j.f.r.

​I think people who never used these cameras cannot form an educated opinion........ First and foremost Ursa requires expensive media to record too, no ND Filters, lack of iso sensitivity and simply not built as a workhorse. There's no denying the C-300 Mark II to many enthusiast might seem "expensive" but in a professional working environment it's actually a very cheap camera that you can pick up and works perfectly. Batteries last all day, records to cheap media, built in ND and quite arguable some of the "Best" colors produced. C300 is a warrior and will work flawless in the hottest temperatures to freezing, Blackmagic cameras are very good technology, but I don't think it's quite fair to compare...... On the flip side URSA mini looks great, but still I know it will have it's quirks as ALL Blackmagic cameras do...... Peace

​A7s produces beautiful log images which you can basically color/grade how you choose too. The first step is taking that log image and converting to REC 709, then you color to taste...... From my experience Sony A7s produces amazing colors and grades wonderfully, you just really have to spend some time with it and understand how it works. Here's a before/after picture of an unreleased Music Video (Artist: Gyptian) I worked on. Graded in RESOLVE and Tweaked in FINAL CUT

​+1 TheRenaissanceMan has no idea what he's talking about...... Iso performance is the #1 thing for Independent Filmmaking and working with a budget. The difference of using 3 lights vs 6 is huge or the difference in wattage from 650watts to 300 is basically cutting everything in half. People who have not used both of these cameras simply cannot comment. I owned a GH4 and Sony A7s, GH4 after iso 800 is basically a noisy image and something you definitely do not want to use as you lose even more dynamic range and are introduce all kind of artifacts in your image. You can use a Sony A7s with a perfectly clean image all the way to 6400+ , I mean PERFECTLY clean image like shooting the GH4 in lowest iso setting. Secondly we have dynamic range, GH4 isn't even close. The ONLY people who say different are those protecting their camera name brand and those who simply never used a Sony A7s. I will say it time and time again, the A7s is simply the best tool in it's price range, point blank period. I suggest people to rent one before commenting any further.....

​ Would rate GH4 around 8-9 stops , nothing usable in shadows, poor iso performance and the ONLY good thing it has is imo is internal 4k. If I don't want a static shot I move the camera, simple......... Finally A7s is a Full Frame camera + APS-C which is simply a larger more professional format when compared to smaller sensor cameras..... I believe A7s is one of the first Full Frame 4K ready cameras within this price range and is something technologically amazing. I suggest you rent one before counting it out simply because it doesn't do 4k internally IMO, Dynamic Range and Iso are much more important for independent filmmakers as well vs resolution......

No built in ND's....... As much as people worry about resolution/dynamic range these companies can't even get the basics right........ Sony FS7 is a much better camera, heck I would even buy a C100 Mark II over this

​GH4 has poor iso and dynamic range compared to Sony A7s , no matter what you do nothing can change that, nothing..... You can easily rent a recorder for A7s if you need 4k..... Also 1080p on Sony A7s is basically perfect and looks much much better than any other camera shooting 1080p outside of Canon Cinema series. GH4 and Nx1 are nowhere close to the quality of Sony A7s. Resolution is simply not the only thing that makes an image........

I'm actually having a great day, my point being many people want this/that lens when in all actuality SO MUCH work is done on Sony EX cameras and the like. If you've worked on a film small/medium/large than you would know it's so much more that goes into it then just a camera, I would even go on record to say that while the camera is important is actually not the #1 or #2 priority of the project. Before anyone judges the images from this camera, just wait till it's in the hands of filmmakers. While it is nice to use your own personal glass how you see fit we may all just be really surprised at what can be done with this camera + also lets not forget the lens from my understanding is made by Leica which is definitely good quality......

​+1 Honestly I think I might be on the wrong forum....... DVX100 is a workhorse of a camera and a tool I was able to do A LOT of jobs on, from documentaries. weddings to commercial events for hotels and businesses of the like. I see this as an EXCELLENT option and feel it will do great. Sure having a changeable lens camera is cool for "artistic" work, but for the bread and butter of video productions you really don't use any of that kind of stuff. As noted in my above quoted post, several people I know using Sony Ex3 cameras still for reality shows, cooking, racing , etc. I see this camera doing great in that market and being an amazing tool. Sure I love my Sony A7s, but lets be serious here and know that is a very very specialized tool and requires a lot of add ons for a shoot, let alone filming and documenting an actual project. This camera has XLR Inputs which is priceless as well + built in ND's etc. Now the ONLY thing I might think is the Canon C100 Mark II could be a better buy, but then again it doesn't shoot 4k like this camera does..... ​ Have you shot a film? I would like to see some of your work done on interchangeable lens cameras if so....... For the record I worked on many productions where we used a DVX100, HVX, HPX, etc all fixed lenses. Film Maker is NOT about a camera, it's about telling a story through moving pictures.........

​You have no idea what you're talking about, any kid with a DSLR can film an event and claim it as something, lets be realistic here. There's NOTHING special about what you have in any of your videos, just descent enthusiast projects. Now for the working class who really get paid to work I suggest you sit back and relax, you might learn something...... My problem is people who don't even make a living in this industry commenting all day claiming this camera this and this camera that, lets be realistic here and start respecting working professionals in this industry.

​ I agree 100%, excellent post!

Non working pros speaking on nothing they know of..... This attitude online definitely needs to stop, especially when enthusiasts such as yourself do not respect professionals being paid for their work and putting out great projects. I would like to see someone here put together a project this fast with more than likely a minimal budget and pressed for time. Acting was not the best, but overall I would say it was a pretty good project and definitely showed what can be done with this camera.

​ GH4 has no successor, neither does Canon 5D which has been out for years...... URSA Mini with new sensor option looks excellent, if you're not a working pro though I don't see most people spending $6k + for that system when you have the Sony FS700, FS7 , C300 Mark I , C100 Mark I and Mark II which are professional cameras used in video productions work wide. Black magic are excellent "niche" projects, but unless you have the clientele honestly imo a waste of money.... I would much rather own a Sony FS700, FS7 or C100 series which are actually used all the time in video productions....

Scale it down to 1080p and get some nice looking perfectly stabilized footage....... Unless you are delivering to a film house, major tv network or client that needs 4K I would always deliver in 1080p. 1080p looks excellent, especially with footage captured at higher resolutions

​C300 Mark II looks excellent and dynamic range is definitely up there amongst the best, footage looks absolutely beautiful............

​ Really hard to judge with such flat neutral settings....... Here's a video of 5D Mark III Raw which is something I haven't really seen any GH4 footage come close too....... FF look Canon Colors are really imo what make the image so amazing. 90+ % of everything I've seen shot on a GH4 looks lifeless and plastic skin tones......... MARK III RAW footage

​ I disagree 100% on your negatives , footage looked great, love the "film like grade" and framing looked great. Would love to see some of your work for comparison..... *Dynamic Range looks INSANE!!!!!!!

​ I need to see some skin tones, medium and close up shots + dof. GH4 has always looked pretty good in wide/extreme wide shots, problem for me at least has always been in seeing very nice natural saturated skin tones......

​You charge $1k weddings , other charge $5k and up. It's all about the market and what you can sell. If you are underpricing your work then of course it's hard to understand, but semi pros to professionals work/earn much more and this is where this camera is geared too. No different than people shooting free Music Videos or working with labels getting minimum 10k budgets, it's all about where/how you place yourself in the working industry. Personally there's NO way in the world I would shoot/edit a Wedding for 1k , when I can make that just editing a simple project....... Done with the off topic, problem is most people simply just don't understand.......

I've used both cameras as a professional working in the industry, 5D is still used plenty, but no question at all the C300 is a much better video camera. Now 5D hack is a different story, I think we should get back on topic though.... My point being the GH4 / NX1 are good consumer cameras, but the poor dynamic range, iso and colors is the reason you simply cannot compare them to more pro cameras.

​The problem is the "prices" you have........ Also your bigger problem is thinking you can even begin to compare something like an NX1/ GH to this camera. Based on dynamic range, color and iso those consumer camera's are not even close, nowhere close. If you're doing $500 weddings I get it, but if you're doing $1500+ every weekend then this caters to a different market.

​Red Epic will cost you A LOT more than 17k....... A LOT more.......... C300 right out of the box has everything built in and uses cheap media.... For commercials, Music Videos, Documentary, etc..... 120 fps in 1080p is also excellent and more than enough for delivery. I work with RED Cameras and they are excellent tools (when used properly) but make no mistake if you ever used a C100/300 you simply can't imagine how quick/easy and wonderful it is to shoot on those systems. I personally own a Sony A7s, but even I know the work required to get a nice image and colors that is so easily achieved on the Cinema line Canon cameras. Make no mistake I LOVE working with RED cameras, but it is definitely a slower workflow compared to the Canon's.

I've been telling people how amazing the C100 Mark II is, honestly simply some of the BEST colors I've seen naturally from the camera. You can youtube/vimeo many links and see for yourself. The C300 should be only that MUCH better.......

Two things I really want...... * Blackmagic Pocket Camera in 4k with at least 48fps in 1080p, even if it's only 30 second bursts it would be greatly appreciated *Sony A7s II incorporating new in body stabilization + tweaks over their first camera

Why are people even asking dynamic range on these cameras, GH4 and NX1 have poor dynamic range + iso performance. If you want Dynamic Range and colors look no further than any Blackmagic Camera, if you want stills capability + Dynamic Range buy a Sony A7s.

​Small sensor will never have high iso performance of larger ones, never.......... GH4 is simply unusable with anything above 800 iso Fact and a damn shame honestly