Cameraegg Compare logoCameraegg

Blackmagic

URSA Cine 17K

Large-format 65mm cinema camera with 17K resolution, interchangeable lens mount, and BRAW recording.

$29,995

Launch price

Released Apr 2024

vs

Blackmagic

URSA Mini Pro 12K

12K Super 35 cinema camera with interchangeable PL mount and BRAW recording.

$9,995

Launch price

Released Jul 2020

URSA Cine 17K is 3.8 years newer.

Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.

Wins

1categories

URSA Cine 17K

WildlifeSports & Action

Wins

2categories

URSA Mini Pro 12K

WildlifeVideo & Hybrid

15 categories tied

Which would you choose?

TL;DR — Key differences

URSA Cine 17K wins 1 categories·URSA Mini Pro 12K wins 2 categories
  • BURSA Mini Pro 12K has lower Weight (520 g vs 8500 g)
  • AURSA Cine 17K has lower ISO min (native) (64 vs 100)
  • BURSA Mini Pro 12K has higher Resolution (80 MP vs 65 MP)

Key specs at a glance

URSA Cine 17KURSA Mini Pro 12K
Resolution65 MP80 MP
Sensor55.96 × 29.87 mmAPS-C
ISO max51,20051,200
Burst30 fps30 fps
4K120 fps120 fps
IBIS8-stop8-stop
Weight8500 g520 g
Battery520 shots520 shots

Size and weight, to scale

URSA Cine 17K

280 × 190 × 200 mm

8500 g (18.74 lb / 299.83 oz)

Credit card shown to scale as a size reference (ISO 7810, 85.6 × 54 mm)

Credit card

85.6 × 54 mm

for scale

URSA Mini Pro 12K

138 × 98 × 88 mm

520 g (1.15 lb / 18.34 oz)

URSA Cine 17K is 142mm wider, 92mm taller, and 112mm thicker than URSA Mini Pro 12K.

URSA Cine 17K is 7980 g heavier than URSA Mini Pro 12K.

Depth (front-to-back): 200mm URSA Cine 17K · 88mm URSA Mini Pro 12K

Sensor size, to scale

URSA Cine 17K

55.96 × 29.87 mm · Full Frame

1672 mm² area

URSA Mini Pro 12K

23.5 × 15.6 mm · APS-C

367 mm² area

4.6× larger sensor area = shallower depth of field and better low-light performance.

Use-case scoring

Which one for what?

Algorithmic scores from verified specs · 10 = best in class

Use caseURSA Cine 17KURSA Mini Pro 12K
Portrait
6.0Good
7.5Good✓ wins
Sports & Action
9.0Excellent
9.0Excellent
Video & Hybrid
6.5Good
9.5Excellent✓ wins
Landscape
8.0Excellent✓ wins
7.0Good
Travel
5.0Fair
7.0Good✓ wins
Wildlife
10.0Excellent
10.0Excellent
Vlogging
5.5Fair
7.0Good✓ wins

Why pick one over the other

Reasons to choose

URSA Cine 17K

  • Codecs

    Adds Blackmagic RAW

  • Dimensions (W×H×D mm)

    Adds 280, 190, 200

  • AA filter

    Only URSA Cine 17K supports it

  • ISO min (native)

    64 vs 100 — lower is better

Reasons to choose

URSA Mini Pro 12K

  • Codecs

    Adds H.265, H.264, ProRes

  • Dimensions (W×H×D mm)

    Adds 138, 98, 88

  • Weight

    520 g vs 8500 g — lower is better

  • Resolution

    80 MP vs 65 MP — higher is better

Both cameras share

  • ISO max (native)Both 51,200
  • Eye AFBoth support eye af
  • Animal / bird AFBoth support animal / bird af
  • Burst (mechanical)Both 12 fps
  • Burst (electronic)Both 30 fps
  • Pre-Capture / Pre-ReleaseBoth support pre-capture / pre-release

Pros & cons at a glance

Editorially curated highlights and trade-offs.

URSA Cine 17K

Pros

  • 17K large format
  • Interchangeable mount
  • Blackmagic RAW
  • Pro cinema workflow

Cons

  • Extremely expensive
  • Massive files
  • Requires full crew

URSA Mini Pro 12K

Pros

  • 12K BRAW
  • Pro cinema workflow
  • Interchangeable mount

Cons

  • Very expensive
  • Huge files
  • Not handheld friendly

Decided which one is right for you?

Compare live prices for the URSA Cine 17K and URSA Mini Pro 12K at major authorized retailers.

Blackmagic URSA Mini Pro 12K

Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.

Full specifications

= category winner

URSA Cine 17K
URSA Mini Pro 12K
Resolution
65 MP
80 MP+23%
Sensor type
65mm RGBW CMOS
APS-C CMOS
Sensor size
55.96 × 29.87 mm
23.5 × 15.6 mm
AA filter
Yes
No
URSA Cine 17K
URSA Mini Pro 12K
Processor
Image processor
Image processor
URSA Cine 17K
URSA Mini Pro 12K
ISO min (native)
64−36 less
100
ISO max (native)
51,200
51,200
ISO max (expanded)
102,400
102,400
URSA Cine 17K
URSA Mini Pro 12K
Shutter type
Mechanical + Electronic
Mechanical + Electronic
Max mechanical speed
1/8000 sec
1/8000 sec
Max electronic speed
1/32000 sec
1/32000 sec

Frequently asked

Quick answers generated from verified specs.

Which is better for video, URSA Cine 17K or URSA Mini Pro 12K?

URSA Mini Pro 12K scores 9.5/10 versus 6.5/10 for URSA Cine 17K — 8K recording for future-proof footage.

What's the resolution difference between the URSA Cine 17K and URSA Mini Pro 12K?

URSA Cine 17K is 65 MP and URSA Mini Pro 12K is 80 MP, so the URSA Mini Pro 12K captures more detail for cropping and large prints.

Do the URSA Cine 17K and URSA Mini Pro 12K have in-body image stabilization?

URSA Cine 17K has 8-stop in-body image stabilization, while URSA Mini Pro 12K has 8-stop in-body image stabilization.

Which shoots faster bursts — the URSA Cine 17K or the URSA Mini Pro 12K?

URSA Cine 17K reaches 30 fps electronic. URSA Mini Pro 12K reaches 30 fps electronic.

What's the weight difference between the URSA Cine 17K and URSA Mini Pro 12K?

URSA Cine 17K weighs 8500 g and URSA Mini Pro 12K weighs 520 g, so the URSA Mini Pro 12K is 7980 g lighter.

Do the URSA Cine 17K and URSA Mini Pro 12K record 4K video?

URSA Cine 17K: 4K up to 120p. URSA Mini Pro 12K: 8K / 6K (max), 4K up to 120p.

Are the URSA Cine 17K and URSA Mini Pro 12K weather sealed?

URSA Cine 17K: Yes. URSA Mini Pro 12K: Yes.

Which has better battery life?

Rated battery life is 520 shots (CIPA) for the URSA Cine 17K and 520 shots for the URSA Mini Pro 12K, giving the URSA Mini Pro 12K the edge.

How much does each cost?

URSA Cine 17K launched at $29,995 and URSA Mini Pro 12K at $9,995. The URSA Mini Pro 12K is $20,000 less.

Can't decide between two? Compare a third camera.

Add any camera to get a three-way URSA Cine 17K vs URSA Mini Pro 12K vs X comparison.

Specs sourced from manufacturer data. Use-case scores algorithmically derived. Last reviewed June 2026.