A7rii vs ursa mini

[Damphousse]

 

Ed, and if you'd still shoot with some 5-7 years old camera? Imagine, no GH4, no NX1, no a7S, you see what I mean.

The last year year and a half saw dramatic progress in hybrid video, but that rate of change is going to slow markedly.  Look what happened with Canon and stills.  As someone else stated, I picked up a t3i in 2013 for a pittance.  I could probably sell it for the same price I paid for it.  There are newer cameras that cost four times the price but they aren't four times better... as far as stills.

People can chase specs but really cameras are beginning to check off all the necessary boxes for me.  A 4.6k S35 raw camera with good color science and DR pretty much does it for me.  The size of the URSA mini is a bit big.  The URSA mini is not discrete.  It also doesn't do stills.  So it won't work for certain applications where an A7RII will shine.  Different horses for different courses.  But if someone said I just need a studio setup or dedicated video camera that doesn't require stealth then I would think the URSA mini is a better choice... assuming you don't mind grading (another caveat).

I like some of these 4k cameras because they have so much detail and all but eliminate moire/aliasing.  But I still just can't let my BMPCC go because it has such a robust codec, DR, and great color science.

[Emanuel]

I don't think anyone will know how much the camera will lose in 6 months.

It's all speculation.

But to play it safe, just rent the camera for like $100 and do some tests and see if it's your next best thing.

I regret buying the a7s very much - I used it maybe 3 times.  I should sell it.  The NX1 - I like it - but it has kind of a crappy magenta digital feel to it for stills and video - the h265 encoding is a pain in the butt - I kind of regret it.

 

so that's like $4500 right there in regreted purchases.  I should have just been more frugal with it all.

I still use the nx1 for scouting because it's so light - and I guess I should sell that a7s when I still can.

Lightweight is a gift indeed... ; )

How about the blackmagic micro then - 1000 plus a small rig and tiny smallhd monitor and you are up and running with global shutter and probably more natural skintones than possible with the a7r II.  

 

Everyone loves to rush things.

And yes I shoot a ton with the sony f35 which is from 2008.  I own three of them.

And I used to shoot a lot with the Arri SRII which is from the 90s I think. Age doesn't matter.  And I use tungsten fresnel lighting a lot if I can over HMI because of how it wraps around the face. 

Horses for courses. Film and digital have no much in common to speak frankly. As far as technology concerns. Other than that, both are able to produce art... : D

Age doesn't matter and really, a camera doesn't lose ability because there's a new cousin nearby.

But, if the whole world is changing to laptops, there's no much sense to deny we are stubborn enough convincing ourselves that old typewriter of good old days is better to match our actual needs ; )

[Emanuel]

 

Last but not least, I've never shared the enthusiasm of these forums on that ugly pink mode (I concur Ed, I am sorry guys) from the technology leader of these greedy lovely times we live on, based on new releases each 6 months when there's a new processor or sensor around the corner. Good-old-times were much more calm waters as matter of fact, but they are gone now :-)