Jump to content

The Canon C200 is here and its a bomb!


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Z_Cunningham said:

For sure, brother.

I botched my first shoot with the C200. You have to pretty much calibrate the camera for every shot. Canon calls it "Black Balance" and it fixes FPN in the lowest IREs. Still need to crush the last 1/2 ish stop of blacks to kill the bad noise. The chroma dies usually when it's uploaded thankfully.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 376
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Man, I suffer in silence when I read some stuff here (I guess I'm masochist to keep reading it). But this one is too much for me... On what ground do you think it should cost 2,500$ ? Please tell me.

The DSLR filmmaker community is funny. It's like "Gimme 8bit proxy, 10bit, RAW, Canon colour science, Log, 4K, IBIS, DPAF and HFR in one package, in A7S form factor, max 2500 bux. I need a silver bull

Hi Guys, Here are some screens from a short I recently wrote/directed. Originally planned to use the Varicam LT but availability was scarce at the time of our shooting days. All in all using the

Posted Images

5 hours ago, Z_Cunningham said:

Thanks, 

No, I wasn't the DP. My homie Jeremy Brockman was the DP (Instagram @brockfeb). We shot entirely at 800 but either exposed right on the nose or underexposed about quarter to a half stop give or take. He definitely intended to do that. After production he did say that when he looked back at the raw stills (since raw has no noise reduction) that he probably would've tweaked that in some shots. 

Also, our colorist said that he made the right choice because the highlights can clips pretty harshly on this camera even when shooting raw. I asked him how many stops of dynamic range he thought the camera had, and he said probably around 12. 

Thanks. I like how the skin tones look. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/6/2018 at 7:05 PM, Z_Cunningham said:

Yea that's what I saw in a lot of test videos before we got the camera. However, when we were doing our camera tests before, ETTR did something weird to the skin tones of our actors that our DP didn't like. One of our main actors has really dark rich skin and we definitely wanted to preserve the fidelity of that. But you live and you learn. All in all I think the images came out solid. 

Stoked to have bought the camera last week. Everything brand new in the box for around 5,500€ which I feel was a pretty good price. Bought a couple of Komputerbay CFAST cards which seem to be working out well so far. I've heard they can be hit and miss but didn't feel like paying 2x that price for the Sandisk.

The camera is a dream to operate, but I'm kind of surprised how tricky it is to shoot RAW at first. My first tests had a ton of noise, and the post-production workflow in FCPX makes things a little complicated by automatically applying a Canon CLOG 2 viewing LUT. Started grading the RAW footage first and then applying a standard Alexa Log LUT from IMPULZ and have been seeing some great results. The 4K 10bit 60fps is really beautiful and produces really smooth, rich results. Will be testing it out over the coming fortnight and will hopefully edit something together to show some results.

Oh, one thing. FCPX is magic. I'm on a maxed out 2014 Macbook Pro (yes, 2014) and I can smoothly playback and grade the RAW before transcoding. Which is insane. After creating proxies and throwing a little more footage on the timeline I've had hardly any issues at all.

Also, if anyone has used the C200 and the Sigma 18-35, could they share their experiences? I'm looking into grabbing that but not sure how it would be to operate handheld without lens IS. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Gregormannschaft said:

Stoked to have bought the camera last week. Everything brand new in the box for around 5,500€ which I feel was a pretty good price. Bought a couple of Komputerbay CFAST cards which seem to be working out well so far. I've heard they can be hit and miss but didn't feel like paying 2x that price for the Sandisk.

The camera is a dream to operate, but I'm kind of surprised how tricky it is to shoot RAW at first. My first tests had a ton of noise, and the post-production workflow in FCPX makes things a little complicated by automatically applying a Canon CLOG 2 viewing LUT. Started grading the RAW footage first and then applying a standard Alexa Log LUT from IMPULZ and have been seeing some great results. The 4K 10bit 60fps is really beautiful and produces really smooth, rich results. Will be testing it out over the coming fortnight and will hopefully edit something together to show some results.

Oh, one thing. FCPX is magic. I'm on a maxed out 2014 Macbook Pro (yes, 2014) and I can smoothly playback and grade the RAW before transcoding. Which is insane. After creating proxies and throwing a little more footage on the timeline I've had hardly any issues at all.

Also, if anyone has used the C200 and the Sigma 18-35, could they share their experiences? I'm looking into grabbing that but not sure how it would be to operate handheld without lens IS. 

Where'd you get such a good price? $6k US is about my cutoff so I would have jumped on that, too.

And Jeez... I might switch to FCPX. How good is its integration with After Effects and Resolve? I don't use dynamic link (I export to After Effects manually) so dynamic link isn't an advantage to me, but I'd want to be able to render out/export 4k 444 ProRes in Canon Log 2 without a LUT and then ingest that into a timeline that's otherwise raw light and edit online in raw light. Amazed to hear it's real time on an older machine... maybe I won't need to upgrade after all. :) 

Then again I don't even really need 4k, but the extra highlight dynamic range on this and 60p seem nice...

Or how is the online/offline workflow in FCPX?

I've used the 18-35mm on a C100 and a C300 and I noticed that, compared with the 17-55mm f2.8 IS (of which I think I had two copies) the image is shakier when using the viewfinder, and significantly. But if you rig up a shoulder rig (I love the Shape offset rig, not the standard one, but the offset one, though you need a loupe for the viewfinder imo) and balance it okay.... I think the 18-35mm is great handheld and even lenses up to 135mm are fine without IS. Most ops I know prefer not to use any IS at all and instead rely on shoulder rigs, but I have to admit the 55-250mm STM for instance is magic and rarely glitches out or misbehaves enough to ruin a shot, while being stable enough to use without any rig at all (not the case without IS).

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Gregormannschaft said:

Stoked to have bought the camera last week. Everything brand new in the box for around 5,500€ which I feel was a pretty good price. Bought a couple of Komputerbay CFAST cards which seem to be working out well so far. I've heard they can be hit and miss but didn't feel like paying 2x that price for the Sandisk.

The camera is a dream to operate, but I'm kind of surprised how tricky it is to shoot RAW at first. My first tests had a ton of noise, and the post-production workflow in FCPX makes things a little complicated by automatically applying a Canon CLOG 2 viewing LUT. Started grading the RAW footage first and then applying a standard Alexa Log LUT from IMPULZ and have been seeing some great results. The 4K 10bit 60fps is really beautiful and produces really smooth, rich results. Will be testing it out over the coming fortnight and will hopefully edit something together to show some results.

Oh, one thing. FCPX is magic. I'm on a maxed out 2014 Macbook Pro (yes, 2014) and I can smoothly playback and grade the RAW before transcoding. Which is insane. After creating proxies and throwing a little more footage on the timeline I've had hardly any issues at all.

Also, if anyone has used the C200 and the Sigma 18-35, could they share their experiences? I'm looking into grabbing that but not sure how it would be to operate handheld without lens IS. 

I have had the camera for 9 months. Use Fcpx, I question your report on the 2014 MacBook Pro editing of RAW. It does not run smooth on my MacBook Pro 2015, nor on iMac late 2014, but definitely smooth on my IMac Pro 10 core, with the best GPU. However, if you create proxies you can edit smoothly. The older Macs has max out configurations. Report says that even the 2018 MacBook Pro have issues with playing back RAW. 

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

I have had the camera for 9 months. Use Fcpx, I question your report on the 2014 MacBook Pro editing of RAW. It does not run smooth on my MacBook Pro 2015, nor on iMac late 2014, but definitely smooth on my IMac Pro 10 core, with the best GPU. However, if you create proxies you can edit smoothly. The older Macs has max out configurations. Report says that even the 2018 MacBook Pro have issues with playing back RAW. 

From my experience RawLite playback is less to do with cpu or gpu power and more to do with hard drive read speed. My 2016 MBP runs the same with or without eGPU. But loading files on the internal hard drive makes playback way smoother then loading from an external hard drive. FCPX has no issues. Resolve is smooth also, but only if playback is from the internal drive.

Maybe there is an advantage if you are doing CGI, but I seldom do that anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DBounce said:

From my experience RawLite playback is less to do with cpu or gpu power and more to do with hard drive read speed. My 2016 MBP runs the same with or without eGPU. But loading files on the internal hard drive makes playback way smoother then loading from an external hard drive. FCPX has no issues. Resolve is smooth also, but only if playback is from the internal drive.

Maybe there is an advantage if you are doing CGI, but I seldom do that anymore.

Interesting article on that hard drive subject.

https://www.macworld.com/article/2039427/how-fast-is-usb-3-0-really-.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DBounce said:

From my experience RawLite playback is less to do with cpu or gpu power and more to do with hard drive read speed. My 2016 MBP runs the same with or without eGPU. But loading files on the internal hard drive makes playback way smoother then loading from an external hard drive. FCPX has no issues. Resolve is smooth also, but only if playback is from the internal drive.

Maybe there is an advantage if you are doing CGI, but I seldom do that anymore.

Sorry but you are most likely wrong here. Have a look at this video (around 8min in the video he talked about Raw Light) : I currently have 3 Mac's, all with internal SSD - It is definitely the GPU that counts, only iMac Pro does a proper job. FCPX is best, then Resolve. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Asmundma said:

Sorry but you are most likely wrong here. Have a look at this video (around 8min in the video he talked about Raw Light) : I currently have 3 Mac's, all with internal SSD - It is definitely the GPU that counts, only iMac Pro does a proper job. FCPX is best, then Resolve. 

 

With all due respect... I'm not "most likely wrong"... I'm definitely correct. I have this camera and edit frequently with my MBP. I don't need to watch a review to understand what I'm seeing in my real world workflow. 

Fyi: I don't run PP on macs. 

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

With all due respect... I'm not "most likely wrong"... I'm definitely correct. I have this camera and edit frequently with my MBP. I don't need to watch a review to understand what I'm seeing in my real world workflow. 

Fyi: I don't run PP on macs. 

Hi, with all respect from my side as well. It a little bit strange, are you applying any colour correction and still get smooth playback and not using any proxies or optimised media? This was the reason that I got an iMac Pro with is cutting it well. 

I am considering upgrading my MacBook Pro (Mid 2015) for when I am on the road. However if I still will need to create proxies on a new 2018 MacBook Pro, the value is somewhat limited. Then we have the throttle issue as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Asmundma said:

Hi, with all respect from my side as well. It a little bit strange, are you applying any colour correction and still get smooth playback and not using any proxies or optimised media? This was the reason that I got an iMac Pro with is cutting it well. 

I am considering upgrading my MacBook Pro (Mid 2015) for when I am on the road. However if I still will need to create proxies on a new 2018 MacBook Pro, the value is somewhat limited. Then we have the throttle issue as well. 

Color collections render preview files.  Once rendered playback is fine. CG is something I do after assembling my timeline.

FCPX is very smooth,  but lacks some raw controls that resolve has. I find these days I'm mostly editing in resolve. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mercer said:

The Raw Panel is available in Resolve with the RawLite files from the C200?

Yes it is... which is why I have favored Resolve for C200 footage. Granted I’m not running the paid version as it is included for free with the P4K. Annoyingly, this means all my GH5S footage must be edited in FCPX as the free version of Resolve does not support the 10 bit ALL-I files from the GH5S.

 

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

Yes it is... which is why I have favored Resolve for C200 footage. Granted I’m not running the paid version as it is included for free with the P4K. Annoyingly, this means all my GH5S footage must be edited in FCPX as the free version of Resolve does not support the 10 bit ALL-I files from the GH5S.

 

That’s interesting. I thought I remember reading that the RawLite didn’t have the same leeway as CDNG files. Cool. How does the WB and exposure controls in Raw tab seem? Are they non destructive like regular Raw files or can they only be pushed so much?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2018 at 4:46 AM, HockeyFan12 said:

Where'd you get such a good price? $6k US is about my cutoff so I would have jumped on that, too.

And Jeez... I might switch to FCPX. How good is its integration with After Effects and Resolve? I don't use dynamic link (I export to After Effects manually) so dynamic link isn't an advantage to me, but I'd want to be able to render out/export 4k 444 ProRes in Canon Log 2 without a LUT and then ingest that into a timeline that's otherwise raw light and edit online in raw light. Amazed to hear it's real time on an older machine... maybe I won't need to upgrade after all. :) 

It was pretty much an open box deal from a production company that didn't use it for a shoot, went for a decent price on eBay. 

On 8/11/2018 at 6:37 AM, Asmundma said:

I have had the camera for 9 months. Use Fcpx, I question your report on the 2014 MacBook Pro editing of RAW. It does not run smooth on my MacBook Pro 2015, nor on iMac late 2014, but definitely smooth on my IMac Pro 10 core, with the best GPU. However, if you create proxies you can edit smoothly. The older Macs has max out configurations. Report says that even the 2018 MacBook Pro have issues with playing back RAW. 

The maxed out 2014 Macbook Pro handles the injest well in FCPX, I can work around with the colour a little, do some retiming and make a short edit while it creates optimised media and proxies. Once you have a bit of footage on the timeline it does start to chug, but that I can edit and grade RAW footage at all was a very pleasant surprise – I was expecting to have to buy a new machine. After I've created proxies and/or optimised media it works very well, the caveat being that I haven't worked on a test edit longer than 2 mins or so. It could be that with 5-10mins of footage on the timeline I see different results. I'm also editing off a Samsung SSD if that helps clarify anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/30/2018 at 11:59 PM, mercer said:

Well, I’d only want the updated DPAF version... and I’d rather it be closer to a grand than 1500... and even then... a C200B will probably start going on sale for 4-5 grand this time next year, so it would probably be smarter for me to save that money for that.

Downside of the C200B is that you lose the touch to focus (and if DPAF is important then the area selection should be too). Plus if you are using an external recorder as you've mentioned, you can't really have the display info on it, such as exposure settings etc on your clean feed external recorder. Honestly think the savings are so not worth it (unless you really want to use it remotely anyway). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, MdB said:

Downside of the C200B is that you lose the touch to focus (and if DPAF is important then the area selection should be too). Plus if you are using an external recorder as you've mentioned, you can't really have the display info on it, such as exposure settings etc on your clean feed external recorder. Honestly think the savings are so not worth it (unless you really want to use it remotely anyway). 

Yeah, you’re probably right. I figured the C200B would go on sale quicker, or be cheaper on the used market and then one could use an external recorder, their phone/iPad or pay the $600 for the official Canon monitor and still be under the C200 cost. But then I realized, that the cable is damn near $300... so at full price you aren’t really saving enough to warrant the piece meal... of course, I rarely/never use an evf, so the camera will be a little smaller by going the c200b route. 

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...