Blackmagic Forum

I do not play on the BM forums very much nor am I that educated on the whole cinema cameras and lens mounts. So I am curious with all the newer Canon RF and Nikon Z lenses and the EF mount well in kinda of decline where does this leave the BMP6K as far as future proof with lenses?

I know you can just stock up on older stuff. Heck I think sigma is still selling some canon ef lenses but I kind of question if BM is going to come out with some newer mount camera ? If somebody was starting from zero would it be wise to wait a few months or so to see what BM comes up with ?

I do have canon RF and EF lenses but I am starting to hit a cross roads of what to put money in. I like canon's auto focus and image stabilization and their rf lenses but the image from BM cameras and adjust-ability in post is the shining star.... I just do not really care for the higher-end canon cinema cameras for the sake of file size/ and processing power for what you get compared to Braw.

I feel a little uncomfortable buying a 2K bmpck 6k right now as if something is just around the corner that is going to change the landscape in BM land ??


Thanks,
Jay

As usual, those who know aren't allowed to say anything, so we can only speculate.

In the past, BMD sometimes announced future cameras during the NAB Show, which is in April this year. But in recent years announcements have often been made when they're actually ready to ship (or close to it), which we can't predict.

Canon aren't licensing the RF mount to camera manufacturers, with the exception of RED. So don't expect a BMD camera with an RF mount.

The safest mount for Blackmagic to keep using on their cameras is PL. It's a truly professional mount with a ton of lenses designed for it. And, you can use those lenses on numerous other cinema camera systems from Arri, Canon, Red, Sony, and traditional 35mm motion picture film cameras. If you ask me it's the best option.

MFT doesn't really cover Super 35 and above up to Full-Frame/VistaVision sensors. LPL however is a shorter flange distance option that does those larger sensors.

Otherwise, Canon RF is propriety and so is Sony E Mount. Canon only did a trade with RED for them to have the RF on their newer cameras because Canon got internal compressed RAW recording in the exchange. I highly doubt that Canon or Sony will allow Blackmagic to have their mounts on BMD cameras.

Since the EF mount was reversed engineered after the patent expired that is why a lot of camera manufacturers used it. And, there was a lot of glass available in that mount. Thus that glass will continue to float around for years to come.

I honestly the best lenses to invest in are PL Mount. You can buy budget lenses now and still use them on a ton of cinema cameras. Plus you then can rent higher end PL glass.

Best mount option is interchangeable IMO.

Don't you need LPL to cover FF sensors?

Tom Roper wrote:Don't you need LPL to cover FF sensors?

Not necessarily. LPL Mainly has a shorter flange distance than PL. But PL can still cover FF sensors. Yet, LPL does have a wider diameter. 62mm vs 54mm.

https://www.arri.com/en/learn-help/arri ... ens-mounts

Tom Roper wrote:Don't you need LPL to cover FF sensors?

PL works with 135 format sensors just fine.

It just doesn’t adapt so well to other mounts. LPL being a shorter FFD should allow a wider range of other mounts. But both cover 135 just fine.

L mount for a mirrorless mount or PL / LPL are the mounts that have a future.

JB

timbutt2 wrote:The safest mount for Blackmagic to keep using on their cameras is PL. It's a truly professional mount with a ton of lenses designed for it. And, you can use those lenses on numerous other cinema camera systems from Arri, Canon, Red, Sony, and traditional 35mm motion picture film cameras. If you ask me it's the best option.

MFT doesn't really cover Super 35 and above up to Full-Frame/VistaVision sensors. LPL however is a shorter flange distance option that does those larger sensors.

Otherwise, Canon RF is propriety and so is Sony E Mount. Canon only did a trade with RED for them to have the RF on their newer cameras because Canon got internal compressed RAW recording in the exchange. I highly doubt that Canon or Sony will allow Blackmagic to have their mounts on BMD cameras.

Since the EF mount was reversed engineered after the patent expired that is why a lot of camera manufacturers used it. And, there was a lot of glass available in that mount. Thus that glass will continue to float around for years to come.

I honestly the best lenses to invest in are PL Mount. You can buy budget lenses now and still use them on a ton of cinema cameras. Plus you then can rent higher end PL glass.

Best mount option is interchangeable IMO.

I agree with everything that Tim said here except PL lenses, besides those recent Chinese brands, are pretty expensive. Other just renting PL lenses, they’re a hard reach for those affording only BM cameras without the funds or potential ROI. So IDK if that makes it a viable mount from a cost/ownership standpoint. EF mount has its quirks but I think is pretty open and there are still many lenses made for it, as well a ton of old lenses that can be bought for cheap. Most folks too will likely already have EF lenses. Both PL and EF are still good options for the URSA line, and EF and MFT possibly for the entry lines like the pocket.

Pl would be a terrible choice for the price segment Blackmagic operates in. The future is mirrorless mounts and they need to be in a mount that offers value options.

L-mount might be possible then, since it can be licensed. But then, I don't know the conditions and if it would make sense for BM economically.

For professional digital film cameras, the LPL makes good sense since it is free from licence, specifically designed for digital sensors and can cover everything including upto 65mm. The PL mount was the last film camera mount and its larger FFD was designed to clear a physical shutter, so according to Arri there are optical advantages that come from a shorter FFD of the LPL. It can easily accommodate a PL adaptor too.

Similarly I think the much maligned EF mount will remain as an option, in interchangeable mount cameras but for cine work it should be of the more robust locking design. Arri, Red, Canon and Panasonic amongst others all have such designs. Such are the wide variety of cheap good lenses available in EF that I would imagine there would be an outcry if it were to be dropped entirely, so I think it is going to be around for some time still. Any newer, better more modern popular mount that is free from, or able to be, licenced without difficulty, will be considered, I am sure.

Show me an EF locking mount that doesn’t add hundreds of dollars to the price…

JB

John Brawley wrote:Show me an EF locking mount that doesn’t add hundreds of dollars to the price…

John I would pay BMD £500 for such a mount. And they are bought all the time for lenses such as the Canon CN-E 18-80s, which are very widely used in TV work on the C300III, Amiras, Pannys and other such cameras.

The Pocket G2 was just released a few months ago in EF. I have many EF lenses from Canon and they all work great on my L mount camera with an adapter.

If Blackmagic were to release an L mount camera I don’t believe they would be leaving any EF users in the cold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ryan Earl wrote:The Pocket G2 was just released a few months ago in EF. I have many EF lenses from Canon and they all work great on my L mount camera with an adapter.

If Blackmagic were to release an L mount camera I don’t believe they would be leaving any EF users in the cold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

YES, the L mount does make sense on the suface.... I mean Sigma and Panny can use all the help they can get with this mount. They already have some great lenses and with support of Sigma the giant they are creating some really nice glass I think for the future.... BM needs to seriously consider it. The conversion from Canon EF to L is pretty seamless. I been using the 150-600 on my Sigma FP with very nice results. Anyway, thanks guys not sure what to do just yet but if BM goes L mount that be a win win for their Canon users to migrate to.....

Staffordfuhs wrote:YES, the L mount does make sense on the suface.... I mean Sigma and Panny can use all the help they can get with this mount.

Are you aware that LEICA own and developed this mount around 2014? That's why it's called "L" mount? It was developed and used to launch their digital mirrorless MILC the SL1
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/leica-sl-typ-601

It made sense that Panny would be involved as they are a longtime Leica partner as are sigma who also make a lot of lenses for the manufacturers as well as their own. Panny, Sigma joined in 2018 to make a formal alliance.

The real question is will they open it up to others....I think the chances are good...DJI just recently joined this alliance.

"L-MOUNT is a registered trademark of Leica Camera AG. Leica is the licensor of the L-Mount Standard and Panasonic, SIGMA, Ernst Leitz Wetzlar GmbH and DJI are licensees."

https://l-mount.com/en/Q-and-A

Also, "Ernst Leitz Wetzlar" is the cinema lens company that make Leica branded cinema lenses, owned by Leica, but technically a seperate company.

JB

I was also sceptical about them opening this up any further, but DJI joining made me more optimistic.
The interesting point for me is that Sigma is making some really excellent glass these days, while Leica glass is still perceived as second to none. The 35mm f1.4 is a dream lens for many photographers. The short flange distance makes constructions possible that are difficult with longer ones, for wides in particular. Nevertheless, they share this mount.

A wrong answer...but an answer nonetheless!

Kim Janson wrote:I am currently playing around with ChatGPT and decided to try it with the original question above, here is the answer:

"Hi Jay,

It's understandable that you might have some concerns about the future-proofing of your lens investment when considering the Blackmagic Design Pocket 6k camera. The good news is that the Pocket 6k is compatible with a wide range of lenses, including both EF mount and PL mount lenses, so you should have plenty of options to choose from.

As for the future of lens mounts and camera bodies, it is always difficult to predict what changes might be coming down the line. However, Blackmagic Design has a reputation for offering a wide range of compatibility with different lens mounts and camera models, so it is likely that the Pocket 6k will continue to be a versatile and flexible camera for some time to come.

In terms of whether it is wise to wait for a newer camera model or lens mount from Blackmagic Design, that will depend on your specific needs and priorities. If you have a specific project or deadline in mind, it may make more sense to go ahead and purchase the equipment that you need now, rather than waiting for a potentially hypothetical future release. On the other hand, if you have the flexibility to wait, it might be worth keeping an eye on the market to see if any new developments emerge that might be a better fit for your needs.

Ultimately, the decision of whether to invest in a Blackmagic Design Pocket 6k or to wait for a potentially newer camera model will depend on your specific needs and priorities. I hope this information is helpful, and please don't hesitate to ask if you have any further questions."

Not bad from AI, to analyse the question and give that answer

One think I would say wort considering is used pocket 4k until the camera you want to invest in is found. With adapters Pocket 4k can take pretty much any lens.

Much thanks for writing and providing and answer....

Kim Janson wrote:"Hi Jay,

It's understandable that you might have some concerns about the future-proofing of your component investment when considering the brand product. The good news is that the product is compatible with a wide range of components, including both components and components, so you should have plenty of options to choose from.

As for the future of components and products, it is always difficult to predict what changes might be coming down the line. However, brand has a reputation for offering a wide range of compatibility with different components and products, so it is likely that the product will continue to be a versatile and flexible product for some time to come.

In terms of whether it is wise to wait for a newer product or component from brand, that will depend on your specific needs and priorities. If you have a specific project or deadline in mind, it may make more sense to go ahead and purchase the equipment that you need now, rather than waiting for a potentially hypothetical future release. On the other hand, if you have the flexibility to wait, it might be worth keeping an eye on the market to see if any new developments emerge that might be a better fit for your needs.

Ultimately, the decision of whether to invest in a brand product or to wait for a potentially newer product will depend on your specific needs and priorities. I hope this information is helpful, and please don't hesitate to ask if you have any further questions."

I'm reading it as pretty much 100% boilerplate.

Insert any brand, product (garden hoses, fitness equipment, kitchen appliance) and components of said product....

But I guess they have to start somewhere. The text is completely coherent and readable.

Really generic. No actual insight.

JB

As stated in previous threads, I think the new camera will incorporate the existing 12k sensor that is cut down to either an 8k or 6k size. They have a history of repurposing sensors for other cameras, so this seems like the next logical step.

In regards to mount, Blackmagic will either go with L mount, or offer a replaceable mount that can be fulfilled by third party manufactures.

There’s been “too much” talk going ‘round for the next camera NOT to have an L mount, haha.

The 12k sensor is the best-looking sensor BMD has ever used. I can easily see them using it in another camera.

Adam Langdon wrote:There’s been “too much” talk going ‘round for the next camera NOT to have an L mount, haha.

The 12k sensor is the best-looking sensor BMD has ever used. I can easily see them using it in another camera.

Oh, the 12K sensor is definitely being used in the next generation camera. However, I think that the URSA Mini Pro design is going to get a new build based on a lot of the requests. So, a move away from CFast and towards CFExpress makes sense. Then maybe even allowing for LPL and PL Mount options. Other improvements obviously.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind L Mount as an option. But keeping the URSA line interchangeable mount. For the Pockets we really need interchangeable or mirrorless so adapters can be used.

I feel like there has to be autofocus in BM's upcoming cameras. Sony, Canon, and now Red & Panasonic are all offering cameras with cutting edge autofocus at competitive prices. The demand and obsession with autofocus just keeps getting louder and louder every year.

Truth is that most sub-$10K camera users are one man bands and autofocus simply makes their life easier. This is where the trend has been going, and it's where BM will lose more & more customers. If BM doesn't have professional quality autofocus in their next round of cameras then they'll be DOA. The resolution war is over, and unless BM offers dynamic range that can at least match the Arri Alexa classic then DR won't be enough to turn heads away from the competition.

BM was once leader of the pack for the best bang-for-your-buck camera, but not anymore. They are behind on every level including price.

What typically makes autofocus hard for camera companies like Fujifilm or Z Cam is the fact that they use off the shelf Sony sensors that lack any kind of dual pixel autofocus. Blackmagic has the upper hand because they are now designing their own sensors. They are in a position to design their own dual pixel phase detection system, or something similar.

This is why I think we will see professional autofocus from BM sooner than later. There is nothing holding them back. They created a RAW codec that went around Red's patent, which is something a big company like Sony couldn't even do. BM designed their own sensor pattern that broke from Bayer. BM has the smarts, the engineers, and they ability to create cutting edge autofocus. I would be shocked to discover that they haven't been working on it for some time now.

Autofocus? Don't make me laugh! Auto Focus and Auto Exposure are two of the main reasons we have populations that can't produce reasonable images moving or otherwise. Not that as tools themselves they are not useful, but the total reliance on them for low end equipment has definitely lowered optical knowledge for users.

Steve.

The issue with autofocus is when you have a busy frame with a lot of moving people. If someone passes in front of your in focus subject the autofocus will try to focus on that person passing in front. Even if that's not what you want. It's not as sophisticated as sheople think.

As convenient as autofocus may be it is mainly useful for select instances. For actual filmmaking your best autofocus is a focus puller assistant camera op on a wireless lens control system.

For stills I've come to love autofocus. But for video production I'd still rely on manual. It's trusted and true.

Kim Janson wrote:Though outside this discussion, the ChatGPT I do think is important. It is not intelligent, but does very good job on analysing and summarising, even explaining legal clauses on simple terms etc.

Does it?

I mean it suggested E mount without specifying that you can only get a Sony camera with E mount. That's a gigantic part of the decision to choose a lens mount.

Also E mount was introduced in...2010? MFT was introduced in 2008? So they're the same age really, but it infers that E mount as a "relatively new mount".

To my mind, it's just presenting the same information you can get with google search, information you still haver to understand and interpret. Now it's just presented with more authority as a single voice.

JB

My feeling is that AF will happen at some point.

Look at how well Resolve can track objects....

Once you take that into a camera....I think they'll just skip the current "dumb" af and got for something that is a lot more advanced based on object tracking or recognition.

JB

They’d have to do that. Sony and Canon got pretty good at tracking for AF, even if the target is temporarily obstructed. And then, they got 10 bit 4:2:2 now, which finally makes log kind of usable now.
Being hybrid cameras, they are pretty attractive both for photography and video.

Who says ChatGPT has no access to the internet? It might soon get Google into trouble.
There’s a reason Microsoft is considering investing billions into it, if you look at their unsuccessful Bing.

Ahhh you know that BMD (and Arri) both use thermoelectric cooling since their first camera?

RED used to be fan only and just very recently switched to thermoelectric cooling as well.

They use it to maintain the sensor tempreture within + or - 1 degree no matter the ambient temperature So they can maintain consistent noise and black levels.

JB

I was about to mention those Peltier elements, John.
But this is different, it’s rather a nano-technology fan. I wonder how much energy they use. Peltier elements consume considerable amounts in all those cameras.

It doesn’t always need a fan.

The original pocket used the camera body itself as a heat sink. No fan.

The fan isn’t noisy compared to RED. This is the way down the list of things to improve in my view especially when it’s essential to sensor noise performance.

JB

John Brawley wrote:It doesn’t always need a fan.

The original pocket used the camera body itself as a heat sink. No fan.

The fan isn’t noisy compared to RED. This is the way down the list of things to improve in my view especially when it’s essential to sensor noise performance.

JB

God! I remember that loud fan in the OG RED. Was a nightmare for sound, even when it was in the supposed quiet mode.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

timbutt2 wrote:The issue with autofocus is when you have a busy frame with a lot of moving people. If someone passes in front of your in focus subject the autofocus will try to focus on that person passing in front. Even if that's not what you want. It's not as sophisticated as sheople think.

As convenient as autofocus may be it is mainly useful for select instances. For actual filmmaking your best autofocus is a focus puller assistant camera op on a wireless lens control system.

For stills I've come to love autofocus. But for video production I'd still rely on manual. It's trusted and true.

Disagree. The default workflow now on all Sony cameras is to use the touchscreen for identifying the subject with a simple tap, and tracking works amazingly well despite foreground obstructions.

In this regard, going with PL mount would be a terrible mistake, foregoing auto-focus capability which is of course an optional feature to use in the field, but valuable for many shooting situations. Meantime, E-mount is arguably an open standard by now, evidenced by DJI's deployment on their Ronin 4D Cinema Camera. Lens availability in E-mount, especially with fast linear autofocus, makes L mount practically laughable as an equivalent.

(Why did discussion about ChatGPT hijack this thread?)

focuspulling wrote: Lens availability in E-mount, especially with fast linear autofocus, makes L mount practically laughable as an equivalent.

What’s laughable is that people keep suggesting E mount as a viable mount that BMD can use.

Sony do E mount cameras. No one else does E mount cameras.

And before you say Kinefinity, I think you’ll find they aren’t officially supported (or even shipping) and their company is based in a location that doesn’t enforce IP protection.

So you know…..L mount it really the only realistic viable option.

JB

John Brawley wrote:

focuspulling wrote: Lens availability in E-mount, especially with fast linear autofocus, makes L mount practically laughable as an equivalent.

What’s laughable is that people keep suggesting E mount as a viable mount that BMD can use.

Sony do E mount cameras. No one else does E mount cameras.

And before you say Kinefinity, I think you’ll find they aren’t officially supported (or even shipping) and their company is based in a location that doesn’t enforce IP protection.

So you know…..L mount it really the only realistic viable option.

JB

The U.S. enforces patent protection as a matter of international treaty for products sold here, as with most other countries too. And I mentioned DJI's Ronin 4D, which is being marketed internationally with E-mount compatibility as a core feature: https://www.dji.com/ronin-4d/lens. So personally, I'm not laughing. It might be Sony turning a blind eye, assessing litigation risk, or just allowing it to benefit their standard. But DJI is a very high-profile example.

Sony is using AI already for tracking and prediction of motion.
And they have been working on content based compression for years. No, I can't disclose that source, but you can wait for it. You know they tend to publish new features in pretty small slices to sell the next model.

John Brawley wrote:My feeling is that AF will happen at some point.

Look at how well Resolve can track objects....

Once you take that into a camera....I think they'll just skip the current "dumb" af and got for something that is a lot more advanced based on object tracking or recognition.

JB

Like Resolve's object tracking but in camera and live sending the data to the lens or, even better, a motorized follow focus (to drive cine/anamorphic lenses)?

<3

Alright, I'm gonna predict TWO Blackmagic cameras this year!
I think BMD were able to get a sense of what customers are purchasing from them with the 6k line-up. NDs, brighter screen vs just a flip screen.

For lack of a better term, the "Ursa Micro"
Ursa Micro Pro
- Internal NDs
- 8k Sensor
- s35, like the 12k
- PL/EF Mount
- A 'video assist' like monitor, that can control the camera but via a removable cable, so you can go without

Ursa Micro
- 8k Sensor
- s35, like the 12k
- L Mount
- The ability to utilize the HDR Video Assists

I don't really know anymore. I just know I'm probably gonna pre-order the next BMD camera regardless of whatever it is, haha.

I don’t think BM will ever call a camera the Ursa Micro specifically because the acronym would be the same as the Ursa Mini, and that would get confusing. My guess is that a smaller Ursa would be named something like the Ursa LT.

Also, considering that the BMPCC6K Pro gave us stackable ND filters, I think that maybe we will get the same on new Ursa cameras. This could give the UMP single stop ND filters 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7.

I do think that a smaller gimbal friendly, maybe box style, Ursa would probably have an 8K slightly smaller sized sensor (compared to the larger than average S35 sensor on the Ursa 12K.) It would have to retail for around $4K, and would be competing with the FX3 & R5 C.

I agree with others that a Modular Monitor would be a huge step up for the Ursa, and BM in general. I would love that feature.

Also having the ability to record proxies would be a very nice feature as well. Preferably to a separate SD card.

Jason Boyd wrote:I don’t think BM will ever call a camera the Ursa Micro specifically because the acronym would be the same as the Ursa Mini, and that would get confusing. My guess is that a smaller Ursa would be named something like the Ursa LT.

Also, considering that the BMPCC6K Pro gave us stackable ND filters, I think that maybe we will get the same on new Ursa cameras. This could give the UMP single stop ND filters 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7.

I do think that a smaller gimbal friendly, maybe box style, Ursa would probably have an 8K slightly smaller sized sensor (compared to the larger than average S35 sensor on the Ursa 12K.) It would have to retail for around $4K, and would be competing with the FX3 & R5 C.

I agree with others that a Modular Monitor would be a huge step up for the Ursa, and BM in general. I would love that feature.

Also having the ability to record proxies would be a very nice feature as well. Preferably to a separate SD card.

Ursa Tiny?

I would love any kind of Ursa with uncompressed RAW along BRAW, Arri style, just for us compression masochists.

focuspulling wrote: It might be Sony turning a blind eye, assessing litigation risk, or just allowing it to benefit their standard. But DJI is a very high-profile example.

Judging by the many posts I can see on various forms it’s been reverse engineered. I’m assuming that because most are complaining about it not working at all, or having some lenses it works with and some that it doesn’t work with.

I very much doubt it’s officially sanctioned because it’s Sony and this is their MO. They wouldn’t authorise this because their whole corporate culture is to make their own IP ecosystem. Think about how they do this with media.

So it’s a reverse engineered, unreliable and inconsistent implementation at best. Sony could probably alter some firmware in a lens update that will break the current functionality.

It’s totally unrealistic to expect BMD would go down this path.

JB

Adam Langdon wrote:Alright, I'm gonna predict TWO Blackmagic cameras this year!
I think BMD were able to get a sense of what customers are purchasing from them with the 6k line-up. NDs, brighter screen vs just a flip screen.

For lack of a better term, the "Ursa Micro"
Ursa Micro Pro
- Internal NDs
- 8k Sensor
- s35, like the 12k
- PL/EF Mount
- A 'video assist' like monitor, that can control the camera but via a removable cable, so you can go without

Ursa Micro
- 8k Sensor
- s35, like the 12k
- L Mount
- The ability to utilize the HDR Video Assists

I don't really know anymore. I just know I'm probably gonna pre-order the next BMD camera regardless of whatever it is, haha.

I feel like a lot of this is in line with what I have asked for. However, I'm asking for a new naming convention with a new main URSA Mini Pro iteration as the basis for the new camera line. Again, I'll call mine the Millennium.

So Millennium, Millennium Mini, and maybe even a Millennium Micro. So going off your bullets I'll mark what I think would be in these.

Millennium
- Internal NDs | Stacked & Motorized
- 12K Sensor | Super 35
- 120 FPS Max Frame Rate at 12K
- Interchangeable Mount | PL/EF/Nikon/B4 Mount
- Dual CFExpress Cards Slots | Including Redundancy Recording Option
- Dual SD Card Slots for Simultaneous Proxy Recording
- Expanded I/O Ports | 2X SDI Outputs, 5-Pin Lemo Timecode, Dual XLR Ports, Front Lens Motor Lemo Port, etc.
- Single Viewfinder Port | Powers and Feeds Video to Millennium Viewfinder
- Wireless Video Assist Monitor | Can Control the Camera via Touch Screen | Or Cable Option

Millennium Mini
- Internal NDs | Stacked & Motorized
- 12K Sensor | Super 35
- 60 FPS Max Frame Rate at 12K
- Interchangeable Mount | PL/EF/Nikon/B4 Mount
- Dual CFExpress Cards Slots | Including Redundancy Recording Option
- Dual SD Card Slots for Simultaneous Proxy Recording
- Smaller I/O Ports | 2X Micro SDI Output, 5-Pin Lemo Timecode, Dual Mini XLR, Front Lens Motor Lemo Port, etc.
- Single Viewfinder Port | Powers and Feeds Video to Millennium Viewfinder
- Wireless Video Assist Monitor | Can Control the Camera via Touch Screen | Or Cable Option

Millennium Micro
- 12K Sensor | Super 35
- 60 FPS Max Frame Rate at 12K
- Fixed Mount | PL & EF Options
- Single CFExpress Cards Slots
- Single SD Card Slot for Simultaneous Proxy Recording
- Minimal I/O Ports like Micro SDI Out, 5-Pin Lemo Timecode, Front Lens Motor Lemo Port, but no XLR
- Wireless Video Assist Monitor | Can Control the Camera via Touch Screen | Or Cable Option

There's probably a bit more I could list, but that's already a lot. It gives an idea however of the direction that I'm leaning towards.

Panavision already make a Millennium camera. My personal pie-in-the-sky hopes are two new cameras to replace the Ursa Mini Pro:

Ursa LT
- Smaller FX6/C200 size & style Body
- 8K S35 Sensor
- 15 stops of Dynamic Range
- 8K@100fps
- Base ISO 800, Max ISO 12,800
- Dual Pixel Autofocus
- Interchangeable lens mount
- Modular Touchscreen / Control Monitor
- SD card slots for proxy recording
- CFexpress Cards or M.2 system
- 7 stop ND filter (Clear,1,2,3,4,5,6,7)
- Gyro Stabilization data
- BRAW & ProRes 422 HQ
- SDI connectors, with a timecode/REF
- Bluetooth & Wi-Fi 6
- Interchangeable Battery Plate
- Price: $4,000 - $5,000

Ursa MX
- Updated Mini Pro size body
- 12K FF Sensor
- 16 stops of Dynamic Range (larger pixels and all)
- 12K@100fps
- Base ISO 800, Max ISO 12,800
- Dual Pixel Autofocus
- Interchangeable lens mount
- Modular Touchscreen / Control Monitor
- SD card slots for proxy recording
- CFexpress Cards or M.2 system
- 7 stop ND filter (Clear,1,2,3,4,5,6,7)
- Gyro Stabilization data
- BRAW & ProRes 422 HQ
- SDI connectors, with a timecode/REF
- Bluetooth & Wi-Fi 6
- Interchangeable Battery Plate
- Price $6,000 - $7,000

And Arri already made the LT

https://www.movietech.co.uk/equipment/c ... rricam-lt/

And red made an MX too

https://www.studioscotland.com/red1mx-camera-review

JB

Jason Boyd wrote:Panavision already make a Millennium camera.

Oh yeah! Oops! I was going off the Scanner names Blackmagic used for the URSA and the Cintel as one was called the Millennium. Will have to go back to the drawing board and see which of those names makes the most sense for them to pick for the next camera line.

John Brawley wrote:And Arri already made the LT

https://www.movietech.co.uk/equipment/c ... rricam-lt/

And red made an MX too

https://www.studioscotland.com/red1mx-camera-review

JB

Blackmagic already took the Mini name from Arri, I figure they’d keep with the tradition

timbutt2 wrote:

Jason Boyd wrote:Panavision already make a Millennium camera.

Oh yeah! Oops! I was going off the Scanner names Blackmagic used for the URSA and the Cintel as one was called the Millennium. Will have to go back to the drawing board and see which of those names makes the most sense for them to pick for the next camera line.

Maybe they could stick with constellations. The Lynx cameras ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Blackmagic Acquires Cintel July 24th, 2012: https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/media/ ... 0120724-01

This includes all of the IP, name and brand ownership and product development rights for the Cintel diTTo and dataMill digital scanners lines, URSA, C-Reality, DSX, and Millennium telecine lines as well as imageMill data management products.

So, if I was to use Cintel as the basis for the naming of the cameras then... Hmmm... Let's see here...

Okay, so I'm going to say the next camera will be called the DSX then. They shouldn't use C-Reality without it being associated with Virtual Cameras and Virtual Production because C-Reality makes the most sense for that.