Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28
  1. Collapse Details
    #11
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    You confirm what I have suspected about the C300 MKIII from all of the reviews and tests I have seen, it is superb camera, I suspect one of Canon's best. The fact that many C500 MKII owners
    have at least a little bit of regret that they bought the more expensive FF C500 MKII without the DGO and slow motion capabilities speaks volumes, not that the C500 MKII isn't also a killer camera.
    The early tests prove that the C300 MKIII is probably the best looking camera overall that Canon has made. But there is still that business case. For me, owning two C200s would actually make me
    more money, I can charge my clients signficiantly more for the two cameras than a single camera that is slightly superior. We did two shoots where year, one with four C200s and one with five and I made
    very good profit even though I only own one of them, even with the markups on my rentals I did well.

    So the cinematographer in me longs for the C300 MKIII, but the business person says, "No, buy one or two more C200s if you need the tax write off". I am deep in live streaming now too where every shoot we
    do is multiple camera and recording codecs really don't matter much. What matters the most if the overall look and feel and our clients have fallen in love with what the C200 allows us to deliver to their audiences.
    The C300 MKIII would look better but costs twice as much and they likely would barely notice the difference. If I was mostly doing traditional EPK/BTS/Corporate/Documentary more, I would lean toward the C300 MKIII
    but for live streaming, the C200 or the C70, multiple copies, would make me more $$$.
    Totally agree, but I do have a nagging feeling that the MKiii might be overlooked for some time as a lot of people have been waiting for the full-frame (non-C700) camera and might dive into purchasing that, then, in a few years, once the documentary crowd start needing to upgrade their MKii's we'll see a surge in the MKiii's.

    I was also the same before the pandemic, multiple cameras were such an important part of what I did from interviews to events to theatre etc and the absolute ease of having a matching set of cameras (and glass) when colour correcting is beyond joyous! It's just by chance I saw one of the second hand places were offering pretty decent money for the C200 still (which I was shocked at) and it made sense to turn them into a new camera. My warranties were up and the multi-cam events all got cancelled so it was a good time to invest. Now I've got the joy of selling accessories lol! If anyone needs any just shout!

    Quote Originally Posted by Clermond View Post
    I must say that both cinematographer and business person couldn't be happier with the 2020 Canon product line. C300iii and R5 as b-cam are a perfect match plus it covers high res stills for all under 14K net. I just ordered a second R5 as backup and/or for a second shooter.
    I’m so conflicted about the R5, I need a second camera and I need a stills camera so it makes total sense, I just want to see how well they match…


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,782
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by aygie View Post
    I’m so conflicted about the R5, I need a second camera and I need a stills camera so it makes total sense, I just want to see how well they match…
    just look in the Industrie News / R5 thread Liam has some sample. I shot a Covid-19 split screen talk with the C300iii and the R5 as close up both. It was quite close even without individual WB just standard 5600K both (it's unfortunately client's internal footage)

    if you need a stills camera anyway - you think there might be a better match?

    You may still think as the R5 isn't available atm


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    2
    Default
    Thank you all for your responses! I'm glad to see this topic has already created this much discussion and I will be taking all of your feedback into consideration.

    I will add that this upgrade will be as much of a personal investment as a business investment, as I have not had as much client work ever since I started working full time, which is how I was able to make my 7D work for me for so long. That is not to say I still won't be doing freelance, but as was mentioned, I can't predict the future as to when or what those jobs will actually be. So that will go into the consideration as well. (Which might mean the C200 is a better choice?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Clermond View Post
    The question in terms of C200 is: will you use RAW mostly? If you use 8bit XF-AVC it doesn't make too much sense to buy a RAW camera.

    After you have waited so long for an upgrade from the 7D I'd suggest to wait for the announcement on the 24th. There might something that hits what you are looking for without spending 11k
    Any personal/passion project I do I plan on shooting in RAW. It's largely the reason why I'm considering these two as opposed to other options. Though for client work that requires shooting an extended amount of footage, like event coverage, it becomes harder to justify the amount of disk space. Which is why I'm taking other codec options into consideration.

    I'm keeping my eye on the C70 (the camera being announced on the 24th), waiting for the official specs. Right now it's all hearsay and rumor, but it's being reported there is no RAW capability on these RF C-series cameras, which is why I'm looking at these others at the moment. But I'm not planing on getting anything until closer to the end of the year or beginning of next. I've been fortunate to have kept my job as long as I have with the current state of the economy, but I'm being safe and waiting a little while longer to make sure it's not going away any time soon before making any kind of big purchase like this. Right now I'm just doing deliberation and research.

    Quote Originally Posted by aygie View Post
    Weíve all got our own views and theyíre all valid, Iíve been using x2 C200ís for about three years and sold both of them to get the C300 Markiii and for me the camera is better in every way. Itís not just about features on a sheet (even through Iíll list some below which I like) but more so the feel of going from a C200 to the MKiii, I can pretty much guarantee that everyone who owns a C200 will prefer the C300MKiii if they used one as it fixes at nearly every complaint against the C200.

    A few key things for me:

    120FPS (yes big need for my work)
    1 button slow-mo (press a button and its 120fps then same button and your back to 24fps, awesome)
    Nicer image (I know this subjective, for me there is something special and different going on, I love it)
    10-Bit
    dual CF Express slots
    custom internal LUTs
    DGO (holy moly its clean)
    no silly confusion about what you recording in vs what your monitoring
    IBIS
    timecode
    illuminated buttons (we do a lot of theatre work so this is a god-send),
    boot time - ridiculously quick
    user changeable mounts

    This isnít to say the C200 is a bad camera, far from it, I loved mine and was sad to see them go but I would not go back and absolutely love the C300 Mark iii
    No doubt the C300 Mark III is the better camera. Like I said, spec-wise, it's my favorite. But is it actually 2x better than the C200 to justify twice the price is what I'm trying to figure out. If not, then either the Mark III is overpriced or the C200 is being offered at an incredibly great price right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    So the cinematographer in me longs for the C300 MKIII, but the business person says, "No, buy one or two more C200s if you need the tax write off". I am deep in live streaming now too where every shoot we
    do is multiple camera and recording codecs really don't matter much. What matters the most if the overall look and feel and our clients have fallen in love with what the C200 allows us to deliver to their audiences.
    The C300 MKIII would look better but costs twice as much and they likely would barely notice the difference. If I was mostly doing traditional EPK/BTS/Corporate/Documentary more, I would lean toward the C300 MKIII
    but for live streaming, the C200 or the C70, multiple copies, would make me more $$$.
    That's just the thing, I AM doing more traditional EPK/BTS/Corporate/Documentary (but more Event Coverage and Narrative work than documentary) while doing little to no multicam live steaming. At the same time, I don't actually consider myself a cinematographer as much as a "one man band" type of shooter that does everything from pre to post, which is mostly what I get hired as. On sets with a full crew, I tend to fall more on the directorial side of things. But I do still like being able to pick something up whenever I feel like it and go shoot something that looks great (which might be even more reason for me to get a C200 over the C300?)


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #14
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,972
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean S. View Post
    Thank you all for your responses! I'm glad to see this topic has already created this much discussion and I will be taking all of your feedback into consideration.

    I will add that this upgrade will be as much of a personal investment as a business investment, as I have not had as much client work ever since I started working full time, which is how I was able to make my 7D work for me for so long. That is not to say I still won't be doing freelance, but as was mentioned, I can't predict the future as to when or what those jobs will actually be. So that will go into the consideration as well. (Which might mean the C200 is a better choice?)



    Any personal/passion project I do I plan on shooting in RAW. It's largely the reason why I'm considering these two as opposed to other options. Though for client work that requires shooting an extended amount of footage, like event coverage, it becomes harder to justify the amount of disk space. Which is why I'm taking other codec options into consideration.

    I'm keeping my eye on the C70 (the camera being announced on the 24th), waiting for the official specs. Right now it's all hearsay and rumor, but it's being reported there is no RAW capability on these RF C-series cameras, which is why I'm looking at these others at the moment. But I'm not planing on getting anything until closer to the end of the year or beginning of next. I've been fortunate to have kept my job as long as I have with the current state of the economy, but I'm being safe and waiting a little while longer to make sure it's not going away any time soon before making any kind of big purchase like this. Right now I'm just doing deliberation and research.



    No doubt the C300 Mark III is the better camera. Like I said, spec-wise, it's my favorite. But is it actually 2x better than the C200 to justify twice the price is what I'm trying to figure out. If not, then either the Mark III is overpriced or the C200 is being offered at an incredibly great price right now.


    That's just the thing, I AM doing more traditional EPK/BTS/Corporate/Documentary (but more Event Coverage and Narrative work than documentary) while doing little to no multicam live steaming. At the same time, I don't actually consider myself a cinematographer as much as a "one man band" type of shooter that does everything from pre to post, which is mostly what I get hired as. On sets with a full crew, I tend to fall more on the directorial side of things. But I do still like being able to pick something up whenever I feel like it and go shoot something that looks great (which might be even more reason for me to get a C200 over the C300?)
    Not sure how much camera infrastructure you own already? Here are some questions that will help you decide. Cameras are just one small part of a "camera package".

    1. Which lenses do you own? Are you "covered" for most of your situations? Do you have a mix of still and cine lenses or just still? I own a dozen EF lenses but no cine glass for my C200 and I have been feeling the pull for a basic set of cine primes (24-50 and 85mm)
    If you buy the C200, that would save you enough $$ to get "set" with your glass situation (unless you already are?)

    2. Which tripod and head do you have? Is it GOOD? Really GOOD? Sachtler/Oconnor good? Not Benro or Manfrotto junk? if you bought a C200, that would give you enough money to buy a great Sachtler at least, the Flow Tech legs and a good head
    that is on the Travis Wears thread with that group buy?

    3. Lighting? Are you flush with every light you need? Besides key, fill, rim/hair? Do you have any RGB lights? Want any? Tube Llghts, Cloth lights? What about gripology? C-stands, flags, sand bags, diffusion, frames?

    4. Pro battery system for C200 or C300 MKIII? Do you have or want VMounts? Do you shoot shoulder mounted EPK style? Do you have all of the baseplate, shoulder mount, grip relocater, rods, lens support stuff?

    If the answer is you have ALL of this stuff and are 100% happy with it, that would lean me more toward the C300 MKIII. If you don't, get a C200 and spend the difference in getting your production gear that
    you really need to be complete. Having a killer camera but crap glass and or a crap tripod is folly. Having a really good camera and all of the support stuff is so much more important.

    Don't forget also that if you want to shoot RAW, CFast 2.0 cards for the C200 are almost free now, while CFExpress cards for the C300 MKIII are still expensive and will be for at least a year or two. I have half a dozen 256GB cards,
    each holds 34 minutes of 4K DCI RAW. Plenty for my needs, at this time and when I need more, I can borrow or rent. CFExpress cards are still not common, you probably won't have many friends who can
    loan you some and a lot of rental places either don't have them or have limited available.

    Part of making an intelligent camera choice is assesing your entire production package and only spending the money if your sum total production infrastructure is "there". If it's not, you have no business
    buying an expensive camera. Buy a cheaper camera and have all of the gear needed to do good production, not just a fancy camera. I can't tell you how many pictures of nice camera builds (Even $50K REDs!)
    I see sitting on piece of junk Manfrotto heads. Those people obviously don't know what they are doing because if they did, they would have a lesser camera sitting on a good head. Of course, none of that
    applies if you only shoot lock offs, but if you actually want to move your camera, you need a good head.

    You can extrapolate this out to all of the other categories I mentioned. Perosnally, even though I have V-Mounts for my C200, I rarely use them unless on a tripod. But for HH shooting, I much prefer the smaller,
    lighter BP-A60. Lenses, even still lenses can be very good image wise for video. But operationally, there is something to having a nice cine lens with silky smooth mechanically linked manual focus, hard stops and a
    more refined image.
    Last edited by puredrifting; 09-16-2020 at 01:03 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
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    121
    Default
    I thought this was a pretty honest and straight forward review. This video compares the C300 Mk3 to the C200.

    https://youtu.be/tdIZXKyLPnQ

    I still feel that the color science has changed a bit with these newer models. The cooler C300 Mk3 stuff looks nice but not a fan of the orange / brown looking footage. I felt like the C200 examples have naturally warm and pleasing skin tones, while keeping the scene neutral looking. Reminds me of Arri. Both are obviously amazing camera, but still would love to see a side by side.

    Negative:

    Cost
    C300iii uses twice the battery life of the C200. (pretty crazy considering the C500ii uses twice the C300iii)
    Media Costs

    Plus:

    PL mount (1600. More expensive than the Arri or Red.)
    Load Custom LUTS
    Auto Focus in Slow Motion Modes
    Wider Range Of Codecs
    Anamorphic 2x Mode (Currently doesn't work in slow motion modes.)
    Less Noise Due To Dual Gain Output Sensor


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    464
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    Not sure how much camera infrastructure you own already? Here are some questions that will help you decide. Cameras are just one small part of a "camera package".

    1. Which lenses do you own? Are you "covered" for most of your situations? Do you have a mix of still and cine lenses or just still? I own a dozen EF lenses but no cine glass for my C200 and I have been feeling the pull for a basic set of cine primes (24-50 and 85mm)
    If you buy the C200, that would save you enough $$ to get "set" with your glass situation (unless you already are?)

    2. Which tripod and head do you have? Is it GOOD? Really GOOD? Sachtler/Oconnor good? Not Benro or Manfrotto junk? if you bought a C200, that would give you enough money to buy a great Sachtler at least, the Flow Tech legs and a good head
    that is on the Travis Wears thread with that group buy?

    3. Lighting? Are you flush with every light you need? Besides key, fill, rim/hair? Do you have any RGB lights? Want any? Tube Llghts, Cloth lights? What about gripology? C-stands, flags, sand bags, diffusion, frames?

    4. Pro battery system for C200 or C300 MKIII? Do you have or want VMounts? Do you shoot shoulder mounted EPK style? Do you have all of the baseplate, shoulder mount, grip relocater, rods, lens support stuff?

    If the answer is you have ALL of this stuff and are 100% happy with it, that would lean me more toward the C300 MKIII. If you don't, get a C200 and spend the difference in getting your production gear that
    you really need to be complete. Having a killer camera but crap glass and or a crap tripod is folly. Having a really good camera and all of the support stuff is so much more important.

    Don't forget also that if you want to shoot RAW, CFast 2.0 cards for the C200 are almost free now, while CFExpress cards for the C300 MKIII are still expensive and will be for at least a year or two. I have half a dozen 256GB cards,
    each holds 34 minutes of 4K DCI RAW. Plenty for my needs, at this time and when I need more, I can borrow or rent. CFExpress cards are still not common, you probably won't have many friends who can
    loan you some and a lot of rental places either don't have them or have limited available.

    Part of making an intelligent camera choice is assesing your entire production package and only spending the money if your sum total production infrastructure is "there". If it's not, you have no business
    buying an expensive camera. Buy a cheaper camera and have all of the gear needed to do good production, not just a fancy camera. I can't tell you how many pictures of nice camera builds (Even $50K REDs!)
    I see sitting on piece of junk Manfrotto heads. Those people obviously don't know what they are doing because if they did, they would have a lesser camera sitting on a good head. Of course, none of that
    applies if you only shoot lock offs, but if you actually want to move your camera, you need a good head.

    You can extrapolate this out to all of the other categories I mentioned. Perosnally, even though I have V-Mounts for my C200, I rarely use them unless on a tripod. But for HH shooting, I much prefer the smaller,
    lighter BP-A60. Lenses, even still lenses can be very good image wise for video. But operationally, there is something to having a nice cine lens with silky smooth mechanically linked manual focus, hard stops and a
    more refined image.
    As usual, spot on and balanced.


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

  7. Collapse Details
    #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,497
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    The fact that many C500 MKII owners
    have at least a little bit of regret that they bought the more expensive FF C500 MKII without the DGO and slow motion capabilities speaks volumes, not that the C500 MKII isn't also a killer camera.
    Who are the regretful c5002 owners? I think you'd struggle to find a c5002 owner who would give up FF for slow motion/DGO. Unless someone bought the c5002 early then found out about the c3003.


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

  8. Collapse Details
    #18
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,140
    Default
    The A7SIII has 4K120fps, 10-bit internal and RAW out and some of the best AF out there... lensing it, of course, is another matter...


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #19
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,972
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by rob norton View Post
    Who are the regretful c5002 owners? I think you'd struggle to find a c5002 owner who would give up FF for slow motion/DGO. Unless someone bought the c5002 early then found out about the c3003.
    Those are the exact ones I am talking abot Rob. Saw several on the various boards expressing dismay/frustration when the C300 MKIII debuted that it had some features that their much more expensive camera didn't.
    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
    Member owlbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    44
    Default
    I think the "regrets" are overstated. It's more of a general side-eye at Canon like "is the S16 120 in 2K on the C500 a hardware thing or an arbitrary choice?" at least from me. Having just compared/reviewed the two cameras at length. I can confidently say I prefer the C500.
    KENNY McMILLAN
    www.owlbot.co
    @_owlbot


    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
  •