Behold, URSA. URSA starts off by taking the 4K global Super35mm sensor and processor out of the Production 4K camera and putting it into a larger housing. Format and image wise URSA can do all of the same things you expect from the Production camera. ProRes and RAW 4K are recorded internally, no outboard recorder necessary. 12-stops of HDR and a global shutter round off the image parameter list. Video is recorded onto CFast cards. Whats new is the housing. URSA is in a more familiar shoulder mount camera body (although it looks like an actual shoulder pad will have to come from 3rd parties). The body has 2 XLR inputs, SDI output, and timecode in and out. It even has a headphone jack. Although it doesn’t ship with a eye level viewfinder it does include 3 separate LCD screens. The primary monitor is a ten inch (yes 10”) flip out LCD screen that is 1080p resolution. On the left side of the camera you’ll find a 5” touch LCD for navigating camera settings. On the right side you’ll find another 5” LCD you’ll find read outs of all your key setting, a histogram, focus assist features, and audio meters.

read more at Blackmagic Introduces Their First “Ready to Shoot” Camera, URSA | News from the NW Digital Cinema Dealer (http://provideoandtape.com/blog/?p=1071)

We're taking URSA pre-orders now. We have a very special offer for those who get their orders in early. epetrie@provideoandtape.com

Are you just advertising, or are you looking for some real life comment on the camera ?

I saw this at NAB, it's a monster. As for the shoulder pad, even with it, how will you hold the camera? Your right hand traditionally goes onto the zoom rocker on an eng lens, but these lenses don't have anything to hold. If you set up a cage or handles for this beast, you'll be looking at more than 30lbs of gear on your right shoulder...correct?

Sure not a "game changer" for me. I'm not sure who it's aimed at, but it sure as heck isn't me.

Whenever you see a headline with a question mark at the end, the answer is almost always a "no".

I saw this at NAB, it's a monster. As for the shoulder pad, even with it, how will you hold the camera? Your right hand traditionally goes onto the zoom rocker on an eng lens, but these lenses don't have anything to hold. If you set up a cage or handles for this beast, you'll be looking at more than 30lbs of gear on your right shoulder...correct?

The Fujinon Alura 18-80mm weighs in at about 10 lbs, you need a certain amount of weight to balance that. It also depends how the camera weight is distributed, I gather with the URSA it's at the back and it does balance the cine lenses quite well with a V lock battery fitted. It's something to be tried out, but I don't think it's a single person, fly on the wall documentary camera.

In 35mm weight terms it's not that bad, it's not too far off a 35mm Aaton. Although, it seems rather over featured in screens.

Well, they certainly went for it. I am happy to see shoulder-mount, XLRs, and a handle. Personally I don't mind heavy, although I can certainly understand why many might.

My burning question, still: where are the internal NDs? Doc shooters really, really need them, and more of us are using s35 all the time, especially those upgrading from the DSLR crowd, so the B4 model won't do.

Ergonomically I prefer the way that the AJA Cion looks, but again with the filters, for heaven's sake.

Actually, I'm glad that these guys are taking so long to get it right, because I want to be able to drive my used F3 into the ground over the next 5 years without having to shell out all my income.

The intent of the post is both advertising and having an engaging and honest discussion of the product. Those don't have to be mutually exclusive.

I do agree that it will take bit of kitting to fit well on the shoulder. I don't think it will take any more then 3 pieces though, certainly not an awkward "cage" system like the Production 4K camera.

It's certainly not perfect but it appeals to me far more then their box camera designs. I'm very interred to see how users respond to the 10" screen. My knee-jerk reaction is that it would be really annoying, but people used to say the same thing about flip out LCDs on ENG cameras.

The lack of NDs on both this and the AJA is a killer. Such an essential tool. A lot of people buying $6,000 cameras are on-man-bands. They don't have first A.C.s standing right next to them with the filter collection standing by.

+1 (or more) on the ND filters.I use a 6-stopper on the BMCC anytime I go outdoors in the AZ sun. And a focusing cloth over my head like a view camera so I can see anything on the screen. Would have liked to take the URSA out in the Las Vegas sun to see if you could really see anything on the screens. I sort of doubt it.

I also nearly fell over when I checked the prices on the CFast cards! Made SSD's look dirt cheap. It wouldn't be hard to spend more for a few cards than the price of the camera.

All that said, they do seem to have crammed a lot of function into a box with a pretty attractive price point.

My first reaction to this camera was with respect to the monitor. Why on earth a 10 inch flip out monitor ? Especially if it has the same mirror finish that the other Black Magic lcds have.

The whole thing seemed like an exercise in designing something different, but not necessarily something you would really shoot with.

On top of that, at least in watching one of Dan May's interviews (President of Black Magic Design), there seems to be a lot of things they are planning to add (and advertising) that won't be there when the camera ships. We Black Magic Cinema Camera buyers are well aware of that trap. Black Magic keeps saying they are going to fix things on our rigs, then they bring out this whole new development project that has a bunch things yet to add, and then claim they couldn't work on our issues because they were working on this new set of equipment. Watch out next year when all of the URSA features have not been added as promised, and yet they add another bunch of products.

IMO in the next year you are going to see CFast cards drop like a rock in price as production is ramped up. CFast has traditionally been used in the industrial setting thus the high prices from being a niche market.

We Black Magic Cinema Camera buyers are well aware of that trap.

You will probably get one additional sensor option: the 2.5K sensor from the original BMCC. After that, newer sensors will only be available in the camera that Blackmagic announces at NAB 2015.

Maybe there will be a good business selling dark cloths for the URSA. I bet we could velcro them onto the frame of the display

+1 on a reseller getting on DVinfo and talking about what they sell...

URSA means "bear".

As in, "This camera is a bear". Weighs 16 pounds?

Time for some of you guys to hit the gym. Build those arms up!

More relevant image of URSA being used outdoors in Arizona

I don't think it will be much of a game changer if they don't quickly fix their rapidly declining credibility.

2.5K owners are screaming for promised fixes in firmware. The 'black sun' effect hasn't been fixed on the 2.5k and they have delivered the latest Ultra HD (I won't call it 4k as it isn't) camera with what? The SAME problem!!! That's appalling IMHO.

If they can't fix the problem on the 2.5 what are they going to do for the current "4K" as it's currently referred to. Or for that matter future products that will be using the same sensor. Who knows? BM seem to be more concerned about bringing out cameras faster than fixing the kit they have already released to their poor long suffering customer base. From my POV this seems like a very short sighted approach to developing and building a good relationship with ones client base.

Seriously, could you live with this problem? It's not just the sun, car and street lights. Look at the water reflections. You need more than black magic in post to fix it!

Time will tell I guess.

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

"Time for some of you guys to hit the gym. Build those arms up! "

If the camera is correctly balanced there should be little stain on your arms. I remember the first time I tried a Panaflex set up for hand held, perfect balance, no strain on your arms. Squats would be good though for those slow rising shots.

Yes Brian, all the talk about the URSA being some sort of behemoth at 16 lbs is generating a few wry smiles from those who spent day in and out with at least twice that weight on their shoulder. Certainly a Platinum with Primos was formidable, and even in the digital era, you guys are glad you never had to shlep a Genesis or F35 with the SR recorder on the back (we used to call the former the Genocide for obvious reasons). By the way--you mentioned the Alura 18-80 in this thread...interesting choice as that is not considered a handheld lens (as oppposed to the Alura 15.5-45 and 30-80, at half the weight). I did straddle one of my poor operators with the 18-80 in a handheld configuration once and it wasn't pretty.

It has become increasingly rare to see cameras designed to actually balance properly on the shoulder these days. I was always a stickler about balancing the load fore and aft which often took some doing. The sliding shoulder pad and viewfinder assemblies on the Arri Amira are quite commendable in this regard. It does seem like there was some thought put into the Ursa to accommodate handheld, by putting the weight towards the rear, but not having a supplied articulating viewfinder solution is something that continues to baffle me with so many modern camera introductions (the Canon C series is a perfect example).

I had some interest in the Ursa until I played with it at NAB. It didn't speak to me, the specs didn't impress and there is that less-than-spectacular track record.

Yes, I wouldn't really pick it for handheld work, the Lightweight zooms are much more sensible at approx 5 to 6lbs. Although, primes make life easier at just over 2 lbs each (unlikely you'd use Master primes at approx 5lb on this camera).

In the end, I suspect many will be using stills lenses on the URSA.

If people are completely tired of having access to super-sensitive full-4K-capable cameras in reasonable sizes using affordable media, then yes, this will surely change that game.

I'm not sure of the data requirements, but being capable of compressed CinemaDNG 4k RAW at 60p will probably rule out the cheaper cards. A RED 16 GB Compact Flash is currently $300.

<I don't think it will be much of a game changer if they don't quickly fix their rapidly declining credibility. >

This is crucial imho. And that means vastly stepping up their customer support and delivering fixes for the products they already sold. If BMD is unable to do that, they will likely lose those customers.

Black Magic Designs has really shaken up the market with all their advanced offerings at affordable price points, but for me, I would rather pony up a few more grand for a rock solid product that I can trust, than save a couple of grand and have to deal with trouble.

Time will tell. I think a lot of folks will be waiting to see how URSA performs when delivered - me included.

Why are we talking about the BMD URSA instead of the AJA CION?

Because BMD is a marketing company that produces cameras and gear that eventually make their way to market, historically in a BETA form whereas AJA delivers usable gear from the get-go but can't market their way out of a paper bag.

This is crucial imho. And that means vastly stepping up their customer support and delivering fixes for the products they already sold. If BMD is unable to do that, they will likely lose those customers.

I disagree, respectfully. There seems to be a constant influx of fanboys who only see the newest product offerings and aren't familiar with the back catalog of issues and lack of support.

Sort of like a ten year old boy who discovers "down there" and thinks he's the first person EVER.

My view is that the fanboys are pretty up on a lot of the boards.
They don't have much money, so when the plunk down $3K, they do quite a bit of research.
That includes looking at all the comments from their peers.
So, I think it will harm BMD - and a $7K purchase is a lot of dough for most people.

Regarding the other statement, we are talking about URSA because that is what the thread is about.
I could have brought up CION, and have on other posts, but this was about BMD and URSA.

BMD marketing is more about affordability, sure they spend more on marketing than AJA, but if you waste money on a product, the word will be to PASS on even an affordable purchase.

As always YMMV :-D

I wouldn't call it a game changer by itself, but evidence of the changing game perhaps? As mentioned, there's a couple of other very nice looking cameras in roughly the same neighbourhood of price and 4k coming along.

(I really want someone to knock Sony off its cheap high-speed perch, just so the price comes down a bit)

I think it is one of the ugliest looking cameras I have seen in quite some time (excluding the Bolex of course - that one takes the cake). In a way it reminds me a lot of the sort of "gamer" mice and keyboards you find at the computer department of stores. All plastic and flash to suck the kids in, because it looks so awesome and badass.

IMO the giant monitor pretty much precludes its use for shoulder mounted applications. Not to mention the weight. The fact that shoulder mounted cameras in the "old days" weighed a ton is irrelevant - we do not live in the "old days" now. Cameras should be moving forwards, not backwards.

Actually, if you've never had the opportunity to put a properly balanced but "heavy" camera on your shoulder, you might find that the lessons of the past are worth paying attention to. It has long been a given that it's better to have a more balanced camera on the shoulder if it means a few extra pounds vs a front heavy and lighter camera. There is a sweet spot of camera mass that adds to the stability of a handheld camera--it can actually be less fatiguing to operate in the long run. Many agree that a properly balanced 25 lb camera is far better than a 5 lb camera perched on the wrist or 10lbs of front-heavy mass cantilevered off the shoulder.

Moore's law doesn't apply to physics, optics or the interface with the human body. Just because camera imaging technology is jumping ahead in leaps and bounds doesn't mean everything around it is starting from scratch. A user who has come up on DSLR rigs would probably be blown away at how solid and stable a 20 yr old Aaton or Betacam feels.

Agreed, Charles. Not that I want a 16+ lb. camera on my shoulder, but if it's well balanced, I'd prefer that to an EX3. They're the worst cameras to hand hold. An F800 is heavy, but it balances well on the shoulder.

I come from the old 3/4" videotape days, where we would walk around with 45 lbs of gear on both our shoulders. I would have been giddy if you told me we'd one day have 16-20 lb cameras available, that didn't need a separate recorder deck. That's also why even today I don't like any kind of external recorders on my cameras.

Function can drive the shape of a camera.

Regarding the Bolex H16, it's a camera that has survived and developed since the 1930s and is still in use today. It's layout is based on the requirement for 2 x 100ft 16mm daylight loading spools (feed & take up) and having a spring motor. It survived by evolving and being versatile (variable frame rates, single frames, dissolves in camera and you can fit an external electric motor), at a reasonable cost. It's a bit of a camel, because of what it can do and where you can go with it. The camera was being used on major TV dramas into the early 2000s, but you can see its 1930s roots. It seems to also feature in a number of ads etc, so I guess it's become a classic. http://www.filmcentre.co.uk/images/cam/Bolex_RX4_H16.jpg

Other approaches come if you only use electric motors. http://www.christies.com/lotfinderimages/d48134/d4813449r.jpg http://www.christies.com/lotfinderimages/d20488/d2048811r.jpg Both of these 1950s camera were designed with a mirror shutter reflex viewfinder, with the Bolex a reflex viewfinder was an add on. All these designs have to allow for those 2 16mm film spools.

Unfortunately, there does seem to be a tendency for modern cameras to become front heavy when rigged for shooting, This isn't helped by fitting a matte box and follow focus together with the increased weight of cine lenses. As Charles says, Moore's law doesn't apply to the optics, however, with the current use of electronic V/F instead of an optical V/F there is little excuse for designing the shoulder pad right at the back of the camera. The Amira's design addresses this issue with its arrangement: http://provideocoalition.com/images/made/images/uploads/AMIRA_Picture_1_640_404.jpg

The subject of design is a bit of a non starter really, on a purely aesthetic level. Ergonomics, sure. But so many cameras these days above a certain threshold just look like a differently shaped brick with plugs and a lens.
The Ursa is a bit reminiscent of a "sports" PC case I suppose, but someone buys those things. The BMCC looked vaguely like an Apple-ish thing. So I guess they're spreading it around a bit.
If I had my way everything would look like it was designed in the 40s, 50s and 60s, but I guess that wouldn't fly either. I don't envy today's industrial designers trying to be interesting and popular at the same time.

No reason why you can't pimp your own camera, using one of the nicest Betacam bodies for hand held work. Bodies for parts are pretty cheap.

The Hyper 35mm Camera. 5DmkII in a Sony Betacam body | Philip Bloom (http://philipbloom.net/2009/10/22/the-hyper-35mm-camera-5dmkii-in-a-sony-betacam-body/)

I was personally impressed with all the features of this camera, and I like its design, especially the ability to upgrade the sensor. As for complaining about having a too big 10" 1080 resolution screen along with two 5" screens... Really? It's like complaining that your pocket is too small to fit all your stacks of money.
If you don't use one of the screens, turn it off. You can always put less things in a too big bag, but you can never put more things in a too small bag...
This camera is designed to be used with a crew, and mostly on a tripod. Maybe it is not perfectly designed for such, but a professional crew would quickly adapt to all its little design quirks, and if its image and sound are great, who cares if the sound guy has to move a bit when the camera is panned?
If this was a bit smaller and lot lighter, I would happily adapt all its design quirks into my run and gun style.
For the price, if it works flawlessly and actually gets delivered, why wouldn't this become an industry standard for medium budget projects?
If they produce a complimentary run and gun version of this camera, iron out all the wrinkles that are unavoidable on the cutting edge of innovation, and improve their customer support, I would only be too happy to give them both my money and my loyalty.

This camera is designed to be used with a crew, and mostly on a tripod. Maybe it is not perfectly designed for such, but a professional crew would quickly adapt to all its little design quirks, and if its image and sound are great, who cares if the sound guy has to move a bit when the camera is panned?

Actually, I have seen a Sony F55 setup that used 3 displays, and only had a single operator (there was an AC to help with the jib, but she was not looking at the screens). Now, this may have been a bit specialized, but I still like the idea of my settings being on a separate display - no more (or at least fewer) annoying overlays :)

No reason why you can't pimp your own camera, using one of the nicest Betacam bodies for hand held work. Bodies for parts are pretty cheap.

The Hyper 35mm Camera. 5DmkII in a Sony Betacam body | Philip Bloom (http://philipbloom.net/2009/10/22/the-hyper-35mm-camera-5dmkii-in-a-sony-betacam-body/)

That's pretty cool. You do hear a lot of fondness for the Sonys of yore. It's like gas shocks and fuel injection in the ol Mustang. I wonder if one day we might see recastings in fibreglass with whatever innards you like (could be pushing the car thing too far here)

That's a tad whimsical, along with the Ergocine Lion which mimics the shape of the Aaton mag, sticking a big chunk of wood behind the camera.

The reality is that the Betacam form factor was ergonomic, but not well suited for production work. Everything was molded and cast into a gentle curve, there were virtually no flat surfaces. One 1/4"-20 mount at the front of the handle (and the handle wasn't flat, good luck mounting things to that). Attaching accessories was like trying to use a suction cup cel phone holder on the dash of a modern car--you can't find a flat part.

The solution, to paraphrase Steven, is to move forwards while looking backwards. Keep the ideas that work (a long, lowslung camera mass that sits on the shoulder "like a cat") and bring them forwards in flexible ways. My vision: the only piece that still has to be physically mated is the optics to the sensor, so start with that as a module and offset the rest of the system (processor/record module/IO module/viewing/battery) as needed. Gimbals and tight spaces (cars), use a long umbilical to separate the guts out and away. Handheld, use a short umbilical and a sliding baseplate to create a completely balanced assembly. Studio mode, push it all together and build it out. Things snap together quickly and easily, and you only use the pieces you need. A "power user" may need it all, a hobbyist can buy into the less expensive modules (HDMI vs HD-SDI for instance) and work their way up. And of course, when it's modular, the different components (sensor module) can be upgraded more easily.

But, that's just me.

I didn't get a chance to put the URSA on my shoulder at the show, but it would have been somewhat pointless without a viewfinder anyway. But, I'll stick the idea that if it sits perfectly balanced, it is going to feel better than a front heavy camera that weighs half as much.

What turned me off the camera for good was those touch screen menus. Not nearly responsible enough for me.

Fitting accessories was a problem on the Betacams. The lightweight support bars seemed to be the first thing to come out, although at that time you wouldn't have fitted a monitor onto the camera. Panavision did a make over with the F900, it wasn't the lightest camera, but you could fit quite a few accessories.

It is more than 16 pounds, there is the weight of the lens, as well as the battery.

Balanced on your shoulder the screen would literally be directly in front of your face, so it would be useless.

Obviously the total payload is more than 16 lbs. The only way to compare camera weights has always been body only. Otherwise there is no baseline.

The flip out screen is not intended to be used for handheld work. Blackmagic is assuming, like many other manufacturers, that third party viewfinders will be used for that. The flip out screen is for conventional shooting.

Actually, if you've never had the opportunity to put a properly balanced but "heavy" camera on your shoulder, you might find that the lessons of the past are worth paying attention to. It has long been a given that it's better to have a more balanced camera on the shoulder if it means a few extra pounds vs a front heavy and lighter camera. There is a sweet spot of camera mass that adds to the stability of a handheld camera--it can actually be less fatiguing to operate in the long run. Many agree that a properly balanced 25 lb camera is far better than a 5 lb camera perched on the wrist or 10lbs of front-heavy mass cantilevered off the shoulder.

Moore's law doesn't apply to physics, optics or the interface with the human body. Just because camera imaging technology is jumping ahead in leaps and bounds doesn't mean everything around it is starting from scratch. A user who has come up on DSLR rigs would probably be blown away at how solid and stable a 20 yr old Aaton or Betacam feels.

Well said, Charles. I agree completely.

No doubt that's true for certain types of shooting. But you're also assuming you can leave the camera on your shoulder the entire time you are shooting. Try sticking a 25 lb camera above your head and hold it there for a few minutes. Or shoot with a 25 lb camera on a monopod. I'd much rather have my C300 in that situation.

As a documentary-style shooter that travels a lot, there is no way I'd return to the shoulder-mount camera. It is simply less nimble in the field and difficult to get on and off planes with. My camera goes under the seat in it's case, a necessity in my book. The shot variety I can get with a small camera far exceeds a shoulder mount camera.

Different strokes for different folks.

I don't think the URSA is aimed at that sort of operation, although you could carry it on as hand baggage in the traditional ENG camera style. In a way, the C300 is closer to the Bolex mentioned earlier, than the shoulder mounted cameras. It really depends on the type of productions you're working on and the size of your crew.

Yes, it is clearly designed to be a production camera. I would imagine for someone who is doing docs that oscillate between run and gun and produced material that the BM Production 4k camera with EF lenses would make a great B camera, perfect for the run and gun aspect.

A MORE perfect scenario is the one I detailed above, where a camera head as small as the Production camera (but better designed) can be built out in a modular fashion when the need arises. Maybe someone will make that.