Is my BMPCC4K better than the Ursa12K?

Hi All,

I shot a music video on the BMPCC4K which consisted of the talent, top lit, wearing a black t-shirt and in front of behind a black backdrop (on paper it sounds like that would never work, but in fact it looked fantastic).

Given the emphasis was focused on the blacks, I wanted the most dynamic range below middle grey. Given all the variables, I settled on ISO 1600 which falls into the second ISO tier of the 4k and gives us 8.1 stops under middle grey. It came out great.

Like most of us, I too am always keen to explore ways / products that can legitimately up the production value and quality of my work - as such, the Ursa 12K is very much on my radar.

For fun, I looked up what the Dynamic Range the Ursa 12K would give at ISO 1600 - and it transpires that the Ursa gives us 6.8 stops below middle grey.

Could that possibly mean that for this particular shoot, that the pocket 4K could actually be the superior tool for the job? Aside from resolution as I am happy with 4K resolution.

If not, what other factors would make the Ursa 12K more superior in this scenario? (I wish I had both cameras to explore - BM if your listening - lol!)

Also, how does the Ursa 12k perform when shooting at 4k? From user experiences, is it allot better than the Pocket 4k?

This post isn't a Pocket 4k vs Ursa 12k debate - I am sure the 12k is superior, moreover, other than resolution and sensor size, what makes the Ursa 12k unbeatable?

Lee, I will say that the UMP 12K has feature and functionality that the Pocket 4K does not. But I will put that aside, as you already know the answer to this. What you demonstrated is your knowledge on how to operate your Pocket 4K as well the lighting and setup for the shot that you said came out great with the P4K. That I think was the secret saw to your successful shot. If you were handling the UMP 12K, I would think that you will compensate the shooting environment so it will take advantage of 6.8 stops below middle gray at 1600 ISO, likely yielding a successful result as well. I think you know what I am saying here and let's leave it at that.

Hi Ellory,

thanks for the response -

Like you mention - at these settings, both cameras would yield great results below middle gray - the focus area of the shoot. However the humble Pocket 4k on paper would have more latitude below middle grey and so would it out perform the 12k in the scenario?

If not, what other factors are involved other than the dynamic range? Is it simply a fact that the 12k has a superior sensor and lets leave it at that? That the dynamic range "thought experiment" above is rendered hypothetical in real-world use?

This is a lighthearted inquiry into what makes a camera "great" other than the popular dynamic range and sensor size debates? Both of which never resonated with me.

Glad you got what you wanted and worked within the strengths of the BMPCC4K.

For your shoot it’s likely that your dynamic range above middle grey was suitably lit and did not having very bright areas so that you didn’t clip. With the UMP12K you would be able to have a greater range above middle grey than the 4K would capture. That too could produce a fantastic result especially if you were delivering for OLED television.

Hi Rick,

I agree.

My initial post wasn't that serious, it just got me thinking about what from a technical point of view makes a "good image". Even the fact of filming the talent in black on a black background also considering the the artist was a black guy, you would think wouldn't work - where in fact the outcome was seriously impressive from an artistic point of view.

I would really love to see what this shoot would've looked like on the Ursa 12k (Hint BM). That said, I am still love with the pocket 4k - it was my first real camera and I have milked every ounce out of this thing.

For best results from the 12K you'll always want to shoot in 12K and then bring that down to either 8K or 4K. You're then getting an image that is as good as the camera will allow. By doing this you're helping reduce and unwanted image anomalies. Also regardless of camera, I believe shooting at it's Native ISO rating is best, then adjust your lighting on set accordingly. I believe this is the sensors "best" setting. nothing concrete here of course. Just my 2c.

At this level it's also a matter of taste. I've tested the 4K, the 6K Pro and the 12K. IMHO, the 4K and 6K deliver great images, but they are a bit more 'video' (in a good sense, like documentary), while the 12K (for lack of a better expression) is very 'movie' or 'cinematic'.
Technically, I second what Travis wrote: But I really enjoyed older cine glass on the 12K, which will not outresolve that sensor.

Spec documents are like music scores. Even the best written scores are only a general road map. What you get out of the piece depends on your use of your instrument. It's about what you hear in your mind's ear and how well you can create that sound. For me nothing short of using both cameras or instruments in the same scenario will give me a result.

Based solely on the charts, the 12K, when middle-grey is exposed for 1600, has greater dynamic range than the 4K at the same relative exposure. Usually, shooters want more stops above middle grey than below, but how you allocate the stops (in post) is up to you. So in theory, the 12K should be "better". And if you down-sample from 12K to 4K on a Resolve timeline, you'll pick up additional dynamic range in the shadows, perhaps as much as a stop.

But for dramatic images, fewer stops can be better than more - crushing the blacks is common in cinema. It really depends on what you're after.

At this level it's also a matter of taste. I've tested the 4K, the 6K Pro and the 12K. IMHO, the 4K and 6K deliver great images, but they are a bit more 'video' (in a good sense, like documentary), while the 12K (for lack of a better expression) is very 'movie' or 'cinematic'.

Uli I always appreciate your knowledge and expertise in this forum. I will disagree with your opinion that the 4K and 6K are a bit more ‘video’, assuming that you meant less filmic in IQ. In fact, I find the 6K otherwise when in BRAW. I would think it’s decent enough to even come close to the Alexa and be able to shot match with it.

I cringe at every characterization that involves one "best" way to do everything, or "always do it this way because it's the best." There are always exceptions to make that not true. For example, 12K is not the "best" if your goal is minimum rolling shutter, etc.

Thanks for the kind words, Ellory.
I was simply trying to characterize the cameras by nuances. When one knows how to light and grade, one can make either camera look ‘cinematic’ (whatever that is). In my eyes, the 12K is all about color, not primarily about resolution. As mentioned above, the 12K has some more DR, but if you have the possibility of proper lighting, the 4K will deliver great images too.
Finally, 12K downscaled to 4K will deliver better detail than the 4K with a very good lens. No 4K camera with a Bayer sensor can resolve 4K. If the audience can spot that, I’m not so sure.
And then, what Tom just wrote is an important consideration too. Depending on the task at hand, you may want a smaller and lighter camera with fewer batteries.