Anyone who says 17k is dumb only knows about shooting and never thinks about editing creatively… Hollywood editors are going to love the things they would be able to do with it.
@@CabralCreatesA few weeks ago, a shot my first dinner scene by the boardwalk and continuity between shots was a nightmare. Sometimes you can’t always have multiple cameras and sometimes the actors get annoyed doing the same take over and over again. With 17K you can get multiple shots and keep continuity, keep your framing and not worry about annoying the talent by making them repeat themselves over and over. On top of that you are not forced to shoot with a shallow depth of field to avoid continuity issues, one can finally show off that exotic location if they so choose.
Also, a good point, these massive resolutions that BMD is pursuing is great for the used market. As they continue to push toward these larger resolutions, they will make it where more people will part with their 4K equipment for these larger resolutions. We now are at a point to where 4K alone is often not enough, which means the used market is only gonna get better in terms of how affordable things will (hopefully) get.
This is a little misleading. The Alexa 65 and the ursa 17k 65 are equivalent to 5 perf 65mm, similar to what the Hateful 8 was shot on. IMAX is 15 perf 70mm, and then downscaled to 15 perf 65mm to leave space for the magnetic audio stripe. The difference between 5 perf and 15 perf is very significant.
Yes 15 perf will be superior always but I look at the difference in price, and the fact that blackmagic always seems to be able to squeeze so much extra life oit of the image with there programming and software abilities and such, and the difference in price. I think at this level of quality it's really nitpicking and 5 perf or 15 perf I doubt 99% of the population would ever know the difference. You likely have more hands on experience with cameras of such a caliber so i wont argue with you over which is superior, but hey at the end of the day we'll have to see what the footage looks like and evaluate it for what it is and the price it come in at
I think everybody is missing a very important point. A larger sensor gives a larger field of view with the same focal length than a smaller sensor. This means that with larger sensors we can use longer lenses that compress the background more, giving more separation. 65mm image will then feel very different than say, full frame 35mm. This is also the reason why Ursa 17k is not in fact larger than IMAX. Idk why the Blackmagic guy brought up The Sphere in the same sentence, they are not comparable. Pixel to pixel, maybe, but image size should be measured from the film negative/sensor, and there is currently no larger medium than 15-perf IMAX. I get that editors and VFX artists get some advantage with the higher resolution, I've worked with 8k RED sensors before and it's really nice to have that flexibility. Still, most cinemas are running 2k projectors and most consumer TVs are 4k so I don't think the resolution is the real highlight of this camera, otherwise we should've seen a higher demand for the original Ursa 12k. The real selling point for cinematographers is going to be the physical sensor size. That is something that has not been easily available for most filmmakers before.
A few thoughts: 1. Since 17K projectors don't exist yet, you're going to need to print to film. 2. The sensor shape is not like IMAX 70mm, it's more rectangular. In order to screen a film in "true IMAX" 1.43:1, the resolution will ultimately be less than 17K. 3. I hope filmmakers that use IMAX will start using this instead, so a movie can be fully in "70mm" and not have annoying aspect ratio changes. That's something that really bothers me personally. This is still a really monumental release. I just wish the next step will be a sensor that does 17K closer to 1.43:1, since that aspect ratio really looks better on huge screens. When I saw Oppenheimer in 70mm IMAX at the BFI in London, it was like the 1.43:1 scenes filled your entire field of vision. It's incredible.
Like all blackmagic cameras, on a technicality basis they're always missing a few marks but the finished product always punches well above it's weight, hopefully the next step will be some attainable lenses for this format
I call BS. IMAX for one is a film stock and has been remixed into something else. Here’s when problems come into play for your audience. The file sizes have to be accounted for. A person will have to upgrade their computer, external drivers, etcetera. The folks who use 65mm and IMAX aren’t concerned with saving a few thousand dollars. Next, where is Joe Shmoe going to project this huge image? 😂😂😂 They’re going to rent IMAX theaters to show their indie film? The folks who will have real use for it is going to remain with Alexa or actual IMAX cameras.
I think this camera would be a great option for indie filmmakers that want that Alexa65 or 65mm film "scope" without taking out a loan the amount of a large house. This would also make it a perfect money maker for rental houses.
I disagree with the "future proof" argument to be honest. What a lot of people forget is that just shooting in super high resolution isn't all you need to achieve high resolution. With a camera like this you'd need the absolute sharpest lenses in the world to resolve anywhere near that level of detail. Yes, it can be done but in most normal scenarios you won't be achieving anywhere near that. 17K works out to 140 megapixels. I've taken still images with my Panasonic S5 in its high resolution 90 megapixel mode and I find if I'm not shooting with the lens in its sweet spot it's not worth it resolution wise. Usually I have to be between F5.6 to 8. Surprised you didn't mention the high speed shooting modes of this camera which I'm actually more impressed by. 8K at 200 fps is insane! No global shutter though :( Would much rather have that.
@The-RoweBoat haha thanks man! Yeah I'm not a seasoned cinematographer or anything to that extent quite yet but growing my expertise day by day! Trying to provide insights for beginners that are being into more fancy equipment
I would want this so I can shoot at 17K and crop to 8K. 17K is 4.25 times the resolution of 8K, so one would be able to get the master, the medium, and the close up. This would come in really handy for scenes in which continuity can be a nightmare to keep track of like action scenes, dinner scenes, scenes in uncontrolled public environments.
Great idea as a camera but will not be usable for the 90% of people im afraid, the issue is lenses there is not many lenses for 65mm sensor size and the once that exist are manly owned by Arri and are only for rental, now yes there is Master Built lenses line for s65 and some Panavision lenses but they cost crazy money and it would probably be cheaper to just rent all the gear from Arri if one would need to do a s65 film. but it is sick that blackmagic is pushing the technology tough i just would like them to to make a global shutter full frame and s35 pocket camera whit better dynamic range of 15 stops and 12bit color space that would actually sell and be useful unlike the 17k franken stain haha
Just like all things, hopefully it will be the straw that breaks the camels back so to speak, paving the way for others to continue to knock the price down with each new variant from all the companies
@@andyelement Well yeah but they are photo lenses and not cinema? Medium format lenses tend to be slow, have significant focus breathing, with very few focal focal length options Medium format lenses can give you better background separation at close distances, but you reach the point of diminishing returns very quickly when compared to fast lenses.
this is like a billion dollars... its sounds smaller than it is... 999 MILLION plus 1 million think about that... resolution scales exponentially fo example I shoot 5k as I shoot Gemini = thats 33% more resolution than 4k and on Gemini I have 300 extra pixels above that so 5120 x3000 (open gate) - It just doesnt sound like it is that much more resolution. 17 K in comparison is FLIPPN MENTAL SAUCE... Ill believe it when I see it and it doesnt catch fire.
as usual. this camera. will make. large.format. available to the. almost masses. disrupt. the market. a little ,,,,,I see only. positives can. come. from this. and. bravo. black. magic ...
Anyone who says 17k is dumb only knows about shooting and never thinks about editing creatively… Hollywood editors are going to love the things they would be able to do with it.
Crop in by a factor of 4.25x for 8K, a factor of 17x for 4K and a factor of 68x HD.
@@walmartpimp2 exactly! You know how many creative things we could do with that ability. It’s great!
@@CabralCreatesA few weeks ago, a shot my first dinner scene by the boardwalk and continuity between shots was a nightmare. Sometimes you can’t always have multiple cameras and sometimes the actors get annoyed doing the same take over and over again. With 17K you can get multiple shots and keep continuity, keep your framing and not worry about annoying the talent by making them repeat themselves over and over. On top of that you are not forced to shoot with a shallow depth of field to avoid continuity issues, one can finally show off that exotic location if they so choose.
Back then they said RED was crazy with their 4K cameras but like now it's a must resolution
Also, a good point, these massive resolutions that BMD is pursuing is great for the used market. As they continue to push toward these larger resolutions, they will make it where more people will part with their 4K equipment for these larger resolutions. We now are at a point to where 4K alone is often not enough, which means the used market is only gonna get better in terms of how affordable things will (hopefully) get.
This is a little misleading. The Alexa 65 and the ursa 17k 65 are equivalent to 5 perf 65mm, similar to what the Hateful 8 was shot on. IMAX is 15 perf 70mm, and then downscaled to 15 perf 65mm to leave space for the magnetic audio stripe. The difference between 5 perf and 15 perf is very significant.
Thank you!
Yes 15 perf will be superior always but I look at the difference in price, and the fact that blackmagic always seems to be able to squeeze so much extra life oit of the image with there programming and software abilities and such, and the difference in price. I think at this level of quality it's really nitpicking and 5 perf or 15 perf I doubt 99% of the population would ever know the difference. You likely have more hands on experience with cameras of such a caliber so i wont argue with you over which is superior, but hey at the end of the day we'll have to see what the footage looks like and evaluate it for what it is and the price it come in at
Thanks for clarifying. Too bad it’s not corrected in the video directly. Now it just looks like a bold claim to make the 17k look better than it is.
I think everybody is missing a very important point. A larger sensor gives a larger field of view with the same focal length than a smaller sensor. This means that with larger sensors we can use longer lenses that compress the background more, giving more separation. 65mm image will then feel very different than say, full frame 35mm.
This is also the reason why Ursa 17k is not in fact larger than IMAX. Idk why the Blackmagic guy brought up The Sphere in the same sentence, they are not comparable. Pixel to pixel, maybe, but image size should be measured from the film negative/sensor, and there is currently no larger medium than 15-perf IMAX.
I get that editors and VFX artists get some advantage with the higher resolution, I've worked with 8k RED sensors before and it's really nice to have that flexibility. Still, most cinemas are running 2k projectors and most consumer TVs are 4k so I don't think the resolution is the real highlight of this camera, otherwise we should've seen a higher demand for the original Ursa 12k. The real selling point for cinematographers is going to be the physical sensor size. That is something that has not been easily available for most filmmakers before.
@@RikhardVellamo great points 👌
A few thoughts:
1. Since 17K projectors don't exist yet, you're going to need to print to film.
2. The sensor shape is not like IMAX 70mm, it's more rectangular. In order to screen a film in "true IMAX" 1.43:1, the resolution will ultimately be less than 17K.
3. I hope filmmakers that use IMAX will start using this instead, so a movie can be fully in "70mm" and not have annoying aspect ratio changes. That's something that really bothers me personally.
This is still a really monumental release. I just wish the next step will be a sensor that does 17K closer to 1.43:1, since that aspect ratio really looks better on huge screens. When I saw Oppenheimer in 70mm IMAX at the BFI in London, it was like the 1.43:1 scenes filled your entire field of vision. It's incredible.
Like all blackmagic cameras, on a technicality basis they're always missing a few marks but the finished product always punches well above it's weight, hopefully the next step will be some attainable lenses for this format
I call BS. IMAX for one is a film stock and has been remixed into something else.
Here’s when problems come into play for your audience. The file sizes have to be accounted for. A person will have to upgrade their computer, external drivers, etcetera. The folks who use 65mm and IMAX aren’t concerned with saving a few thousand dollars.
Next, where is Joe Shmoe going to project this huge image? 😂😂😂
They’re going to rent IMAX theaters to show their indie film? The folks who will have real use for it is going to remain with Alexa or actual IMAX cameras.
IMAX size by the way is 15 perf horizontal 65mm film. this is vertical so almost 3 times less size i think. buzzwording.
I think this camera would be a great option for indie filmmakers that want that Alexa65 or 65mm film "scope" without taking out a loan the amount of a large house. This would also make it a perfect money maker for rental houses.
Rental houses gonna be huge 🙌
I disagree with the "future proof" argument to be honest. What a lot of people forget is that just shooting in super high resolution isn't all you need to achieve high resolution. With a camera like this you'd need the absolute sharpest lenses in the world to resolve anywhere near that level of detail. Yes, it can be done but in most normal scenarios you won't be achieving anywhere near that. 17K works out to 140 megapixels. I've taken still images with my Panasonic S5 in its high resolution 90 megapixel mode and I find if I'm not shooting with the lens in its sweet spot it's not worth it resolution wise. Usually I have to be between F5.6 to 8. Surprised you didn't mention the high speed shooting modes of this camera which I'm actually more impressed by. 8K at 200 fps is insane! No global shutter though :( Would much rather have that.
@@majestic-skies some valid points
Dude, this video is great. Your demeanor, flow, knowledge is great. It's nice to see someone like you young and confident in what you're saying.
@The-RoweBoat haha thanks man! Yeah I'm not a seasoned cinematographer or anything to that extent quite yet but growing my expertise day by day! Trying to provide insights for beginners that are being into more fancy equipment
I would want this so I can shoot at 17K and crop to 8K. 17K is 4.25 times the resolution of 8K, so one would be able to get the master, the medium, and the close up. This would come in really handy for scenes in which continuity can be a nightmare to keep track of like action scenes, dinner scenes, scenes in uncontrolled public environments.
If you say game changer one more time you’ll win a prize
Game changer 🙌
I'm gonna need this camera for my you tube videos....
@@chelo111 hahaha best of luck 🫡
ok so term police is here. i think its digital imax. just imax size is 3x almost. film was horizontal in that case. so almost 6x7 photo film frame.
Great idea as a camera but will not be usable for the 90% of people im afraid, the issue is lenses there is not many lenses for 65mm sensor size and the once that exist are manly owned by Arri and are only for rental, now yes there is Master Built lenses line for s65 and some Panavision lenses but they cost crazy money and it would probably be cheaper to just rent all the gear from Arri if one would need to do a s65 film. but it is sick that blackmagic is pushing the technology tough i just would like them to to make a global shutter full frame and s35 pocket camera whit better dynamic range of 15 stops and 12bit color space that would actually sell and be useful unlike the 17k franken stain haha
Just like all things, hopefully it will be the straw that breaks the camels back so to speak, paving the way for others to continue to knock the price down with each new variant from all the companies
Every medium format and large format lens ever made.....
@@andyelement Well yeah but they are photo lenses and not cinema? Medium format lenses tend to be slow, have significant focus breathing, with very few focal focal length options Medium format lenses can give you better background separation at close distances, but you reach the point of diminishing returns very quickly when compared to fast lenses.
@@dirtystax284 shoot a project with MF lenses, they're incredible. They don't need to be 'fast' on a 65mm sensor.
Poor, poor Jeff.
without any kind of IBIS, jitter on 17k footage must cause the tides to go off schedule within 1000 miles
You rig it heavy enough, and you're good
this is like a billion dollars... its sounds smaller than it is... 999 MILLION plus 1 million think about that... resolution scales exponentially fo example I shoot 5k as I shoot Gemini = thats 33% more resolution than 4k and on Gemini I have 300 extra pixels above that so 5120 x3000 (open gate) - It just doesnt sound like it is that much more resolution. 17 K in comparison is FLIPPN MENTAL SAUCE... Ill believe it when I see it and it doesnt catch fire.
Storage is gonna be crazy
Mind boggling
Jesus these resolution wars are so fucking dumb.
hahaha
yeah but bad filmmakers outnumber good ones 1000000 to 1 and they need new excuses to blame their work on
Then rent lenses for it!?!?!
I like your content.
- Subscriber n725
What broke Jeff could do is buy a mamiya medium format speedbooster for his full frame camera and get to shooting 😉
This is an option for Jeff... not quite the full quality I'd imagine but the same look??
as usual. this camera. will make. large.format. available to the. almost masses. disrupt. the market. a little ,,,,,I see only. positives can. come. from this. and. bravo. black. magic ...