Jump to content

Canon C300 Mark II flopping vs the Sony FS7 at rental?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Jimmy said:

With these kind of anecdotal stories... You need to ask yourself some further questions before drawing any kind of conclusion:

Is the C300 mk1 still renting well?

Have rentals simply dropped across the mid range, now people can afford truly good cameras as owner/operators?

Are people just renting the FS7 for occasional slow-mo shots to go with another camera?

Has the FS7 taken rentals away from the F55, RED etc too, eg, we have hit saturation point where that camera is good enough to scoop up all kinds of work?

It seems to me that alot of the market that the C300 was so successful in.. what I would call throw away tv (reality, interviews etc)... Is still 1080p based and the C300 is still king. I can see the C300 ii slowly grabbing back ground as the price comes down and the need for 4K in that area grows. Too little info and too little time passed to call it a flop.

My No.1 rental house said it's mainly the 4k50fps (frame rate in UK) with the slow motion as an added bonus, as to why the FS7 is by far the hottest rental camera on their books. (then the slow motion and speed booster option). 

The issue we have is that Canon absolutely have the better image quality, but when a client asks you to slow that beautiful image down, you can't. The image on the FS7 is more than good enough as a compromise for higher frame rates. 

Slo-mo is a highly requested feature in my market area - and barely anybody in my market area shoots Canon because of this. 

That said, I rented the original C300 for an event job as it was the ideal choice. Simple, reliable and great colour out the box. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi Andrew, I couldn't agree more with your article. As a former C300/1DC owner, I love Canon's color science (especially for skin tones). And I was eagerly looking forward to the C300 Mark II. But

Money might be the only thing that will make Canon change anything. But there are still a lot of people praising and buying Canon for video - even DSLRs - and maybe things are starting to turn, but as

The FS7 is great for slomo, the C300 II is great for AF, color, and skintones. Getting ARRI-like color from the C300 II is an amazing deal and the DPAF is super useful. Not having to mess with color A

1 hour ago, Oliver Daniel said:

I rented the original C300 for an event job as it was the ideal choice. Simple, reliable and great colour out the box. 

This is really the point i'm getting at... The C300 is still ideal for that market and quite a few others, where 1080/24/25/30p is enough.

I'm not sure that the FS7 is taking those jobs from the C300 ii any more than the C300 is ....

I think C300 ii didn't really have a defined market and it is suffering for it, a case of bad timing from Canon... the events guys don't need it's additional features... the music / narrative guys have options that cover more bases... When events/reality tv etc move to 4K, it will probably regain some dominance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

The C300 has an excuse, it is an old camera that does a 4K sensor readout.

To do 1080/60p from the F3, sony just has to read out 2 megapixels worth of data at 60fps

The C300 would have had to do 8 megapixels - 4K 60fps which is a but much to ask from 2011 tech.

Now they have an updated cam, the slow-mo is still crap.... that's more of a worry!

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Is kinda crazy the C300 can't even do 1080 60p!

At least my Sony F3 is capable of that :-D 

This is where i think Canon got it so wrong... They tried to move up a tier but didn't seem to notice that narrative shooters need HFR.

C300 ii seems to be in no man's land at it's price point ... too much power for most event shooters... not enough for the rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tugela said:

But apparently not with the people renting equipment, if the OP is true.

Perhaps it depends on location? When I asked the folks at Division Camera in Hollywood many months ago (they hadn't had the C300 II that long), they said the C300 II was renting very well, just surpassing the FS7 (Alexa Mini was also very popular). Alexa is popular as it takes the least work in post- largest usable DR and best color/look straight out of the camera. The DR really helps if over/underexposed: good recovery results are possible in post (people make mistakes, lighting can change unexpectedly etc.). This saves time and money (don't need to reshoot, and/or a shot that would be lost on another camera is still usable).

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, hmcindie said:

The interesting thing is, it still seems like Sony is using the same kind of colorimetry it did 10 years ago. For example, the old Sony HC1. Great handycam for it's time. But when I compared it to the Canon HV20 in cinemode... The difference is actually almost the same now. The Canon HV20 had a mode that disabled sharpening completely and had a very cinematic image, a bit orangey with a great whitebalance. The Sony was a bit more blue, bit more magenta, bit more sharp. Sony was also two years before Canon in the market.

I have very similar memories of that era. I was at first very sceptical of HDV, because I'd seen only footage from the early Sony models that only did interlaced image with godawful washed out color. It seemed in some ways inferior to prosumer SD. I was actually thinking of picking up an XM2 at the very tail end of SD era, but then I looked into the HV30 and fell in love. That camera had the worst focus wheel, but other than that it felt revolutionary. I ended up shooting three indie features with it, and some footage still holds up to a degree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jcs said:

Perhaps it depends on location? When I asked the folks at Division Camera in Hollywood many months ago (they hadn't had the C300 II that long), they said the C300 II was renting very well, just surpassing the FS7 (Alexa Mini was also very popular). Alexa is popular as it takes the least work in post- largest usable DR and best color/look straight out of the camera. The DR really helps if over/underexposed: good recovery results are possible in post (people make mistakes, lighting can change unexpectedly etc.). This saves time and money (don't need to reshoot, and/or a shot that would be lost on another camera is still usable).

Got to remember the bias they have when you ask if a camera is "popular".

 

It isn't in their best interests to make you think a camera is unpopular and to thus make you reconsider renting it!

 

Plus even if they're telling the truth that the C300II rents just as much as the FS7, the fact they have to first slash the rental price of a much more expensive camera down to near the level of the FS7 shows that it isn't really as popular. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Got to remember the bias they have when you ask if a camera is "popular".

 

It isn't in their best interests to make you think a camera is unpopular and to thus make you reconsider renting it!

 

Plus even if they're telling the truth that the C300II rents just as much as the FS7, the fact they have to first slash the rental price of a much more expensive camera down to near the level of the FS7 shows that it isn't really as popular. 

That's possible, however around Hollywood/Beverly Hills I see C100, C300 (I/II), Reds, Alexas, and even the XC10 (paparazzi), but not many Sonys...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/30/2016 at 5:03 AM, kgyalla said:

The F5 that still retails for over 16k, has no internal 4k, no 12 bit 4444, and one stop lower in dynamic range.

F5 was released in 2012, 4 years ago, and it can do internal 4K with FW. Is there solid evidence for the claim that F5 has 1 stop less DR?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/30/2016 at 5:03 PM, kgyalla said:

As someone who has just bought a c300 mark 2 and is the owner of two c100s, I second Tom's comments. The sony camera's have failed to deliver a shooter experience let alone a image quality I desire. One has to realize that the c300 mark 2 was never competing with the fs7 but the F5 and F55. The F5 that still retails for over 16k, has no internal 4k, no 12 bit 4444, and one stop lower in dynamic range. So compared to that, the c300 mark ii is quite a steal even at the same price. Canon was always aiming for the Sony F5/F55 line during their C300 Mark ii development process.

However, Sony's release of the fs7 wasn't ever based on a real product strategy. Which company would release the two lower priced prosumer products that have a wealth of features that there entry level Pro camera could not do without a pricey firmware update. Sony has shown a resurgence in the last two years with the A7 line by throwing the entire kitchen sink at the problem of slumping sales. We as the consumers have benefited greatly from this. However, as a videographer/cinematographer that needs gear to provide a living for me (www.kyalla.co), these cameras though feature rich lack great image quality. 4k is overrated when compared to skin tones, color science, ergonomics, etc. Though I think there is many areas that Canon needs to improve in (overcrank), I do think they have been taking the right approach of focusing on image quality, ergonomics, build construction, and color.

WTF...  so so wrong. Unless you are claiming what I did today was impossible? As I was just today recording 'internally' with a Sony F5 in 4K 16bit raw, name any Canon which can do that for such a low price? NONE can!!

 

So pfffttttt... blew right past that measly 12bit and doing 16bit raw! ;-) Ha! No Canon, at any price, can do that internally.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I meant the base Sony F5. Add to the fact that you can only get the higher bitrate options with the external recorder and the camera does not come with any power/monitor options out of the box. The 4k is also a optional license add on. 

9 hours ago, Advisti said:

F5 was released in 2012, 4 years ago, and it can do internal 4K with FW. Is there solid evidence for the claim that F5 has 1 stop less DR?

 

I agree the camera was released at a time much earlier than the c300 mark ii. However Im just going by their numbers. The internal 4k can only be done with a add on firmware license purchase. The dynamic range number is the one that I'm quoting from Sony's own website.  The c300 mark ii was confirmed to have 15 stops via a reputable third party. Though 15 vs 14 is not that much difference. The f5/f55 are great cameras, however I think Sony might have had a misstep by not offering 4k internal right off the bat for the F5.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One more time, F5 can do internal 4K since 2014 after firmware upgrade (there was a free hack before that allowed 4K on F5 anyway, internally, without external recorder).

Aside from 4K December 2014 update enable recording in Apple ProRes and Avid’s DNxHD codecs directly to the Sony SxS Pro+ memory cards that the camera normally uses (note that's internally). These cameras already supported XAVC, MPEG2 and HDCAM SR, not to mention the additional RAW option that's available if you have the AXS-R5 raw recorder.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Liszon said:

A-humm.. Yes, we know it does 4K.

The person I responded to obviously doesn't as he said F5 doesn't do internal 4K. The "paid" 4K firmware update 2 years ago was less than $1000 which is peanuts given we are talking about $10,000+  cameras.  Even before that, there was hack that allowed internal 4K recording anyway. Most F5s sold today are already updated to 4K fw version, aren't they?

The point is that when C300 Mk II was released, F5 by that time, already did internal 4K. and much more (ProRes, DNxHD, HDCAM SR 422 and 444,  10-bit XAVC, high frame rates, all internally, and 16-bit raw to AXS-R5 raw recorder.)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Advisti said:

Most F5s sold today are already updated to 4K fw version, aren't they?

I am not sure about that. The firmware might be up to date but 4K is still dependent on the paid unlock code. Some shops (eg. Adorama) sell packages with the extra licence included, others don't seem to even mention it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2016 at 1:47 AM, Liszon said:

Well what he said is not a lie actually, the bare bones 16k F5 doesn't do internal raw - unless you have the R5 sitting in the back.

 

On 8/31/2016 at 2:42 AM, kgyalla said:

I meant the base Sony F5. Add to the fact that you can only get the higher bitrate options with the external recorder and the camera does not come with any power/monitor options out of the box. The 4k is also a optional license add on. 

I tonight made the F5 I'm using shoot 4K ***FOR FREE****! ;-) :-D 

 

 

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?148795-Canon-s-new-C700&p=1659639&viewfull=1#post1659639

Yet another report that C300mk2 is renting poorly (in regards to the likelihood the C700 will be a hot rental item):

Quote

Well, considering that many Rental Houses are having issues renting most of their C300MII stock I sincerely doubt it. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The C300 II is selling very well, sold out until then end of September: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134579-REG/canon_0635c002_eos_c300_mark_ii.html

We use the C300 II along with the 1DX II (for low-profile run & gun, travel shoots, and occasional 4k60p) and while it's not an ideal 'all-in-one' solution, it works very well in production given the excellent PDAF AF and great color and skintones straight out of camera (a real time-saver in post). The C300 II + 1DX II is lot more expensive than an FS7 up front, however time is money and ultimately getting better images (in focus!) in less time is more important than the initial savings for an FS7 (we're selling our FS700- 60p is good enough (and 120p on the A7S II is useful too (can match A7S II to Canon with a bit of work in post)).

As more professionals find PDAF saving time and money in higher and higher end productions, the PDAF cameras will naturally get more popular. The C700 will be even more like an Alexa/Amira but with PDAF- that's something ARRI and Sony don't have. Sony could bring their A7R II level AF (or better) to the pro cameras someday, and if they can get closer to ARRI/Canon for skintones in real-world lighting conditions (not just the studio), they'll put up a good challenge to Canon (and even ARRI).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...