Do they all do 4K/60fps? And does the $2995 model do 160fps? It also looks like CFast cards are pretty expensive.

Why not Nikon mount? Is it because Canon has cinema lenses?

Because all protocols are known. And lenses are electronically controlled.

Actual best mount is FZ one :-)

Nikon has issue as you need to implement lever :-)

@Vitaliy_Kiselev On an URSA the sensor block including the mount is user upgradeable. Not really meant for switching in and out job to job. More like this situation where a better sensor comes along. Also, internchangeable mounts are very difficult to do if you want precision. Wasn't' the RED Titanium EF mount 2 or 3K ?

JB

Expect to budget an extra $3000 per hour of RAW recording time.

256GB will hold around 20 minutes of 4.6K RAW, and a 256GB CFast card costs around $1000 at the moment.

Too bad they couldn't have used SSDs.

My math works out to 32 mins of raw 4.6K/30P per 256GB card (with 4:1 compression). These 128GB cards seem fairly reasonable - http://www.amazon.com/Apacer-APCFA128GACAD-BTM-MLC-High-Speed/dp/B00RB5FPAM/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1424266220&sr=8-4&keywords=apacer+cfast+2.0+128gb That would get the price down around $1120/hr if they work.

@Tron you're right, I wasn't calculating using their 4:1 compression figure. $1120/hr is a little better. Still about twice as much as SSDs would cost though. I would definitely consider this camera for paid documentary gigs, but for the freelance work I'm doing now, it's a big expense. Either I use my GH4, or I rent a RED / Alexa. The upfront cost of owning this puts it just out of reach for me. Maybe once CFast cards and storage in general gets a little cheaper!

@Sangye I'm holding off on a purchase too, probably until the price on the 4.6K drops a little further and CFAST 2.0 becomes a bit more price & brand competitive. A big plus to this cam is that rental costs should be very reasonable - as low as $300 for 4-5 days, plus it requires almost no rigging to get the job done.

@Sangye You claim 1150 an hour for RAW 4:1 yet compare it to a GH4 ? Do you shoot RAW 4:1 your GH 4 ? with your RED or ArriRAW ?

Horses for courses...I think the media cost isn't insignificant, but it's already more or less halved over the last 12 months...

CFast is here to stay and, like SSD's will get cheaper. More can more cameras support it (like the new C series Canons)

JB

I have no use for 4.6k. It's ridiculous. The only advantage I see to the higher resolutions is better end color resolution. Almost everybody is delivering a 2K master for projection and broadcast/digital distribution.

Even RED's 8K is only attractive in that it may yield a true 444 color option with equal numbers of RB and G lines for every line of 4K res.

@leonbeas native ISO is a bit over 800 - the new sensor behaves the same (actually a hair better) in lowlight like the Pocket and original 2.5k BMCC - and yeah no black sun dot and no FPN

I've made a quick comparison flipping one image and resizing according to specs and URSA looks really close in size to FS7. I hoped it was a more suitable camera for my Ronin but it seems it will have the same big problems of Sony model. Sad to know that a 60k$ regular RED camera fits perfectly and a 5K$ "mini" URSA is a pain to be used :(

E Mount would be better.

MFT would indeed be best, and is one of the big factors holding me back from buying this camera. (With built in ND filters being the other big missing piece from this camera)

It is a fallacy to say it would mean a smaller sensor, as JVC has proved MFT works well with Super 35mm