, however I think BM is trying to strike a balance of satisfying the clamor for more footage from the 4.6k especially since the announced ship date has come and gone and having a finalized camera that's fully ready to ship. I think what they should have done is gone over the footage, take note of any issues to work on and release only shots without issues. This video test by Roman Alaivi shows almost no magenta cast at all. It almost doesn't look like it's from the same camera.

What BM should have done is ship on time.

All this speculation about the Magenta cast is why you don't announce a camera before you are in production. I don't know why BM would allow any of the pre-production testers to ever release video from said cameras, no matter how good it is. Because until people can perform their own independent evaluations on production cameras (which I look forward to), it means close to nothing. And may do unwarranted damage to the camera's and company's reputation.

I tend to agree with you, however I think BM is trying to strike a balance of satisfying the clamor for more footage from the 4.6k especially since the announced ship date has come and gone and having a finalized camera that's fully ready to ship. I think what they should have done is gone over the footage, take note of any issues to work on and release only shots without issues. This video test by Roman Alaivi shows almost no magenta cast at all. It almost doesn't look like it's from the same camera.

Interesting that he used the Pink Panther Theme song.. seems very fitting for this topic...

I agree 150% with the OP. The 50% is the additional fact that the magenta cast is not just in the edges but also on skin tones and more. This is not only a pre-production flaw but a huge mistake for a company not to acknowledge up front. For a moment I thought I was looking at Sony fs7 footage. BTY. We have three professionally calibrated high-end monitors in our studio.

And until you reproduce the issue with a production camera, it means nothing.

Good grief! Arguing over the image produced by a prototype probably built over 8 or 9 months ago with a prototype sensor, and a level of board and firmware which could have radically changed between now and then, is pointless. We know they added the B4 mount, and who knows what they've done since. They've had plenty of time to go through at least three more generations of PCB and dozens of firmware versions and maybe even a few versions of sensor. I suspect that the production camera will be a distant cousin of the camera that purportedly shot that magenta cast video.

There is just no point in speculating about it. The time to get worked up over any kind of cast is when the production camera is tested.

A prerelease camera with a prototype sensor... Btw all my lenses, filters and all different lights I shoot with have different levels of color cast/tint, which can and should be adjusted in post. Not judging the test footage here or the colorists, but even a very slight color shift towards green on the grading monitor could explain a slight magenta tint in the end result. Nothing to worry about. My main concern is the noise level, dynamic range, sharpness, robustness in color info and ability to discern between different color nuances. IMO judging by the footage seen so far, the 4.6 has a very neutral and gradeable vibe.

Compare the BM cameras to FS7 footage... It's a completely different world of color and a lack of artifacts with the BM cameras.

Good grief! Arguing over the image produced by a prototype probably built over 8 or 9 months ago with a prototype sensor, and a level of board and firmware which could have radically changed between now and then, is pointless. We know they added the B4 mount, and who knows what they've done since. They've had plenty of time to go through at least three more generations of PCB and dozens of firmware versions and maybe even a few versions of sensor. I suspect that the production camera will be a distant cousin of the camera that purportedly shot that magenta cast video.

There is just no point in speculating about it. The time to get worked up over any kind of cast is when the production camera is tested.

I have to disagree with you here. I think it's very valuable to provide feedback on image quality and issues during the testing phase. This is where our input can make it into the final production camera. Where would you rather have this problem be discovered? In the beta stage or once you have it in your hands? Hopefully, they have already known about this issue and have been on top of fixing it and the camera will be shipped without any trace of any sort of cast. But for sure, the acid test will be when the final production camera is shipped and end users get it in their hands.

I have to disagree with you here. I think it's very valuable to provide feedback on image quality and issues during the testing phase. This is where our input can make it into the final production camera. Where would you rather have this problem be discovered? In the beta stage or once you have it in your hands? Hopefully, they have already known about this issue and have been on top of fixing it and the camera will be shipped without any trace of any sort of cast. But for sure, the acid test will be when the final production camera is shipped and end users get it in their hands.

You would have a point if the testing were being performed on the latest release candidate camera. Testing a unit that could be dozens of version levels out of date is rather pointless. At best all you can do is reiterate a problem BM would have known about for months. Really more of a nuisance than a help.

Now if you were testing the latest release candidate that would be something completely different.

Are you?