Tom_Bassford wrote:Out of interest which cameras do you currently use?
Sorry if I wasn't clear, in house we're mostly using the Canons which I previously linked.
The main reason for this is simply the lens reach. I believe the FF equivalent of that glass is something like 29mm-530mm at a constant 2.8. Nice for wide venue shots up to acceptable closeups, and if we need really tight shots we just position cameras where we need them. I like the noise performance, color science, and image quality of the Canons compared to similar offerings by Sony and Panasonic, but that is admittedly a subjective choice.
We rent 2/3" chip cameras for higher end productions, but the theory is still the same - I have to have the reach. That gets pricier the larger the chip gets. The nice thing is that our tally/comm/return system works identically between all cameras, which is precisely why we use it.
I would love to actually own something even better, but again, what exists? I can't afford that new 4K Sony, but I can afford an Ursa. Why do you think I am here?
Coincidentally, my workflow would be identical with the Ursa as it is with my Canons. Literally nothing would change except perhaps where a couple of the plugs go.
Tom_Bassford wrote:The production aesthetic that is possible with the HDC1500 type cameras is better not because of a pixel peeping image quality improvement, it is better because the workflow is actually designed for live production, and the shots work.
Absolutely smaller chip cameras are easier to work with - and if that makes the difference between getting a shot vs. not getting a shot, then there is no question: workflow is king. But I was strictly talking
image quality from the s35 perspective. Higher resolution is objectively better than lower resolution (if all other things are equal).
The whole idea is to maximize your image quality without compromising your workflow. I know you feel the same way or you would still be shooting in standard definition. No, we all want the best image quality possible - we are image makers. It is simply finding the point at which we start to make other compromises based on the image quality that we have to stop and reassess. Those compromises may be workflow related or they may be other things too like financially related.
This is precisely why people - even with unlimited budgets - choose 2/3 over 35mm. But if the workflow was identical, then I think you would see way more people shooting s35. I have shot live concerts before with a bevy of Epic cameras, and the footage looks stunning; way better than the output from a 2/3" chip camera. Even over the internet on a live stream, you can just feel it. But it was definitely a pain in the ass, and most of the time you just need things to work. We agree completely.
However, I still believe more people are interested in Ursa as a means to increase the quality of their productions than they are that Ursa will make their workflow easier. You may disagree and of course we will never know, but the majority of people aren't on these forums either. They see a sexy new "4.6K" camera and now they want to know how to get 12G fiber to it. Just scroll up. If everyone was content with 1080 and didn't care about picture quality, they wouldn't be trying to figure out how to squeeze "4.6K" into their workflow. BMD wouldn't be messing with 12G anything. They could just make a nice 2/3" chip with bigger photosites for better sensitivity and a B4 mount standard - with all of the workflow things you're talking about - and be done with it. But no, people don't want a 1080 camera. EVEN if they end up using Ursa in 1080 mode, they STILL want the 4.6K camera!
Tom_Bassford wrote:The workflow is key, and URSA is breaking new ground here by providing a truly professional workflow at a price point which is previously unheard of. I disagree that blackmagic already provide the workflow of tally / returns and comms to any camera, It simply isn't the case, the camera converter doesn't provide returns to the viewfinder, nor is it integrated into the camera, and there isn't a low cost solution for putting a hired in digisuper 100 on any of these existing low cost cameras.
Well, stop by our studio and I can show you working comms, tally and return video working with any camera you like, even a GoPro.
No, you don't put return video in the viewfinder, but the talkback doesn't go through the camera anyway and the tally gets passed to whatever monitor you want it to. You've got me on the digisuper, but then again if your budget affords you a digisuper then your budget affords you better than a poor performance windowed crop of a sensor. You will get a better picture from a 2/3" broadcast camera with that kind of lens than you will putting it on the Ursa no doubt. Then again, if the image doesn't matter to you then I guess we are just going round in circles.