Absolutely beautiful footage. I appreciate you putting professional cinema glass on the camera instead of a photo lens or prosumer glass, makes a huge difference. Ursa's in the past have always looked great, but seemed to be missing a step compared to an Arri, Red, Sony, or Varicam(R.I.P). Definitely not the case here. Looks phenomenal. Think I'll be making that investment soon.
Beautiful! Just beautiful! Its super detailed and color rich but it doesnt have that super resolution netflix cut paper with the image so sharp look. I HATE that look. This looks like clean, sharp, detailed creamy film. The way movies are supposed to look, less video gamey. Golly I'll never have that camera but I am super happy that a 12k sensor looks like this and not that super over sharpened look.
Yeah Co-signed what Ben said. Matrix Ressurections come to mind when i think of absolutely sterile. Red Rangers. (Sony Venice vibes like that too lol). I’ve been shooting with the FX3 for 3 years now and the difference between what I get with a Sigma Art vs my old set of Takumar’s would have you believe it’s a different camera. Add Dehancer on the end for the 👨🍳😘
Enjoyed the thoroughness of the test here and glad you weren't just sticking the camera in front of focus charts with flat lighting/ultra sharp lenses. Really showed off some nice character. I'm curious about the post processing here - Anything beyond colour/contrast/tone adjustments? Any sharpness tweaks etc. or is it just the "pure" sensor negative?
@@PostromoPictures just the LUT as I mention in the video and then a little offset tweak to colour balance to how I liked it, no contrast or further balance changes
I would do color test with gels on tungsten lights - your issues could very well be related to the LEDs not being up to standard in certain color ranges.
@@Murmeldyrful i disagree, I think we should test cameras with the type of lights we’ll be lighting our scenes with, which now, especially for neon / saturated colours is likely to be LED
Hey how is the noise floor ? Had a touch on the camera at a show, and it's seemed a bit on the noisy side. What your though after those proper test ? This 40mm 2x Pana XTAL ana is freaking gorgeous.
@@PALALALALALALA yep, I may make a separate video or post about this - the noise is definitely worse on the video output than on the footage - have spoken to BM about it and they are going to look into it - so that maybe what you saw at the show. It’s pretty clean up to and including 800. I think I’m going to rate it at 400 for now, as that seems safe and I prefer to light to that level
@@Ben_Saffer Thanks for the answer. Interesting about the noise level being different on display and files... EDIT/ heard the audio com at second listening, thanks for sharing ;) Thanks for posting those tests. Would love a mini version : 60FPS / 8K / V-Mount of that sensor / camera.
@@Ben_Saffer Just downloaded some clip from TRM. Noise patern cleans up like nothing with a slight touch of noise reduction. That's a really interesting sensor.
Amazing how everything changed once you put the cookes on … entire frame lit up differently. Always been a Cooke fan and it’s amazing seeing why with this. Never been a BMD fan tho but the 12&17k cine is giving me food for thought. In the past their build quality was atrocious, hearing good things now. Not a fan of not having ProRes internally, I’ll need to play with BM_RAW a bit more but ….. meh. Would like to see a set of signatures on this as well.
@@blackicestudios bm raw is the best bang for buck codec available, streets ahead of redcode, xocn, tiny compared to arriraw though obviously not as robust as arriraw files. ProRes is not a modern enough codec for the resolutions and colour depths cameras need now. Give it another try, it’s honestly a great piece of tech
@@Ben_Saffer well ArriRaw is uncompressed so it will be HUGE all the time. BmRaw can’t be streets ahead at 12bits when R3D is 16bits and O-xcn giving variants(10/12/16). BUT who knows maybe that special sauce negates the need for 16 ….. you may be correct about ProRes but even as a proxy makes sense. As well HQ and 4444 can more than stand up to the job. I’ll take your advice and check it out .
@@blackicestudios it has many other features aside from the pure specs tho, including this down sampling method that allows shooting 8k files using the full 12k sensor which seems to work really well. Also in terms of proxies, it’s so performant you very often don’t need to work with proxies (obv this is workflow dependent) but I can use 12k files on my MacBook happily just by switching the quarter res debayer and back to full for final export
Hey man, thanks so much for this, appreciate it. I was wondering what’s happening in the shot at 16:46, I’m seeing a lot of artefacts around her as she walks, but I’m not sure if my brain is messing with me, thanks again for uploading this man!
That wall is deliberately designed to be a worst case scenario in terms of moire motion artifacts - you actually get moire in your eyes when you’re in the room. I think what you’re referring to there is down to the compression on the export / TH-cam though, as it’s not really there in the original footage. Well spotted tho!
This looks great - but - this scene with these lenses would look basically the same on any number of cameras, including the $3k Pyxis. (And probably even cheaper cameras.) The reality is we've hit the "good enough" threshold in terms of PQ.
@@Humcrush I agree. That’s why it mostly comes down to things like available sensor modes, frame rates and crucially how well you can rig the camera for production environments
As filmic as it gets! So creamy, colours are just marvellous!! Wow!!! Genuinely impressed
This was great to see. Thank you for uploading all of this footage. I’d love to see a direct comparison to the Ursa mini 12K.
Absolutely beautiful footage. I appreciate you putting professional cinema glass on the camera instead of a photo lens or prosumer glass, makes a huge difference. Ursa's in the past have always looked great, but seemed to be missing a step compared to an Arri, Red, Sony, or Varicam(R.I.P). Definitely not the case here. Looks phenomenal. Think I'll be making that investment soon.
Beautiful! Just beautiful! Its super detailed and color rich but it doesnt have that super resolution netflix cut paper with the image so sharp look. I HATE that look. This looks like clean, sharp, detailed creamy film. The way movies are supposed to look, less video gamey. Golly I'll never have that camera but I am super happy that a 12k sensor looks like this and not that super over sharpened look.
@@chrisw443 yea, I think a lot of times that look is down to the lenses and the image pipeline more than the camera
Yeah Co-signed what Ben said. Matrix Ressurections come to mind when i think of absolutely sterile. Red Rangers. (Sony Venice vibes like that too lol). I’ve been shooting with the FX3 for 3 years now and the difference between what I get with a Sigma Art vs my old set of Takumar’s would have you believe it’s a different camera. Add Dehancer on the end for the 👨🍳😘
Awesome tests, Thanks for sharing Ben. Any chance of a R709 ish version? For those of us who have to conform to more traditional broadcast standards 😅
Enjoyed the thoroughness of the test here and glad you weren't just sticking the camera in front of focus charts with flat lighting/ultra sharp lenses. Really showed off some nice character. I'm curious about the post processing here - Anything beyond colour/contrast/tone adjustments? Any sharpness tweaks etc. or is it just the "pure" sensor negative?
@@PostromoPictures just the LUT as I mention in the video and then a little offset tweak to colour balance to how I liked it, no contrast or further balance changes
Wow this camera is beautiful!!!!
great footage thanks
would love to see these on the pyxsis
I would do color test with gels on tungsten lights - your issues could very well be related to the LEDs not being up to standard in certain color ranges.
@@Murmeldyrful i disagree, I think we should test cameras with the type of lights we’ll be lighting our scenes with, which now, especially for neon / saturated colours is likely to be LED
@@Ben_Saffer you do you bro but I was over here troubleshooting.
Hey how is the noise floor ? Had a touch on the camera at a show, and it's seemed a bit on the noisy side. What your though after those proper test ? This 40mm 2x Pana XTAL ana is freaking gorgeous.
@@PALALALALALALA yep, I may make a separate video or post about this - the noise is definitely worse on the video output than on the footage - have spoken to BM about it and they are going to look into it - so that maybe what you saw at the show. It’s pretty clean up to and including 800. I think I’m going to rate it at 400 for now, as that seems safe and I prefer to light to that level
@@Ben_Saffer Thanks for the answer. Interesting about the noise level being different on display and files...
EDIT/ heard the audio com at second listening, thanks for sharing ;)
Thanks for posting those tests.
Would love a mini version : 60FPS / 8K / V-Mount of that sensor / camera.
@@Ben_Saffer Just downloaded some clip from TRM. Noise patern cleans up like nothing with a slight touch of noise reduction. That's a really interesting sensor.
Amazing how everything changed once you put the cookes on … entire frame lit up differently. Always been a Cooke fan and it’s amazing seeing why with this.
Never been a BMD fan tho but the 12&17k cine is giving me food for thought. In the past their build quality was atrocious, hearing good things now. Not a fan of not having ProRes internally, I’ll need to play with BM_RAW a bit more but ….. meh.
Would like to see a set of signatures on this as well.
@@blackicestudios bm raw is the best bang for buck codec available, streets ahead of redcode, xocn, tiny compared to arriraw though obviously not as robust as arriraw files. ProRes is not a modern enough codec for the resolutions and colour depths cameras need now. Give it another try, it’s honestly a great piece of tech
@@Ben_Saffer well ArriRaw is uncompressed so it will be HUGE all the time. BmRaw can’t be streets ahead at 12bits when R3D is 16bits and O-xcn giving variants(10/12/16). BUT who knows maybe that special sauce negates the need for 16 …..
you may be correct about ProRes but even as a proxy makes sense. As well HQ and 4444 can more than stand up to the job.
I’ll take your advice and check it out .
@@blackicestudios bmraw is 16 bits linear unpacked like r3d. They just pack it down to 12 bit log but 12bit log = 16bit linear
@@blackicestudios it has many other features aside from the pure specs tho, including this down sampling method that allows shooting 8k files using the full 12k sensor which seems to work really well. Also in terms of proxies, it’s so performant you very often don’t need to work with proxies (obv this is workflow dependent) but I can use 12k files on my MacBook happily just by switching the quarter res debayer and back to full for final export
@@BlackopsCoops ahhh I see, maybe that’s how they got around the patent infringement?
Very nice test.
Hey man, thanks so much for this, appreciate it.
I was wondering what’s happening in the shot at 16:46, I’m seeing a lot of artefacts around her as she walks, but I’m not sure if my brain is messing with me, thanks again for uploading this man!
That wall is deliberately designed to be a worst case scenario in terms of moire motion artifacts - you actually get moire in your eyes when you’re in the room. I think what you’re referring to there is down to the compression on the export / TH-cam though, as it’s not really there in the original footage. Well spotted tho!
@@Ben_Saffer ahhh that’s interesting! Nice one man, thanks for the response.
This looks great - but - this scene with these lenses would look basically the same on any number of cameras, including the $3k Pyxis. (And probably even cheaper cameras.) The reality is we've hit the "good enough" threshold in terms of PQ.
@@Humcrush I agree. That’s why it mostly comes down to things like available sensor modes, frame rates and crucially how well you can rig the camera for production environments