Posted 31 January 2017 - 02:55 PM
The URSA 4.6k is FAR easier to use then the Canon C100, which is a garbled mess. You may find yourself re-thinking your entire strategy on how you use the camera due to it's ease of use. Having shot with the C100 and C300MKII, I can attest to how horrible the menu's and controls are. The URSA's exposure tools are also MUCH BETTER and easier to use then the C100.
There really isn't any comparison between the two cameras either. The C100 is an 8 bit 4:2:0 MPEG 2 camera, the URSA Mini 4.6k is a 14 bit RAW camera that can also shoot 12 bit 4:4:4 Pro Res XQ as well.
The big problem with the URSA's in general is their lack of an Optical Low Pass filter. This is a HUGE PROBLEM, but there are solutions. Running any filtration in front of the lens helps considerably. Softer cinema glass will also help with the issue. Google search moire issues and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Truthfully, I'm a pretty big fan of the URSA 4.6k, the only reason I don't own one is the OLPF issue, but I've been playing with it for a while now and I think it's a great camera. It captures colors the way I like to grade in the coloring bay. Mind you, the C100 does as well, I think the C100 has a good looking imager. It's just matched to a poor processor, which even prohibits capturing a decent signal externally. With the full kit (viewfinder, shoulder kit, V mount batteries) it makes a powerful weapon. It's biggest issues are the lack of direct menu controls without opening up the display. I'd also say it's a bit on the heavy side, which kinda sucks if you're shooting shoulder all day long. It also has a few configuration issues, timecode input rarely works, the XLR's on top is bogus, the power button being behind the display sucks as well. But meh... I'd rather have good menu's and a great looking image anyway.