Jump to content
DBounce

Canon C200 Philip Bloom Review

Recommended Posts

Everyone has a different use for a camera. Some folks strictly shoot events or weddings, some shoot music videos, some shoot commercials, some shoot industrial promos, some shoot nature docs, some shoot sports, some shoot timelapse, some shoot features and some just shoot camera tests.  

I see the C200 strictly as a Raw Cinema camera that shoots proxies. Others see it as a poorly spec'd standard video camera that has some nice additional features, like Raw. This isn't a camera for shooting events or docs. This isn't a camera for shooting sports. It's not a camera for shooting a lot of things. But it's arguably one of the best cinema cameras ever made for shooting one-man band, indie features and music videos. Some of us want the absolute best quality a file can give us and will take 12 bits over 10 bits any day of the week, no matter the setbacks in storage and conversion time. I'm not happy about the absence of a middle codec, but I think the C200 is going to be the camera I choose for a small feature. 

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
7 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

I had an idea that would be an amazing feature for Canon's DPAF. They need to make a small trackpad on the side grip. You can move the AF tracker around with your thumb, and tap to lock focus on a subject. Or either select which face to focus via the trackpad. Mini joysticks are nice but they're too slow for video.

I like it, should be possible on the touchscreen also (touchscreen-focus-tracking might actually be possible in some models...M5?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are alternative suggestions:

"Canoning" = bringing out a new camera with a feature set from 5-10 years ago (such as: mush-o-vision 1080p in all consumer EOS bodies, 8bit codecs in Cinema EOS bodies), but improving on one single killer feature that makes people buy the new, overpriced product anyway (such as: dual pixel AF in consumer EOS bodies, raw in the C200).

"Sonying" = bringing out a new camera with a killer spec sheet that makes everyone believe, in the phase between announcement and product availability, that it will be the camera to end all cameras. Only later, people realize that it actually sucks in practice (because of terrible ergonomics, menus from hell, zombie color science, underpowered codecs, overheating).

"Panasonicking" = bringing out a camera that disrupts the very definition of a prosumer hybrid camera (first with clean 1080p, then with 4K, then with 10bit), but somehow always ends up being neither a great stills camera, nor a stunning-image cinema camera.

"Blackmagicking" = bringing out a camera whose image quality rivals RED/Arri at a tenth of the price or less, but earning a shit reputation nevertheless because you sold it to people whose footage is brown noisy mush because they didn't put an IR cut filter onto their lens and didn't expose ETTR, with dictaphone sound because they recorded with the internal mic, with framedrops because they disregarded the list of compatible storage cards and whose resulting videos look crap because they're not colorists, but slapped on the M31 LUT (if they didn't choose to upload their ungraded log video to Vimeo because it says "Cinema" in the color menu). And hey, using it people find out that after all, they didn't need raw or 10bit ProRes Log but in-camera lens stabilization, a good internal mic, ISO 100, long internal battery life, stills.

Share this post


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

Here are alternative suggestions:

"Canoning" = bringing out a new camera with a feature set from 5-10 years ago (such as: mush-o-vision 1080p in all consumer EOS bodies, 8bit codecs in Cinema EOS bodies), but improving on one single killer feature that makes people buy the new, overpriced product anyway (such as: dual pixel AF in consumer EOS bodies, raw in the C200).

"Sonying" = bringing out a new camera with a killer spec sheet that makes everyone believe, in the phase between announcement and product availability, that it will be the camera to end all cameras. Only later, people realize that it actually sucks in practice (because of terrible ergonomics, menus from hell, zombie color science, underpowered codecs, overheating).

"Panasonicking" = bringing out a camera that disrupts the very definition of a prosumer hybrid camera (first with clean 1080p, then with 4K, then with 10bit), but somehow always ends up being neither a great stills camera, nor a stunning-image cinema camera.

"Blackmagicking" = bringing out a camera whose image quality rivals RED/Arri at a tenth of the price or less, but earning a shit reputation nevertheless because you sold it to people whose footage is brown noisy mush because they didn't put an IR cut filter onto their lens and didn't expose ETTR, with dictaphone sound because they recorded with the internal mic, with framedrops because they disregarded the list of compatible storage cards and whose resulting videos look crap because they're not colorists, but slapped on the M31 LUT (if they didn't choose to upload their ungraded log video to Vimeo because it says "Cinema" in the color menu). And hey, using it people find out that after all, they didn't need raw or 10bit ProRes Log but in-camera lens stabilization, a good internal mic, ISO 100, long internal battery life, stills.

This is it!

I move for a vote!

Could we ad,

Samsunging = getting the f..k out of Dodge.

Leicaing = sticking to what you do best. Even though it only appeals to a selected few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Samsunging = getting the f..k out of Dodge.

Leicaing = sticking to what you do best. Even though it only appeals to a selected few.

Or:
"Samsunging" = your engineers have just put 100 petaflops quantum computing into an artificial intelligence APS-C chip that happens to double as a hydrogen fuel cell. But you wisely decide that smartphones are the future.

"Leicaing" = bringing out cameras knowing that in the smartphone age, cameras have become as gratuitous as wrist watches. So you emulate the Swiss watch industry.

"Hasselblading (2015-style)" = in the smartphone age, everything has become a commodity. So you emulate luxury smartphone brands that slap diamonds and crocodile leather on commodity phones.

"Pentaxing" = bringing out cameras nevertheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cantsin said:

"Leicaing" = bringing out cameras knowing that in the smartphone age, cameras have become as gratuitous as wrist watches. So you emulate the Swiss watch industry.

The problem with this one is tha part about the smartphone age.

They haven't adapted with some exclusive image. They are doing the same thing they have always done. For a hundred years. They've seen it all. Photography boom after photography boom. Film, digital, smartphones, dslr video. But they could care less. They stick to their concept.

And remain profitable I might ad. When all the others struggled the worst Leica still made money. They will outlive Nikon and the other large brand that falls. Which that is remains to be seen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

The problem with this one is tha part about the smartphone age.

They haven't adapted with some exclusive image. They are doing the same thing they have always done. For a hundred years. They've seen it all. Photography boom after photography boom. Film, digital, smartphones, dslr video. But they could care less. They stick to their concept.

Only for their own interchangeable lens camera bodies and lens line-up. Besides that, they're also licensing their brand for Huawei smartphones and rather plasticky Panasonic lenses, and conversely sell rebranded Panasonic camera bodies under their own name.

Share this post


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

Only for their own interchangeable lens camera bodies and lens line-up. Besides that, they're also licensing their brand for Huawei smartphones and rather plasticky Panasonic lenses, and conversely sell rebranded Panasonic camera bodies under their own name.

Yup, and laughing all the way to the bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Yup, and laughing all the way to the bank.

Which makes them perfectly comparable to the Swiss watch industry and a company like Omega-Swatch (which sells you a whole range of products from a $30 plastic Swatch [the equivalent of the "Leica" lens in the Huawei phone] to a $30,000 Blancpain Brassus, the equivalent of a Leica S.). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2017 at 8:10 AM, Andrew Reid said:

No camera are identical, if you are looking for something cheaper than the C200 that has word-for-word the same features and overall spec you won't find it, but you can say the same about nearly every single camera in the world.

If you take out the C200's raw, which not many C200 owners are going to actually use, and look at just the key selling points, they are -

4K
Dual Pixel AF
NDs
Video camera ergonomics
XLRs
Native Canon EF mount

Canon has made sure nothing from their stills line is the same but the 1D X II actually has a more user friendly implementation of Dual Pixel AF with 4K 60fps, so some might swing to that if simplicity is your thing.

The FS5 has everything the C200 has in terms of features apart from the internal raw... Plus it has 10bit 1080p internal, better slow-mo and electronic NDs, stuff the C200 doesn't have.

The A99 II has 5 axis IBIS, again better 120fps, full frame sensor, much cheaper, smaller form factor, yet many of the same ergonomic features of a video camera.

GH5 has actually a broader spec sheet for video than the C200.

 

 

head-banging.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rioching... putting the wrong brand on your camera

Samsunging... climbing 9 tenths of Everest but before reaching the peak, turning around and going back down again then shooting yourself in the head

Sonying... Trapping the finest tech specs in bodies designed by the Sony playstation team's children

Panasoniceering... Being an amazing basketball player trapped in the body of a 4ft dwarf

Nikonactioning... To simply run out of ideas and never have a new one ever again, resulting in no action, simply a freeze frame of a once great company

Canoning... To simply coast along garnering praise and success from nothing, like a miracle Christ-like figure who has lucked into it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎07‎/‎2017 at 0:10 AM, Andrew Reid said:

 

The FS5 has everything the C200 has in terms of features apart from the internal raw... Plus it has 10bit 1080p internal, better slow-mo and electronic NDs, stuff the C200 doesn't have.

 

Except it is not all about features, but about image. And the image from the FS5 is shite. I would take the C200 over the FS7 any day of the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna order one, and before you stone me death let me explain :glasses:

I make my living on video gigs, and we have used two C100s for the past three years for most of them. There were only a few occasions where I wanted more than 8-bit, and about 30% of the time I wish I had more data than the brilliantly implemented AVCHD 24mbps. On paper they're shit. In reality they're brilliant workhorses.

When I did want more data, a little Ninja 2 with a locking HDMI cable provided more than enough wiggle room using DNxHD 220X, without sacrificing any camcorder conveninece. It looked really good, but what was amazing is well the AVCHD stood up to it with a tenth of the data.

What did I really miss on shoots? frame rates up to 100fps. If we really needed this we usually ended up hiring an Arri Amira for the whole job instead of doing things piecemeal. Anything higher than 100fps I took from Amira usually ended sped up in an edit so 100fps would have been fine. So 100 fps is what I'd like.

We also have a Red and don't use it much because of the weight and neediness of all the kit that goes with it. It takes a lot more post. It's been used as a B-Cam to an Amira on some shoots and in this situation the far superior colour on the Amira made the Red look poor :grimace: so it's not really useful for my work.

During this time I've had a lot of Sony cameras and always sold them after a brief honeymoon period. Why?

Terrible colour. I can't stand it. Yeah high speeds are great and so are high bitrates, but the footage always looked kinda anaemic and dead rendering the slow-mo and bitrates meaningless to me. Even in that bloom review I knew he was shooting himself with a Sony because he was MagentaMan. It's so slow to fix the colour, it's really annoying and takes the fun out of the post. Also they're always clunky to use in terms of menus and often feel cheaply made and ergonmically questionable.

So the C200 comes along. The whole "either have really compressed or stupidly massive raw" is a bit of a niggle, but they may add another bitrate option as they did with other cameras like the XC10.

In short for users making use of these the way I do it'll be ideal. I can use all the lenses, all the batteries, it'll cut well with the C100s, I get my 100fps and I can do extra special shots for post and so on in raw. I don't have to think too much about adaptors, batteries, dodgy colour and so on, just hand them the money and I can thrash the thing for five years.

in other words THEY HAVE ME OVER A BARRELL :confounded: but they're good at what they do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jgharding said:

I'm gonna order one, and before you stone me death let me explain :glasses:

Jeez dude, why would anyone stone you ? ;) As long as you are happy with your gear and can deliver the job you can film with your cell phone and I'll have nothing to say.

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...