Jump to content
hmcindie

C200 - some thoughts

Recommended Posts

I've been doing personal projects with the Canon 5d mk III shooting raw.  For professional work I've recently used the FS7 and the A7sII.

We got a chance to play with the C200 for a couple of hours so we quickly shot some shite and I tested the camera out.

The autofocus. It can be crazy good depending on where your coming from. I haven't really used any autofocus system for a long time. The 1DXii was used on a gimbal - where the autofocus worked great - and the 5dmkIV was quickly tested. But the C200 was the first where I was like "damn, this is magic". It had trouble in low-light and with some older and heavier lenses (like the f1.2 50mm) but when using the 18-80mm t4.5 lens it worked like magic. Seriously good. I could imagine using it a lot. For documentaries etc, I could see this camera just being perfect. It lacks an intermediate codec between the RAW and the H264 but I would probably be pleased in just shooting a doc with the internal H264.

Two quibbles came to mind: 1. Proxy workflow. The h264 and the raw clips are named differently. What the hell? I have to use bulk renamer or another tool after the shoot. Also the camera stopped shooting proxies after we changed the cf-card and it didn't notify us. Wtf canon? There are some ergonomic things that I didn't enjoy. The way of changing iso/shutter/aperture is a bit too videocamera oriented (I like how it's done with red or dslr's more than this fs7/c200 style). The playback buttons were all over the place. Those things can be fixed though by utilizing some custom buttons.

The C200 is a capable camera with a good nice, cinematic image quality. But so is the 5d raw and it has one thing going for it that no camera has in it's price range. Full frame and raw. That is unbeatable. Sure, it doesn't do 4k but I will always choose image quality and latitude over sharpness. In the end it's just a camera. If you shoot an ugly basement like we did, you will get an ugly basement. Next time we'll have to try just shooting some nature and philip bloomic stuff with an ambient music track haha ;)

Which is better, the FS7 or the C200? It's a tossup really, the C200 does some things better (color, autofocus. menu) the FS7 other things better (slowmotion, codec - though you might have to do proxies for the big fs7 files too)

We will be playing around with the Sony RX10 iv on friday so if you guys have anything to ask about it, I can try checking those things.

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

I would buy 3 of these bodies if Canon addressed these issues:

- Need an option for positive EF lock mount (lens wobble when pulling focus)

- 10 bit 24 and 30 fps RAW option (currently forced 60fps so fucking stupid)

- Windowed 1080 raw recording (crop to reduce bitrate would be awesome)

- Windowed high speed raw recording (48, 60, 120, etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2018 at 7:22 PM, andrgl said:

- 10 bit 24 and 30 fps RAW option (currently forced 60fps so fucking stupid)

I don't know if there is a difference in image quality anyways. I think the 12-bit and 10-bit modes are very close. I didn't do an exact study but just shooting randomly here and there I noticed no differences. But yes, getting 10bit 24fps should lower the space requirement. Good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to see how the C200 would perform a bit further north (99830, Saariselka) both at night and in cold conditions. If you still have it, send it up to me!!!

Nice basement.

Share this post


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

I don't know if there is a difference in image quality anyways. I think the 12-bit and 10-bit modes are very close. I didn't do an exact study but just shooting randomly here and there I noticed no differences. 

 

In grading? In theory, 10 bits hold 1024 tones and 12 bit 4096 tones so you should be able to push 12-bit image more in post.

Share this post


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

In grading? In theory, 10 bits hold 1024 tones and 12 bit 4096 tones so you should be able to push 12-bit image more in post.

Depends on how they're distributed and quantization noise.

I do remember someone (Scorsese and Prieto?) compared 2k 12bit and downscaled 4k 10bit raw on the C500 and preferred the former ever so slightly, but they found the difference to be extremely subtle even when projected at the world's best facilities. I doubt I'd notice it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I do remember someone (Scorsese and Prieto?) compared 2k 12bit and downscaled 4k 10bit raw on the C500 and preferred the former ever so slightly, but they found the difference to be extremely subtle even when projected at the world's best facilities. I doubt I'd notice it.

https://nofilmschool.com/2014/01/dp-rodrigo-prieto-reveals-why-color-is-king-in-canon-c500-promo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Depends on how they're distributed and quantization noise.

I do remember someone (Scorsese and Prieto?) compared 2k 12bit and downscaled 4k 10bit raw on the C500 and preferred the former ever so slightly, but they found the difference to be extremely subtle even when projected at the world's best facilities. I doubt I'd notice it.

 

12 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

 

If it is worth to sacrifice 4k for 12 bit doesn't it mean that it is actually quite a big difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, tomekk said:

If it is worth to sacrifice 4k for 12 bit doesn't it mean that it is actually quite a big difference?

"due to the fact that his testing revealed that the color depth and latitude were slightly higher in 2K." That is his quote. I guess I would take that when sort of Only the best you can do is what you are trying to do. Are you going to say ehh 4k looks worse so lets go that way?

I would imagine up on a 50' screen Any difference is noticeable, especially to the person that shot it. You might not notice it, but that is why people like him are successful is they go for every last ounce, and someone else would just go the way everyone else does.

I have seen some 1080p look better than some 4k on the web and out of certain cameras. I guess if I was into 4k I  would be looking for a better 4k camera LoL. But maybe some people think just because it is in 4k hell it HAS to be great. I think that is the story above. And take nothing for granted is the take away. But that takes time and money, and the average person has neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the video, he actually said that 12 bit colour bit depth gave them more pleasing skin tones and more latitude. He never used the word "slightly". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell I didn't write the article, I just used the quote in the piece. Take it up with No Film School LoL. It doesn't appear you believe the article anyways.I Really doubt the difference is night and day.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tomekk said:

 

hehe, yeah I know. I just thought I would add this small piece of information for the sake of completeness :). 

Well I will sleep peacefully tonight knowing it is total completeness.  :grin: I ought to kick HockeyFan12 for ever bringing it up! :grimace:

Share this post


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

Well, it seems, we have learned that there is a difference, and it is not a slight one but a noticeable one ;).

Well Since I would Never be able to afford to buy a Canon C500 sort of moot points LoL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Well Since I would Never be able to afford to buy a Canon C500 sort of moot points LoL.

Price has come way down. Could be purchased for under 4500 with a recorder.

2 hours ago, tomekk said:

In the video, he actually said that 12 bit colour bit depth gave them more pleasing skin tones and more latitude. He never used the word "slightly". 

The highlights clip so hard on the C500. The newer sensor on the c300ii and c200 is much smoother.

CanonEF.jpg

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...