{"id":164,"date":"2017-09-13T06:37:33","date_gmt":"2017-09-13T06:37:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/?p=164"},"modified":"2017-09-13T06:41:32","modified_gmt":"2017-09-13T06:41:32","slug":"lower-priced-professional-cameras-are-bloody-good","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/2017\/09\/13\/lower-priced-professional-cameras-are-bloody-good\/","title":{"rendered":"Lower priced professional cameras are bloody good!"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>This is a preliminary comment on cameras at about $6K-$7.5K<\/p>\n<p>This is purely personal and is on no way meant to be objective, unlike the CML evaluations which have no personality involved and are purely objective.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;ve had the Ursa Mini-Pro the longest and have only shot the CML evaluations with the C200, I&#8217;m waiting for a Panasonic EVA. I rejected the FS7 during the evaluations because I hated the way it felt and its menus. I did say that this was not objective!<\/p>\n<p>The more I look at the images from the UMP &amp; C200 the more impressed I am. I&#8217;m shooting both RAW and with a small amount of compression, in the case of the UMP 3:1 and the Canon is variable between 3:1 to 5:1 depending on the subject\/action.<\/p>\n<p>I really like them both and the EVA is going to have a fight on its hands to be better, or even as good!<\/p>\n<p>I wouldn&#8217;t hesitate to use either of these cameras for professional work. The images from both are great, the C200 has slightly better colour, the greens &amp; yellows are purer and to me more accurate but it&#8217;s not a big thing and easily adjustable in Resolve.<\/p>\n<p>The style of working with them is very different, the UMP is fitted with the shoulder mount and the V\/F. It&#8217;s quite heavy in todays terms and light compared to what I&#8217;m used to \ud83d\ude42<br \/>\nTo get it to function comfortably on my shoulder I&#8217;ve had to move the top handle as far forward as I can and the shoulder mount as far back as it&#8217;ll go, but then I&#8217;m a pretty big bloke. It balances well with a V Lock battery on the back and a small lens on the front.<br \/>\nThe battery life is good but not nearly as good as the C200.<br \/>\nThis camera works really well used in the way that I&#8217;ve used cameras for the last 45 years or so. It&#8217;s a progression from the 16mm cameras to Betacam&#8217;s and the F900 and Varicam 2700 to Amira. It feels like a &#8220;real&#8221; camera and functions like one as well. Anyone used to using a camera like these will feel right at home.<\/p>\n<p>The C200 is much lighter and is really best used with the touch screen V\/F and held in one hand. It&#8217;s a very different way of working from &#8220;traditional&#8221; cameras but it can work really well. With IS in lenses and AF facial tracking you have a whole new world to explore. I&#8217;ll post more about this in a month when I have had a chance to shoot in more practical situations. Initial reaction is that battery life is outstanding and the camera feels very light.<\/p>\n<p>In terms of dynamic range they both start to get a bit noisy for me at 2 stops under and clearly hold highlights at 3.5 stops over with the C200 having a slight edge in the highlights and the UMP a slight edge in the shadows.<br \/>\nThey also both feel solid and professional with the UMP feeling like a solid brick shithouse, in the best possible taste! This is a camera that will take a hammering.<\/p>\n<p>They both work well in preset colour mode and load into Resolve with the standard IDT&#8217;s and no correction resulting in good images, as usual I&#8217;d suggest reducing the contrast setting to around .85.<\/p>\n<p>My only complaint about the UMP so far is that the extension handle is too short but as it uses a standard rosette I just replaced it with one of the extensions from my ET Mantis shoulder mount and its now perfect.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;m testing with various AF stills lenses and the C200 is noticeably quicker to focus, the UMP has a tendency to hunt with older lenses.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;m struggling to find anything bad to say about either of them.<\/p>\n<p>A complete comparison with images and illustrations of the UMP, C200 &amp; EVA will follow.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This is a preliminary comment on cameras at about $6K-$7.5K This is purely personal and is on no way meant to be objective, unlike the CML evaluations which have no personality involved and are purely objective. I&#8217;ve had the Ursa Mini-Pro the longest and have only shot the CML evaluations with the C200, I&#8217;m waiting &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/2017\/09\/13\/lower-priced-professional-cameras-are-bloody-good\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Lower priced professional cameras are bloody good!&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-164","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cameras"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8PwMD-2E","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=164"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":168,"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164\/revisions\/168"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=164"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=164"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cinematography.net\/CineRant\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=164"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}