Jump to content
Mattias Burling

The Canon C200 is here and its a bomb!

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, ssrdd said:

I think C200 should cost less or sell for 6000usd with kit lens. if not panasonic is better option. 

Any reason why it should cost less? Do you believe Canon isn't offering enough features for the money, or is it your budget constraints? Because we all dream stuff cost less. I'd like Sigma to charge $2,000 for their cine lenses, but that ain't happening anytime soon. I'm not taking sides, I've got no intention of picking up a cinema camera anytime soon, but it seems to me that the C200B is a great deal at only $5,999.00 USD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
1 hour ago, cpc said:

Don't get fooled by nominal bitdepth. A 10-bit raw frame from the Varicam LT or the Canon C500 contains much more color info than a 12-bit 4:1 Blackmagic raw frame.

How is that possible? Any 12-bit capture will have 4 times the amount of bits than a 10-bit file.

Tried to find a white sheet on Canon RAW but was unable to. Care to share one?

Share this post


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

How is that possible? Any 12-bit capture will have 4 times the amount of bits than a 10-bit file.

Tried to find a white sheet on Canon RAW but was unable to. Care to share one?

12 bits is 2 bits more than 10 bits, that is 1.2 times the amount of bits (and 4 times the values that can be encoded). These are nominal bits though. You can think of this as the available coding space. What you put in there is another story. First, the tone curve might not use all the available coding space (for example, the BM 4.6K log curve is closer to 11 bits). Then compression comes in. A BM camera may reduce actual precision to as low as 8-7 bits in HFR (4:1 compression), depending on image complexity.

You can read the paper on canon log (c-log), canon raw uses the same curve sans debayer.

Share this post


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

Any reason why it should cost less? Do you believe Canon isn't offering enough features for the money, or is it your budget constraints? Because we all dream stuff cost less. I'd like Sigma to charge $2,000 for their cine lenses, but that ain't happening anytime soon. I'm not taking sides, I've got no intention of picking up a cinema camera anytime soon, but it seems to me that the C200B is a great deal at only $5,999.00 USD.

 

Sir, I am comparing this camera with Ursamini due to RAW codec. yes it has good auto focusing, great color out of the box. But there is no 10bit codec internally which is more important than having Light RAW for me. All this can be achived under 5k with Gh5+atomos. Offering Duel pixel focus is the only new thing this segment. For me its not worth paying 2 or 3 grand extra just for Auto focus and never used Video autofocsing for any job by far. I am neither sides panasonc or canon. I just feel its not worth it. 

 

I agree for some of the photgraphers who got into videography after long time spending in still/autofocus industry, may be they rely on. 

Share this post


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

12 bits is 2 bits more than 10 bits, that is 1.2 times the amount of bits (and 4 times the values that can be encoded). These are nominal bits though. You can think of this as the available coding space. What you put in there is another story. First, the tone curve might not use all the available coding space (for example, the BM 4.6K log curve is closer to 11 bits). Then compression comes in. A BM camera may reduce actual precision to as low as 8-7 bits in HFR (4:1 compression), depending on image complexity.

You can read the paper on canon log (c-log), canon raw uses the same curve sans debayer.

lol sorry for the typo, was on phone, meant to write 4 times the data.

You have a source for your blackmagic claims? None of the information you've posted is available from official channels.

It's funny because your post omits the other half of the usual internet claim of 2 x 11-bit values conformed to 12-bit log. (15 stops has to come from somewhere.) 60fps on the 4.6k can be captured lossless btw.

 

At the end of the day, more bits equals less omitted data and more flexibility in post. I'm sure you may be okay with 10-bit 60p, but others aren't. :) I guess Canon has to gimp their low-end models. It would've been nice to have option for 10/12/14bit capture.

Share this post


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

You have a source for your blackmagic claims? None of the information you've posted is available from official channels.

It's funny because your post omits the other half of the usual internet claim of 2 x 11-bit values conformed to 12-bit log. (15 stops has to come from somewhere.) 60fps on the 4.6k can be captured lossless btw.

Well, I am the source. I don't need official channels for this, I trust math better than any channel. :) 

The ~11 bits used by the BMDFilm curve is orthogonal to how their pipeline constructs a 12-bit digital image. It is the result of the lack of a linear toe (which creates sparsities in the darks, i.e. values which never happen), as well as unused values at the top end of the range.

I haven't looked at the specs recently, but 60 fps 4.6K lossless raw would be in excess of 700 MB/s, which I am not sure is even supported by CFast cards currently.

edit: FWIW, I've written this, I guess it should be ok as far as credentials go: http://www.slimraw.com/

Share this post


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

Just went and tested this out, 4,6k60p is available in lossless RAW as well as 3:1 and 4:1. The RAW/Prores compression ratios are completely separate from the frame rate/resolution.

Well, this kind of makes my argument irrelevant then. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, kaylee said:

v cool... where can i get my hands on some raw light footage to play around with? 😎

There are no support for it in the editors yet. You would have to convert anyway, so you might as well download P.Blooms footage from Vimeo.

Share this post


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

There are no support for it in the editors yet. You would have to convert anyway, so you might as well download P.Blooms footage from Vimeo.

@Mattias Burling

As a lot of us here value your opinion greatly, what is your take for these new low-ish budget Cine Cameras (C200 and Panasonic)? It seems like the Panasonic wins in the middle codec, while "loosing" in the lower codec and internal raw.

Share this post


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

 

Looks good to me. Have to see what Panasonic brings, but as of now I am definitely leaning towards the Canon. It seems to match really well with the C300. Feels organic, with nice motion cadence. I'm thinking of the C200B with a loop for the LCD, or possibly... if that proves difficult to deal with a separate EVF. Not sure if I'll spring for the Canon CN-E 18-80mm T4.4 also, or just use my L series lenses.  It's food for thought.

Share this post


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

Looks good to me. Have to see what Panasonic brings, but as of now I am definitely leaning towards the Canon. It seems to match really well with the C300. Feels organic, with nice motion cadence. I'm thinking of the C200B with a loop for the LCD, or possibly... if that proves difficult to deal with a separate EVF. Not sure if I'll spring for the Canon CN-E 18-80mm T4.4 also, or just use my L series lenses.  It's food for thought.

The c200 looks even better than the C300ii, definitely RAW is the future, technology is evolving every day and prices going down weekly, with 3 x 250GB Cfast cards and  a computer you can do a day of shooting without a problem, I am falling in love for this camera more and more every day with every new footage which is released…..the color, the texture, everything is so good, I am already saving for it, and I am sure as soon as the c200B is released we will see many ingenious peripherals added a very low prices, that will save us some grants which is always welcomed….well done daddy Canon, finally you delivered!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Panasonic needs to leave dfd af and figure out how to compete with dpaf because amateurs and professionals without large crews know how much time and energy this saves on a shoot. Panny can come out with the best features but dpaf is joining the idea of canon colors on why most will go with them knowing that their overpriced cameras are being crippled.

Share this post


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...