Jump to content


Photo

Blackmagic Ursa Mini 4.6k EF Test Footage

ursa mini 4.6k black magic ursa ef test

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 27 June 2016 - 09:36 PM

I've began taking this camera out and testing it in a variety of uncontrolled conditions. I have also been using it on an upcoming short film entitled "The Towns We Lived In". Take a look at some of the test footage which I have been shooting and let me know what you think. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have been using Canon Zooms and Zeiss Contax glass. But I will hopefully be testing other lenses on it soon.


  • 0




#2 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 538 posts
  • Director
  • OG from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 27 June 2016 - 10:39 PM

The camera itself looks very nice, but does anyone else feel everything in the foreground is a bit too video-ish?


  • 0

#3 Shawn Sagady

Shawn Sagady
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 164 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Maryland

Posted 27 June 2016 - 11:45 PM

I just cant get over how sharp it all is, I mean thats amazing we can capture such detail, but did anyone think to ask if we should.  I know you can soften it up in post or use filters to take the edge off but seeing pores on peoples face without being a closeup is kinda disturbing my mind for some reason.


  • 0

#4 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 538 posts
  • Director
  • OG from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 28 June 2016 - 01:48 AM

Yeah, like a Sony handycam with better bokeh.


  • 0

#5 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3082 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 28 June 2016 - 11:12 AM

Nice footage Robbie. Which ND filters were you using outside? I've had a hard time getting clean colors shooting day exteriors with the Ursa Mini 4K because of the high IR sensitivity, but the 4.6K seems much better.
  • 0

#6 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 28 June 2016 - 05:46 PM

Haha yea I fully understand the whole "sharpness" thing and I'm wondering if that is something a colourist can fix? I have seen some footage from the 4.6k that looks very clean and I honestly think a lot of it does come down to the grade. 

 

The only video with any form of filtration was the "autumn" one which had a Hoya IR Cut and a SLR Magic Vari ND. That video was shot wide open at F4 on a Canon EF 24-105mm lens so there was quite a bit of ND happening especially at ISO 800.

 

I actually did a video test comparing the SLR Magic Vari ND to the Hoya ProND on the 4.6k at 4:1 raw but I haven't uploaded it online. It was actually very difficult for me to see the difference in the 2 ND's so the Vari ND seems to be pretty good. I also compared 1080p ProRes HQ to Raw 4:1, and once again, the change in "look" appeared to be very slight although I do think that the 4.6k raw stuff did look a lot more "natural".

 

The worst video was probably the "Bubbles" one since I was shooting handheld with a Rokinon 14mm at 800 ISO at probably like a T8- T16. When I graded it in colour it looked really bad and it felt like I needed an IR cut or something, that's why it is in B & W. I shot this very quick video on the same day (all audio was literally scratch audio from the camera): 

 

 

I have had to shoot a number of very quick videos (one day turn arounds) at my job and so it has taught me how to grade the footage pretty fast: 

 


  • 0

#7 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 538 posts
  • Director
  • OG from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 28 June 2016 - 06:00 PM

Is there a "sharpness" setting within the camera to turn down?


  • 0

#8 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 28 June 2016 - 06:04 PM

Yes there is actually. I think the camera's default setting is +10 sharpness. I need to do some comparisons actually.


  • 0

#9 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1628 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 28 June 2016 - 06:50 PM

I rented the 4.6 as well several weeks back. The camera itself was built okay, seemed to work okay. However, the results were rather startling to me in terms of sharpness. I often shoot my GH4 in 4k and downrez to 2k, which should create some very sharp footage. The 4.6 was at least twice as sharp. Honestly, it reminded me of Red Epic footage - which is way to sharp for its own good.

 

Personally, I liked the footage overall from the Pocket more than I did the 4.6k. That's just me though. It just feels 'too sharp' and too 'digital' to me.

 

PS) Great cinematography though on your part. 


  • 0

#10 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 18986 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 June 2016 - 07:46 PM

I think it's the lack of a low-pass filter that is making the image seem so sharp. To me, it's problematic -- I've been pretty impressed with the look of BM footage, but the moire problems that pop now and then really bother me.


  • 0

#11 Peter Bitic

Peter Bitic
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Student

Posted 28 June 2016 - 10:29 PM

I liked the deep DOF black & white one.


  • 0

#12 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 18 July 2016 - 08:12 PM

I agree with what David has said. I know that Mosaic Engineering made an "OLPF" for the pocket and cinema cameras, so i'm wondering if there is a way to get an OLPF made for the 4.6K. I have emailed Mosaic Engineering but does anyone know of another route?

 

Thanks!


  • 0

#13 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 01 August 2016 - 09:48 PM

Here's an interesting combination which Dom Jaeger helped me work out. It is the Blackmagic Ursa Mini 4.6k EF with Zeiss Contax 35mm 2.8 MMJ with an oval iris installed. I also used a Black Satin 1 Filter. 

 


  • 0

#14 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1306 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 25 August 2016 - 07:08 PM

Wow, the image of the young lady with the sun behind her is like the holy grail of cinematography in my opinion, because her face wasn't black or otherwise washed out.  Incredible.  


  • 0

#15 Robbie Fatt

Robbie Fatt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 25 August 2016 - 07:17 PM

And that was in Pro Res HQ UHD so I could technically bring back even more detail if I had shot in RAW.


  • 0

#16 Jay Young

Jay Young
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Lexington KY

Posted 26 August 2016 - 04:02 AM

I think it's the lack of a low-pass filter that is making the image seem so sharp. To me, it's problematic -- I've been pretty impressed with the look of BM footage, but the moire problems that pop now and then really bother me.

 

I have been impressed with the image quality too.  There are now two people who have created replacement elements for several BM cameras which fix one of two problems.  Some chaps from mosaic engineering  have created a new optical anti-aliasing filter that greatly reduces the Morie issues, and a fellow from Norway (Sweden?), created a new IR-cut OLPF which fixes a lot of the IR issues.   I am almost certain one could not use both at the same time.  But a nice IR filter in front of the lens works well too. 


  • 0

#17 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1306 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 27 August 2016 - 01:17 AM

I think it's the lack of a low-pass filter that is making the image seem so sharp. To me, it's problematic -- I've been pretty impressed with the look of BM footage, but the moire problems that pop now and then really bother me.

 

David, bottom line; you wouldn't buy one, or use one until the updates have taken place?


  • 0

#18 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 18986 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 08 September 2016 - 08:55 AM

I don't know, it looks tempting but since I don't have to buy anything right now, I don't have to make that hard decision.


  • 0

#19 aapo lettinen

aapo lettinen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 774 posts
  • Other
  • Finland

Posted 08 September 2016 - 09:11 AM

one of the disadvantages of this type of cameras is the lack of built in ND filters. that is actually the reason why I choose the FS7 so often over BM cameras. making great quality internal NDs seems to be quite expensive because Blackmagic does not even try it  <_<


  • 0

#20 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 18986 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 08 September 2016 - 09:34 AM

Sure, but it looks like the Sony FS7 averages about $3000 more than the 4.6K BlackMagic...


  • 0



Visual Products

Glidecam

Zylight

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Pro 8mm

Quantum Music Works

Metropolis Post

The Slider

Pro 8mm

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

Glidecam

Technodolly

Zylight

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Quantum Music Works

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

CineTape