on May 22, 2015 at 2:20:57 pm Last Edited By Bill Bruner on May 22, 2015 at 2:21:51 pm
Three extra stops of dynamic range (15 versus 12) plus the extra resolution.
If the $4995 4.6K Mini produces results like those seen in this test of the classic URSA with the same higher resolution sensor (embedded about a third of the way down the page), then the 4.6K camera is definitely worth the extra $2000.
I plan to get the 4.6K Mini, if I can afford it. But I will settle for the 4K version if I can't swing the extra $2K.
I sorry, but I've looked at the test footage of the 4.6 Ursa and it doesn't look that good. The color is flat, the skating shots are terribly backlit with no detail of the subjects and the overall image is washed out. The footage in the kitchen looks like 80's Betacam underexposed with the classic video "brown" look.
I'm sorry to be so critical, but if we shot footage like that for our clients and own projects, we'd be in trouble...and I know you can fix it in post, but why use a cameraperson at all, just use a remote control or drone.