Blackmagic has two new 4K cameras at NAB - "URSA" & "Studio Cam"

[Rakesh Malik]

Liquid cooling probably also allows BMD to take advantage of cooling solutions for personal computers which due to the economies of scale, are quite inexpensive relative to their quality and robustness.

[Brian Drysdale]

PVC interview Dan May from Blackmagic about the camera.

PVC at NAB 2014 - Blackmagic's URSA on Vimeo

[Phil Goetz]

Pre-order the URSA today! We have four handy configurations.


Blackmagic Design URSA EF Upgradable 4K (Pre-Order)


Blackmagic Design URSA PL Upgradable 4K (Pre-Order)


Blackmagic Design URSA Broadcast 4K (Pre-Order)


Blackmagic Design URSA HDMI 4K Recorder (Pre-Order)

[Mat Thompson]

This is an interesting but baffling camera. I didn't think I could be put off a camera by the weight but 7.5kgs without an evf or battery!? Wow! - 3 screens you' have to' carry seems a bit ott. And where are those other flavours of prores?

I have to say though this is a huge amount of camera for the money...literally!

[Warren Kawamoto]

I didn't know anything about Ursa when I walked into the BM booth at NAB. Without looking at the specs, two things stood out for me. First, this camera is huge! It's about 1.5 times the size of a standard bread loaf. Massive. Second, why were the audio monitor meters on the right side of the camera? A shooter won't be able to monitor audio, unless another meter is included in the lcd?

[Chris Barcellos]

Warren:

Their idea is that it will actually be a for a sound guy to control sound levels without interfering with shooter. I think the two side monitors can view the same thing, but not certain. Most of us current BM customers blew a gasket when BM suddenly produced these at NAB, when they haven't fixed the issues with the first four cameras.

[Galen Rath]

BM had best have deep pockets if these new big investments don't sell. Will be interesting to see if there is a price reduction in the next 12 months due to slow sales.

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

Their idea is that it will actually be a for a sound guy to control sound levels without interfering with shooter. I think the two side monitors can view the same thing, but not certain.

This makes me think that perhaps BMD doesn't understand their customer base. Do they really think it's the best idea to design a camera that's geared toward running it with a crew (cam op, focus puller and audio tech)? I would think that there would be a majority of single operator users who want to use this instead of a production crew, so it would have made more sense to design the ergonomics for a single operator.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Ed Arszyla

This makes me think that perhaps BMD doesn't understand their customer base. Do they really think it's the best idea to design a camera that's geared toward running it with a crew (cam op, focus puller and audio tech)?

I've just watched the link Brian gave, and there are so many (critical) questions which could have been asked.....

In particular, they talk about the sound recordist having access to the one side of the camera, hence the audio metering and controls there. Do they seriously think any camera operator is going to be very pleased if somebody starts adjusting knobs on the far side of their camera mid-shot? And is the side of the camera the best place for the recordist to always have to look for his metering?

Surely the arrangement where the recordist lines up a small mixer with the camera pre-shooting, which gives him the flexibility to monitor and adjust levels where it's most suitable to him, far preferable? Oh wait - that's what happens at the moment, so they couldn't advertise anything "new"......

And the 10" monitor - it may be useful sometimes, but is it the only method of viewfinding? What happens on an outdoor shoot in bright daylight?

Overall Ed, I agree. It smacks of having been designed by technicians who think they know what cameraman want - rather than involving those who actually use the gear day in, day out. The comment about it's coming from a company with a base in computing may be more revealing than they intended.....

It's interesting, it's got good points, but I'm just left feeling it hasn't been fully thought through. Which is a shame.

[Mike Bagley]

For the studio camera, what's a decent low cost zoom lens suggestion? I don't see 720P SDI output. That's kind of disappointing. Looks very interesting that's for sure!

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Warren Kawamoto

I didn't know anything about Ursa when I walked into the BM booth at NAB. Without looking at the specs, two things stood out for me. First, this camera is huge! It's about 1.5 times the size of a standard bread loaf. Massive.

Size wise the dimensions are pretty similar to an ARRI Alexa, although that camera has a shoulder notch built in. The weight is greater than the Alexa, in that the latter needs to have a viewfinder fitted before they match. I suspect the large screen feature may be adding a bit to the URSA's weight compared to the Alexa plus the liquid cooling.

According to John Brawley, the URSA, with the liquid cooling part of Ursa at back of the camera and its length, balances well with vLock and a heavy cine prime or a lightweight zoom.

A number of the current large sensor (smaller) cameras tend to be front heavy, especially with a cine lens fitted

[Murray Christian]

Originally Posted by Ed Arszyla

This makes me think that perhaps BMD doesn't understand their customer base. Do they really think it's the best idea to design a camera that's geared toward running it with a crew (cam op, focus puller and audio tech)? I would think that there would be a majority of single operator users who want to use this instead of a production crew, so it would have made more sense to design the ergonomics for a single operator.

Sure, why not? I think if they took a glance around a forum like this one they'd see pretty fast that most of the one-man-band and wedding shooter talk goes straight to whatever the latest high end one piece is from Sony or Canon. It would probably be a mistake for someone their size to try and compete with them directly.

BM as camera makers have chucked their lot in with with filmmakers and students from the start, I'd say. This one seems like the wish list of a mid-late 2000s 'video' student crew struggling to do a single system shoot with an XL1s or XHA1 or something (ie. me) and hitting most points fairly well (not weight, but hey). I would imagine a lot of that stuff still applies until more recent times.

[Mat Thompson]

Surely the point is and very frustratingly that their cameras have so much potential. They are putting in some very nice ingredients but by not really speaking to operators within their marketing user group they are coming up with a rather strange finished recipe. 3 screens, a built in 10inch monitor, high bit rate only, 7.5 kg body... - would anyone actually ask for these in a camera and wasn't the story the same for their first cameras to, internal battery etc ??

[Murray Christian]

Originally Posted by Mat Thompson

Surely the point is and very frustratingly that their cameras have so much potential. They are putting in some very nice ingredients but by not really speaking to operators within their marketing user group they are coming up with a rather strange finished recipe. 3 screens, a built in 10inch monitor, high bit rate only, 7.5 kg body... - would anyone actually ask for these in a camera and wasn't the story the same for their first cameras to, internal battery etc ??

Well, it's not that they shouldn't listen to them. But as these discussions usually develop, the 'pro-shooter' space usually wants particular things, as ever, that no one is going to deliver without adding five-to-ten grand to the price. BM seem to have a more broad audience in mind. That and keeping the price down seems to explain their unusual mishmash of features.
The BMCC, complained about though it is, made a lot of sense in a world full of people weaned on DSLRs who wanted to play with raw. I can't think of a camera yet people have had no wish list/change list for, bar some top tier ones perhaps. So the fact that there's some is really no surprise.

Quite a few little oddities seem aimed directly at situations I've seen myself. Its been a while but the last couple of shoots I was on had f3s and Epics festooned with monitors and other stuff. One for the op, one for the follow, one for whoever else is looking. Each of those added $50 or more to the daily rental cost. Put them on the camera and you could be saving some starving crew $1000 a week. The on board ones aren't as flexible, but swings, roundabouts etc.
I always recommend against single system audio, but I've still seen a ton of people use it, even demand it. And then the knobs and monitoring options becomes something audio people have to sigh about on the day. This camera does a better job there.
Those are a couple of examples. There's a number of things people are pointing out as weird that I have personally seen and they are addressing. Good plan or not? I don't know. But their logic is at least partly explicable to me, is all I'm saying.

[Brian Drysdale]

Single system sound is pretty standard on a lot of broadcast TV productions. Double system adds another item to the post production, which has an increasingly tighter schedule over the years, not helped by the fixing it in post approach. .