timbutt2 wrote:Jonesy Jones wrote:Jacob Fenn wrote:I'm in complete agreement here. I actually had my credit card out to buy the Ursa Mini Pro until I realized that, even with 4 media bays, it cannot record raw and proxy simultaneously (BM confirmed this with me on the phone). This is a huge omission, and the reason I'll be sticking with Red for now, despite my preference for not having cameras with skulls on them...
It's a physical switch to choose either CFast or SD, but I wonder if firmware might allow, at the very least, for recording of raw+proxy to one media type.
Come on guys! Gees. There is no other camera on the planet that can do what this camera can do for a price that is embarrassing to all other manufacturers, and still you find a complaint?
I'm not complaining, just pointing out a potential missed opportunity. It simply would have been an amazing feature in this feature full camera. And, also, by stating the desire and having others agree it gives Blackmagic the knowledge that it is desired. This way they can work to implement it in a future model.
You're misreading our intent Jonesy. The camera and price point are truly laudable, but the proxy omission is a big deal and there are more than enough warm fuzzies for the camera in other posts here. The most beneficial feedback isn't loading forums with info on how groundbreaking the camera is, but pointing out the features that could be changed–particularly those with a low implementation cost and a high return on capability. I would hope that adding a proxy recording option via firmware is just such a feature.
But, since you want to hear more of my feature wishlist, here goes. I'll give you my top four features available in other manufacturer's cameras which are still missing in the Ursa Mini, and I think you'll realize why the proxy feature was the most relevant (implementable) one to have mentioned. Please note, I'm mentioning multiple manufacturers here so please don't accuse me of being an ignorant fanboy of any one specific camera platform or of being anti-Blackmagic. Why do I think this is relevant to post here? Because Blackmagic may be one of the few camera manufacturers who will actually pay attention to this list. This is far from a list of everything I'd see on my ideal camera, but I think it represents
the most major advantages of other camera systems compared to the UM 4.6k Pro. If everyone helps add to or subtract from this list it could be a very helpful bit of information.
1)
Red's built-in WiFi capability in conjunction with the Fool Control app is amazing. You get full control of pretty much everything in the camera from basics like start/stop recording and recording codecs and framerate to specific looks modifiable with custom RGB curves (which stick with the footage all the way through post incidentally), all right from your phone. You can trigger playback from the camera with the app, input metadata, and, best of all,
pull focus on Canon lenses right from the app. I've never seen anything like it and it's probably my current favorite feature. The focus pulling works better than it ought to with a decent lens and it has meant not installing a separate follow focus motor, gears, and receiver which is more helpful than I have words for. Red opening up their SDK to third-party development was a very good move in my opinion. Incidentally, I also appreciate Red's weight and form factor as it makes mounting on smaller gimbals a breeze. I've already mentioned Red's ability to shoot ProRes proxies alongside the .R3D raw files. Not having to copy all the data from a shoot over, but rather taking low-weight proxy files and doing a quick copy and edit on a laptop, only to re-conform to the original .R3D files (and at that point only copying the ones to my local drive that I need) is more helpful than I feel people give it credit for. Once you've worked this offline/online way it's tough to go back, and Blackmagic, makers of phenomenal post editing and grading tools, would be the logical ones to accommodate this workflow.
2)
Sony's low light capability. The 4.6k sensor is simply not anywhere near the low-light league of the Sony sensors. Not much more to say there.
3)
Olympus's sensor stabilization. After shooting handheld with smaller mirrorless cameras and their stabilized sensors, I have to admit really missing it when I pick up the cinema cameras from any manufacturer. I don't know that an S35 sensor could ever physically perform like a smaller MFT one when it comes to sensor stabilization, but it still makes a big difference when handheld on something like an S35 a6500.
4)
Canon's dual pixel AF. On-sensor phase detection has made video AF truly usable in a huge number of situations, and now that BM has really made a competent ENG-style camera, this is one area where a C300 II really has an advantage.
Again, by no means a comprehensive list of my 'perfect camera', but here are the biggest advantages from other manufacturers (at least the big ones that came to mind) in my view from all the other cameras I've used. Everyone please chime in, and perhaps help rank these ideas (and yours) in priority. Again, you can see why adding the ability to shoot simultaneous proxies makes way more sense than trying to change any one of these aforementioned items. And again, if this camera weren't an amazing value for the things it *does* do at this price point I wouldn't be making this list in the first place. The Ursa Mini Pro is amazing, beyond the descriptive power of any of the available emoticons here
Written by an extremely average person.