Raafi Rivero

Being that there is such a lack of info online about this camera, I figured that I would see what I could do to provide info for those interested. I have no problem trying out Chinese manufacturing in general and have had good results overall.
The video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxebYAeneaA
First impressions with the Kinefinity KineMini after using DSLRs for professional work for ~6 years:
Bought this for shooting anamorphic, which it is brilliant at, but I'm really liking what this might offer for commercial projects. The color latitude on this feels incredible. Dynamic range seems good, I don't really care to scientifically test it, but being able to control the highlights in camera is a nice professional feature. 4k is remarkably clear. 1080p slow motion, not so much. Not sure why, but I get a lot of RGB mud in the shadows if you want to be picky on the image. It may be Cineform, I will have to test a few options. I really enjoy the development-type workflow with raw. File sizes are large, but really not that much worse than uncompressed 5D raw. Although it is much heavier (considering all accessories) than a DSLR setup, it's completely possible to run and gun and not that hard to get used to. I often cheated with exposure on a DSLR- using shutter angle instead of using a Vari-ND filter like you're supposed to. That doesn't seem to work with this camera, as a low shutter angle feels extremely video-ish for whatever reason. People think you're filming a movie, not taking pictures (this can be a good or bad thing) Can't wait to get the new speed booster for this thing. Super 35mm is OK, but I am used to depending upon my 35mm Zeiss (no longer a wide on s35) and 100mm Zeiss (far too telephoto for most of my shooting)
 
 
 

​I own a small set of lights, but I'm speaking more from the perspective of an indie filmmaker than as someone doing gigs for clients. With most jobs, you budget to rent or use lights (and depending on the budget, a nicer camera, lenses, etc.). Pass it on to the client. Your task is to create a buttery-smooth corporate image, and that often requires a higher level of ordnance than most of us have in our kits.  But with an indie film you're up to your own devices and there's more incentive to bring the total cost of production down because there's even less of a backstop financially. Doing a 300 ft. cable run to light up the facade of some building in the deep background of your shot vs being able to crank the ISO and only light your foreground subjects is a huge financial (gear + time + manpower!) advantage. I never suggested that we would work completely without lights, but the promise of low-light capability is that you can do less lighting, and less of the most costly type of lighting.

​I own a small set of lights, but I'm speaking more from the perspective of an indie filmmaker than as someone doing gigs for clients. With most jobs, you budget to rent or use lights (and depending on the budget, a nicer camera, lenses, etc.). Pass it on to the client. Your task is to create a buttery-smooth corporate image, and that often requires a higher level of ordnance than most of us have in our kits.  But with an indie film you're up to your own devices and there's more incentive to bring the total cost of production down because there's even less of a backstop financially. Doing a 300 ft. cable run to light up the facade of some building in the deep background of your shot vs being able to crank the ISO and only light your foreground subjects is a huge financial (gear + time + manpower!) advantage. I never suggested that we would work completely without lights, but the promise of low-light capability is that you can do less lighting, and less of the most costly type of lighting.

Low-light ability is fuel for a low-budget production. We absolutely must learn the low-light capabilities of the Ursa Mini before jumping in. But, to me, it's worth paying the extra $2k for the 4.6k sensor, no matter what. That regular-old 4k sensor isn't worth the trouble. That said, the one sample video didn't look that bad in the couple of darker scenes.
Not as worried about the ND thing -- they would have been a huge bonus, of course -- but if you're shooting with a matte box you can always drop in filters. And if you're shooting without a rig and not swapping lenses too much then use vari-ND filters. I have a couple 77mm ones and use step-up rings in case they don't fit whatever lens I'm using at the moment. It does slow you down to unscrew and screw them on to different lenses, but it's not a deal-breaker. 
CFast media is a real bummer, though I suspect prices will come down soon enough.
 
 

​+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.....
 
 
 

Am in perverted in hoping the URSA Mini 4.6K will *not* blow our minds away with image quality and performance? As then it will make it easier for me to resist spending a huge sum of money! lol

Ugly, ugly post. Here's a clean table:

​Haha. Get a grip, mate.

I didn't say the DoP's work was shit. I said the "C300 MKII looks shit" - the colours, the motion-cadence, the highlight roll-off. Don't put words in my mouth. You're trying to teach me a lesson in respect by disrespecting me? How sophisticated and wise of you. Get off your moral high-horse.
And, well, hmmm, I dunno, "J.F.R", but I like to consider myself a "professional". Yeah, I didn't go to filmschool, nor am I apart of any cinematography society, but I think my portfolio in my signature speaks for itself. Or, perhaps you're right and all those famous musicians and their management teams are wrong for hiring me - cause, I mean, after all, according to you, I'm a "non working pro" - just an "enthusiast" that knows nothing, right?
Move along.

Well said. That, to me, is the key with Blackmagic. It just passes the eye test right off the bat. FS7 stuff always seems like it needs to get dressed up to look like cinema. Blackmagic stuff just is. The Kinefinity footage has a similar feel to me: right off the bat it feels movie-like. With the total cost of media, batteries etc I wonder which is a better overall value between Kine and the Ursa Mini.