Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23
  1. Collapse Details
    #11
    Senior Member chris f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,364
    Default
    I feel like the C700 (for the right price) could make for a good studio cam. Great image, convenient ProRes options for quick delivery and easy post workflow, etc. But with that form factor, I'll take a hard pass. Would also only want the EF mount so you can take advantage of autofocus.

    Having been someone who had the C500 when it first came out (work bought it) and then who bought it personally for dirt cheap long after it had ran its course I can't see myself going backwards on technology. Even if it's a good deal the convenience of new features (in my case the autofocus and internal recording of the C200) are just too good to pass up in my opinion.

    At this point I would need a very specific and regularly occurring use case to go backwards....
    Director | Making Lemonade: Our Covid 19 Story
    (warning: this film contains 0% politics, 0% conspiracies, & 100% optimism)


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #12
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,932
    Default
    I like the C700, well setup, fully-featured. I don't understand people's claims of it being heavy, as it's like half the weight of an Alexa. It gets a bit long with the raw recorder attached at the back, but so few people would want to shoot uncompressed 4k raw anyway, that I don't think that's a big issue. Size wise, it's hardly any worse than an FX9 with a v-mount plate out the back.

    It came too late to the party and didn't offer anything much more than people were already getting with Sony F55s or Varicams, which is why I think it's seen so little market penetration, but for a great price like that?! It's a bargain. Plus for just $5k more, you could have Canon upgrade it to their 6k Full-Frame sensor. It's a lot of camera for the money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #13
    Senior Member Jaime Valles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,108
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    ...but for a great price like that?! It's a bargain. Plus for just $5k more, you could have Canon upgrade it to their 6k Full-Frame sensor. It's a lot of camera for the money.
    It's a nice camera, for sure. But for the price, I'd rather get one of the newer offerings like the C300 Mk III or C500 Mk II, plus they're smaller and lighter weight. Both of those should be better image quality than the original C700, no?
    Jaime VallÚs
    AJV Media
    Video, Photography & Graphic Design: www.ajvmedia.com


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #14
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    4,477
    Default
    The 700 was just too late to the party and too expensive, especially to be a Canon camera. Yes, it actually had things I had asked for and suggested in the surveys that they had sent to C series owners years before, but it was still “a day late and a dollar short”, so to speak. If it had been introduced in 2012, it would be a completely different story.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #15
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,665
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Run&Gun View Post
    The 700 was just too late to the party and too expensive, especially to be a Canon camera. Yes, it actually had things I had asked for and suggested in the surveys that they had sent to C series owners years before, but it was still “a day late and a dollar short”, so to speak. If it had been introduced in 2012, it would be a completely different story.
    And if it wasn't in Arri Amira and RED territory on cost. If the C300 MKII, at the time, was a $10k or $12k camera, if Canon would have put the original C700 in the $18k range, it could have been a major success.
    It would work great as a small crew documentary A cam for interviews and crewed support shoots, even shoulder mounted. The whole Codex thing was a mismatch as far as cost structure, way too high end for
    who should have been buying the C700. I liked the form factor way better than any of the smaller Canons. I was hoping the C300 MKIII and C500 MKII
    were going to be this form factor at 2/3 size.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #16
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,932
    Default
    The C700 was a direct competitor for the F55 and the Varicam, I don’t think it’s unreasonable that they priced it comparably, unfortunately the boat had simply sailed by the time they got there.

    I think they’ve managed to leap right back into relevance again with the C500ii and C300ii though. The size, weight, feature-set and price are pretty fantastic on those.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #17
    Senior Member Eric Coughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,350
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    I liked the form factor way better than any of the smaller Canons. I was hoping the C300 MKIII and C500 MKII
    were going to be this form factor at 2/3 size.
    But are not the C300 Mark II and C500 Mark III basically the same form factor at 2/3 the size when you add the extension unit? This to me makes this generation of the C-series brilliant, as it pleases the cradle shooters and those who want a small and not long form factor, while also offering the opportunity for a long camera AB or V-mount shoulder balanced setup that doesn't rely on clunky rail setups.

    If you add some other items such as a Teredek holder and or Wooden Camera C-Box 3G-SDI to the back you can make the C300 or C500 even longer while adding functionality and still not needing cluttered rails as it looks like with the extension unit it may still be slightly shorter than the C700. Again, I see this as a positive because a camera that starts longer such as the C700 or Amira starts to get too long when you add on the Teredek holder as Run&Gun had mentioned in another topic. The C-Box or Teredek holder also snap on super quick (as quickly as mounting a battery) so do not require much time to rig up and are very contained to smoothly fit as if part of the original camera.








    There is a certain beauty to a camera like the Amira which is so well contained so that you rarely need to spend much time rigging or derigging like you may need to do with a Mini or C300, but on the flip side, the Mini and C300 have more flexibility in being able to use in smaller spaces or on a gimbal or drone. The Mini has a downside though of having the fan on the back of the camera which means you're always needing to use a not as ergonomic cage or rail setup to mount a battery compared to the C500 Mark II or a Red.
    Last edited by Eric Coughlin; 05-22-2020 at 12:52 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #18
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,665
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    The C700 was a direct competitor for the F55 and the Varicam, I don’t think it’s unreasonable that they priced it comparably, unfortunately the boat had simply sailed by the time they got there.

    I think they’ve managed to leap right back into relevance again with the C500ii and C300ii though. The size, weight, feature-set and price are pretty fantastic on those.
    I'm drooling over the C300 MKIII. What a great package at the right price. Canon is hitting it out of the park during the unfortunate year that never was for production.
    Last edited by puredrifting; 05-22-2020 at 05:59 PM.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #19
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,665
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Coughlin View Post
    But are not the C300 Mark II and C500 Mark III basically the same form factor at 2/3 the size when you add the extension unit? This to me makes this generation of the C-series brilliant, as it pleases the cradle shooters and those who want a small and not long form factor, while also offering the opportunity for a long camera AB or V-mount shoulder balanced setup that doesn't rely on clunky rail setups.

    If you add some other items such as a Teredek holder and or Wooden Camera C-Box 3G-SDI to the back you can make the C300 or C500 even longer while adding functionality and still not needing cluttered rails as it looks like with the extension unit it may still be slightly shorter than the C700. Again, I see this as a positive because a camera that starts longer such as the C700 or Amira starts to get too long when you add on the Teredek holder as Run&Gun had mentioned in another topic. The C-Box or Teredek holder also snap on super quick (as quickly as mounting a battery) so do not require much time to rig up and are very contained to smoothly fit as if part of the original camera.








    There is a certain beauty to a camera like the Amira which is so well contained so that you rarely need to spend much time rigging or derigging like you may need to do with a Mini or C300, but on the flip side, the Mini and C300 have more flexibility in being able to use in smaller spaces or on a gimbal or drone. The Mini has a downside though of having the fan on the back of the camera which means you're always needing to use a not as ergonomic cage or rail setup to mount a battery compared to the C500 Mark II or a Red.
    Good catch Eric. Comparing those images, I think you're right on base here, forgot about the extension units. Add a shoulder mount and handgrip extension and you have a great package for shoulder mounted documentary shooting.
    Still have to engineer the EVF solution yourself if you can't shell out $4k for the EVF-70 but that's do-able.
    Last edited by puredrifting; 05-22-2020 at 06:00 PM.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #20
    Senior Member Jaime Valles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,108
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Coughlin View Post
    But are not the C300 Mark II and C500 Mark III basically the same form factor at 2/3 the size when you add the extension unit? This to me makes this generation of the C-series brilliant, as it pleases the cradle shooters and those who want a small and not long form factor, while also offering the opportunity for a long camera AB or V-mount shoulder balanced setup that doesn't rely on clunky rail setups.
    Exactly. The C300 III and C500 II are the best of both worlds when it comes to form factor. Once production starts ramping up, I'm going to be looking at the C300 III veeeeerrrrryyyy closely. Who knows... maybe by then there will be a price drop!
    Jaime VallÚs
    AJV Media
    Video, Photography & Graphic Design: www.ajvmedia.com


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •