majoraxis

This youtube video lists the camera as "Ursa Mini Pro 12k".
Wow - impressive!  The color rendition is special in the way that the different shades of a color appear distinct and unique even when they are very similar.  I also like the motion cadence.  The image is solid and without distraction.  It's nice to not have any obvious flaws that steel my attention from the content.
 

This youtube video lists the camera as "Ursa Mini Pro 12k".
Wow - impressive!  The color rendition is special in the way that the different shades of a color appear distinct and unique even when they are very similar.  I also like the motion cadence.  The image is solid and without distraction.  It's nice to not have any obvious flaws that steel my attention from the content.
 

Seems to me it’s the sensor and codec that is the issue.  If this had a pocket 6k sensor (yes with the m4/3 mount) and BRAW it would be a best seller.  People know what they want and will purchase without hesitation when the right product is available.

I take pictures with my iPhone every day so better image quality is welcome.
One thing this may excel at is shooting in public places without a permit or kit.  A couple of self recording lavalier mic body packs and you could shoot a conversation at a table in a mall that would probably look pretty good.  Also, car interiors could be a good application.
The saying used to be “lights, camera, action” now it’s “no lights, no problem, I got the new iPhone“
Anyways, someday the photos I take of paperwork at work (instead of scanning them) will be ready for the big screen.

10 years just about EVERYBODY on the planet that can afford a phone will have the same motion picture IQ power we currently have.
Best to question "what exactly do I bring to the table when offering video production services?"  If your answer is "the camera" you need to start getting really paranoid.  Most clients are not going to fret about DXO scores. If that's where your attention lies (and there's nothing really wrong with that) I hope you're aspiring to a much higher echelon of production than I am!
I'm pretty close to retirement so my day in the sun with all this stuff is coming to an end.  Looks like I'll be riding the imaging technical wave as it crashes onto the beach.

This youtube video lists the camera as "Ursa Mini Pro 12k".
Wow - impressive!  The color rendition is special in the way that the different shades of a color appear distinct and unique even when they are very similar.  I also like the motion cadence.  The image is solid and without distraction.  It's nice to not have any obvious flaws that steel my attention from the content.
 

New footage from the Blackmagic URSA Mini Pro 12k is few and far between.  Seems like dogs in 8K 60p and 12k 60p is best we can do on a Sunday morning (starting at 8:36 in the video).  A good reminder regarding focus and depth of field when shooting household pets. ; )
"Help me, @Neumann Films. You're my only hope."
 
 

Is amazing. I love it. Never going back to RED unless I’m forced to by a client.
Just thought I would share. The IQ is pristine, colors are great and it’s just a breeze to use. Will post a few stills here in a day or two.

Got the A7SIII as wanted a small body that could do 4k120 10bit with high calibre AF tracking for gimbal work, and more.
Coming from the EVA1 and GH5. 
No footage yet to show. Haven’t used it on a job yet but I’ve took it for a casual spin in the park.
Is the hype real? Not sure yet. Need more time. 
Some observations: 
1. The body is very very light. The buttons are nice to press. The screen is a little thin. The menu button is in the wrong place. The grip is far better than before. It’s much bigger. 
2. The EVF is insane. Never seen an EVF that clear and sharp, ever. 
3. Menu’s make sense, finally. Woo woo. 
4. AF tracking is great. Feels like cheating. I’m not sure how I feel about it as part of the craft though. Feels less rewarding, if that makes sense? Lovely on a gimbal though.
5. Working on a screen this small makes me feel disjointed from the scene. Much less clarity than the EVF. Good I’ve got the Ninja V to test then! 
6. Dynamic range is impressive. Very nice roll off. 
7. There’s a “Shockless” WB. When you change it, it transitions smoothly while recording. Same with ISO and shutter speed. Nice!
8. How am I using ISO 100 in Slog3? Thought this was BANNED. 
8. Rolling shutter looks gone. Ran off. Away.  Thank the Lord. 
9. Battery life - hmmm. Not Panasonic standards. 
10. Tamron 70-180 seemed a bit drunk with close distance AF. 
11. Image looks quite clinical. Used ProMist 1/4 - not judged it yet. Seems better. Will decide later. 
12. Why is the skin tone in FCPX yellow looking when the skin is on the line in the vector scope? Not that the skin tones are bad (they are good off the line),  just doesn’t make sense. Maybe I’m blind. 
13. Colour is better. I’m not sure how much better yet. Definitely an improvement. 

I need to get this thing on a proper shoot. Got a triple music video shoot in Turkey coming up so I’m going to throw it in the deep end on that one. 
Overall, I’m impressed so far but I can’t help feel a slight bit of disappointment when Canon announced the C70, which is the camera I described some years back as the one I would love to have. Now it exists. Funny world. 
 

@Desmond Downs Great idea!  Thanks for sharing!

Guten Tag @Neumann Films 
great to hear that your 12K URSA is on its way. I´m looking forward to the first samples.
What I´ve already seen from BMD and John Brawley looked awesome. I just like the BM Color-Science and BRAW aswell. Back then it was CDNG and ProRes with the BMCC and the original Pocket, ahead of Canon here. Now it is the great Codec in combination with an enormous amout of recording-modes and really high-res formats.

My 12K URSA arrives in two days and I’m beyond stoked to play with this thing. Honestly it has a lot hype to live up to (for me personally)

Blackmagic is one of the smartest companies today. While it feels like everyone else is thinking short term, they're clearly looking at the long game, especially with this release. I have no idea what their finances are like, but if they can maintain this direction they'll have so many advantages over everyone else, given their focus on the entire work flow from start to finish. 

It is a mildly warm camera... Simply adding a cage with wooden grip would allow you to shoot handheld without touching any of the hot parts - if that is, it ever went above 43C. No evidence it does. Also, the aluminium cage would disperse the heat, radiate it to the air, and the wooden grip wouldn't conduct much heat towards your hand - so that kind of simple cage is a win-win all over really.

We can start the discussion from possible many angles indeed... let alone the customary DOF or use of slower glass and strictly going from a low light perspective?
 

@BTM_Pix Thanks!
Looking forward to the feature announcement of the pro version.
I am hoping there will be the ability to correlate and link the zoom motor value with the focus motor value so  there is some type of auto framing mode ( or Zolly mode).

@BTM_Pix very impressive!  I have Nucleus M Follow focus and a GH5 or URSA Mini Pro 4.6k both are adapting b4 lenses with the follow focus.  Will I be able to use the first less expensive version or will I want to wait and purchase the more expensive more advanced 2nd version?
Thanks!  Mark 

I bet so too but, I've just received from CDA TEK support on the now released v6.9.6 update a few days ago, so I guess we're pretty safe with our Irish supplier :- )

DEVELOPMENT UPDATE
AFX has five user selectable focus transition modes. When the transition mode is set to Off, no transition is applied and the AFX snaps immediately to the new focus point.
When the mode is set to 1,2 or 3 then an increasing preset length of transition is applied from the current focus point to the new focus point.
The final mode is called Natural and applies a transition that is based upon the distance between the current and new focus points meaning that the greater the distance the longer the transition.
Focus transition mode is available in both AF-S and AF-C modes.
 

There will be a development announcement of it before the pre-order begins for the AFX so people can see which one of them - if any - will be more suitable for their use.
Price and lead time is the benefit of the AFX as for some people the combination of additional focus tools it brings to the Pocket cameras might actually be all that they need and the second unit will be a couple of months behind.
It is very, very different and whilst it is initially for the Pocket cameras it is a more universal product.
As I say, both will be known before any pre-orders happen for the AFX so it will be easier to evaluate for individuals then before any commitments are made.
 

Some gorgeous shots by Note.
This camera is the most interesting of all the new releases imho, am bored of the overheating mess that is Canon, and the disappointingly video like images of the A7s3. 

On several occasions I have indicated that he will have to make a short documentary about this defective product, a product of the protection policies that Canon has with its line of film cameras. I see it difficult for Canon to apologize, since there is an army of complacent (or paid) youtubers and this audiovisual piece would remain for posterity, reminding us that we must be critical as consumers and showing how fanaticism for brands allows this type of bad practices. A short documentary that serves as an audiovisual memory.

Thanks
Yes but it has a spread so it depends on distance to subject.
Again, depending on subject distance and the focal length and aperture, you can grab focus using AF-S by aiming the camera (or turning the unit if you prefer) to the subject at the edge of frame and there should be enough latitude for it to be in focus.
It is all situational though so, in general, it should be considered centre zone only with the additional option to grab and lock focus of an edge subject or use the thumbstick to manually tune focus.
Its a set of additional tools rather than the magic bullet but as I've mentioned there are actually two AF units coming and the second one is very different both in terms of functionality and certainly in price.
 

So, with all this talk about 8k RAW, it's got me thinking, and I'm contemplating going back to 1080p.
I've been thinking about all these cameras with high resolutions and ferocious data rates, and why they don't implement higher bitrates and bit-depths on the lower resolution modes.  
Noam Kroll just shot a low budget feature in 2K Prores HQ on his Alexa Classic.  In 4:3 no less!  https://noamkroll.com/playing-against-filmmaking-trends-on-our-feature-with-arri-alexa-classic-2k-prores-hq-43-aspect-ratio/
His pipeline was RAW -> Prores HQ -> storage.  Prores HQ in 1080 is around 176Mbps, is All-I, and is 10-bit.  It sounds lovely.  Uncompressed 1080 10-bit is a whopping 1490Mbps, so the 176Mbps of HQ is quite a saving of data rates.  
But what do I actually want?
So I made a list:
I want more bit-depth than 10-bit
10-bit is fine if you're on a controlled set or have time to get your WB broadly right in camera, but for some of the horrendous situations I find myself in, having more bit-depth would help (remember how with RAW you can WB in post - well, bit depth is what enables that) I want high bit-rates for a good quality image
A good quality image means that every portion of the screen gets a decent amount of data, so this is about bit-rate.  It's not about resolution, because a 100Mbps 4K file will still have half the data available for each square cm of the screen than a 200Mbps 1080 file I want files that are easy to edit in post
It doesn't matter if my 8K smartphone files are only 100Mbps, the computer still has to decode, process, display, and encode 16 times as many pixels as 1080 So, do I want 1080p RAW?
Yes, and no.  RAW has great bit-depth, much larger bit-rates than I care for, but also isn't the best that 1080 can get because it is lower resolution after debayering.  Do I want 2.5K RAW?  Maybe.  Problem is that RAW and IBIS are very rarely found together.  What I really want is some kind of compressed, but not too compressed, intermediary file.  
What I really want is 1080 Prores 4444 (which is 264Mbps) or Prores 4444 XQ (which is 396Mbps), because these are 12-bit.  12-bit would do me very nicely.
So, what do we get from the manufacturers?  We get ridiculous bitrates on the higher resolutions, and paltry token efforts on the lower ones.  My XC10 is a classic case - 305Mbps 4K but 35Mbps 1080p.  The 4K has 2.5 times the amount of data per pixel than the 1080p, and 10 times the amount of data per square cm of screen.
But I have a GH5, which is one of the exceptions, as Panasonic went for the jugular on the lower resolution modes as well as the higher ones, and so I'm down to the three "best" modes that will work on a UHS-I SD card:
5K 4:3 200Mbps Long-GOP h265 4K 16:9 150Mbps Long-GOP h264 1080p 16:9 200Mbps All-I h264 So I shot a test.  That test showed me that the 5K mode is far superior, even on a 1080p timeline, but uploaded to YT is a different story.  Considering I have partnered with YT for distribution share my videos on YT, that's what my friends and family end up seeing.
This lead me to the question about what is actually visible after it's been minced by YT?
Luckily I had done a previous test where I took an 8K RAW file, and rendered out various resolution Prores HQ intermediaries, then exported each of them from a 4K timeline.  That video is here:
So, I downloaded the above video in 4K, 2K, and 1080p resolutions, took screen grabs, and put them side-by-side for comparison.  Here they are - you're welcome.



So, what can I see in these images?
The 4K download is better than the 2K, which is better than the 1080p.  This is hardly news, each of these is more than double the bit-rate of the next one and they're all using the same compression algorithm, that's how mathematics works. Watching in 4K each lower resolution is subtly worse than the previous, except for 1.2k (720p) which is way worse.  That's to be expected, 2k - 1.2k is a bigger percentage drop than the other resolutions.  However, things don't get "bad" until in the 2.5k - 1.2k range, depending on your tolerance for IQ. Moving to the other extreme, watching in 1080 they are all very similar, except for the 1.2k version, which is interesting. Some of these grabs also have a lower resolution one looking better than the higher one next to it.  That's not an accident on my part (I checked), it really is like that.  As the original video has the resolutions all in sequence in the one video, I suspect that the frame I chose was differing distances from the previous keyframe in the stream, so that will introduce some variation. So, what does this mean?
Well, firstly, no point shooting in 8K RAW if your viewers are watching in 1080p on YT.  I doubt that's news to anyone, but maybe it is to some R5 pre-orders lol.
More importantly, if your audience is watching in 1080 then they're not going to notice if you used 2K intermediaries or 3.2k ones.
How can we apply this to our situations?
This is more complex.  In this pipeline we had 8K RAW -> X Prores -> timeline.  This meant that the Prores was by far the weakest link, and Prores HQ is pretty high-bitrate compared to most consumer formats.  1080 Prores HQ is 176Mbps, but UHD Prores HQ is 707Mbps.  I don't know of any cameras that shoot h264 in anything even approaching those data rates for those resolutions, so good luck with that.  
If you're shooting 4K 100Mbps h264 then that's the same bitrate per square pixel of screen as 1.4K Prores HQ, which is pretty darn close to that 1.2k that looks awful in all the above.  
Obviously if your viewers are watching in 4K then it's worth shooting in the highest bit-rate you can find.
What does this mean for me?  Not sure yet, I need to do more tests on the GH5 modes, and I need to think more about things like tracking and stabilisation which can use extra resolution in the edit.
But I won't rule out going back to 1080p.

Once there is an USRA Min Broadcast with a 6k RGB sensor using the same sensor tech as the BM12k, the both super 16 and b4 cinema lenses will be back in fashion.  
The super 16 lens is not the problem,  it is having camera that can make these lenses shine.
I had a GH1 with a vintage C-mount 25mm f0.95 and in video mode it look pretty good but in photo mode it look like a still frame from a movie.
Anyways, tube mics where kind pushed to the side by solid state mics in the 70’s as there were cleaner to analog tape then with digital audio recording the tube mics (and tube compressor) became in fashion again an doubled and quadrupled in price overtime.
Once Blackmagic’s RGB sensor tech as a lower price point and compatible with super 16 resolution wise, I’m sure it will be popular option for specific film genres like horror, documentaries and action scenes.