EOS R has been updated with an AI type auto focus. Ir rarely, if ever, misses. Whether it makes it to the C500 MKII remains to be seen but I don't see any reason why it shouldn't.
C200: $1,000 Price Drop.....C500MKII coming soon?
- Thread starter chris f
- Start date
EOS R has been updated with an AI type auto focus. Ir rarely, if ever, misses. Whether it makes it to the C500 MKII remains to be seen but I don't see any reason why it shouldn't.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
You can get help, there are kind, giving people who care about the quality of your productions. Slow Motion Abusers Anonymous is just a phone call away.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Have you seen the tests yet? The FX-9 AF locks in much quicker and tracks more accurately than the C500 MKII DPAF in those video tests (it was either CVP or ProAV?). BUT, I am told by my Sony and Canon reps that all of the footage we are seeing now from both is from pre-production units so that is always subject to change
by the time we see shipping models.
Run&Gun
Veteran
I guess, like everyth8ng else, it just depends on your client, the style and subject matter. As much as slow-mo is over used, sometimes I feel there is some unnecessary hate for it, as well. In the sports production world, slow-mo is bread & butter. And I’m not just talking about for live broadcast instant replays. Something I think is kind of glossed over that slow-mo does, is it can add weight and importance to a shot of the ordinary. Not necessarily a case of, “find a better shot”, but it makes the shot of the ordinary that you need, better. It can add drama. It can help draw attention to what you may have missed in real time or let you know that that person or what just happened is important or worth noting. There are numerous reasons and scenarios to use slow-mo and I don’t think it should be ignored just because you feel that other people over use it.
That being said, I can shoot 180 in-camera on my 55, but I rarely shoot slow-mo and when I do, it’s rarely over 60. But I would never buy a camera that can’t shoot it.
I'd be very interested in what you have to say after using both cameras. From what I've seen via a variety of videos, Sony's algorithm for face/eye tracking is superior, but the canon wins in user control, and perhaps in their new "smoother" focus-pull algorithm. I read an interview with the Japanese team behind the C500mkII and they pointed to their focus being on tools the DP could use to "control" the autofocus and select what's getting focused on. While the FX9 has some control, I don't thinks its as sophisticated as canons touch focus. I have to say though I was pretty impressed with Philip blooms low-light test of the tracking AF....I don't think DPAF would function as well in that situation.
I've seen all that's been put up on YouTube and Vimeo. The best visuals were made with Cookes - obviously, no AF - in that Phil Bloom video that Barry G just mentioned above. The rest have been pretty meh, including that Jaguar commercial.
But, as Mr. Reference (aka Steve Yedlin) said, once you got Raw, you can make it look like anything and the meh was not necessarily camera fault. (but may have been the camera setup/calibration)
As to EOS R, there were two AF updates after the initial camera release, which had only Dual Pixel. The new Sony A7RIV and A9II have almost a hundred percent hit rate though.
Actually I was referring to another video he posted...I think it's on facebook. Shots on a dimly lit sidewalk at night, tracking passers-by walking toward the camera...with him flipping out in the background, as the camera seemed to want to keep tracking them as they left the frame when they walked past him. Not sure the lens he was using, but definitely not a cooke
yeah it probably was Blooms. https://youtu.be/1ggQ_9Le_KQ
(this is a longer edit than the one I originally saw which was just raw clips without music and him making comments to whomever he was with regarding the AF.) And the lens was a Sony 70-200.
Last edited:
My version of slomo is to shoot 29.97 for a 23.98 project. Barely noticeable and it can put a nice veneer on hand held b-roll, and take the edge off fast subject movements. A few years ago we had a music video with an extended “shaft” walking-through-the-urban-jungle sequence. We wanted the artists gait to match the music, which had had a complicated rhythm that was a little too slow to walk naturally too. We calculated an overcrank that would work (36fps) and used F&SM to record it. In the end, while it feels smooth, I don’t think it feels egregious, and fits the subject matter. Where I object, is when the use of slow motion turns a commercial into a slide show—a series of “barely moving” shots —it just seems lazy to me.
nutmegger
Well-known member
As a former C100MK1 24-105mm f4 kit owner I have a couple of questions regarding the C200 24-105mm II kit.
First question: I am aware the when not shooting in the RAW mode, the camera records an 8-bit 4:2:0 signal to internal SD cards. My question is can the C200 also output simultaneously an 10-bit 4:2:2 signal via its SDI and HDMI ports?
Second question: Does anyone own/use a C200 with the new 24-105mm v2 lens? How is the image quality in the non RAW mode? Any issues with this camera/lens combination?
PS: Any rumors about an updated C200 version in the near future or firmware updates for the current version. I believe the C200 was introduced in 2017.
First question: I am aware the when not shooting in the RAW mode, the camera records an 8-bit 4:2:0 signal to internal SD cards. My question is can the C200 also output simultaneously an 10-bit 4:2:2 signal via its SDI and HDMI ports?
Second question: Does anyone own/use a C200 with the new 24-105mm v2 lens? How is the image quality in the non RAW mode? Any issues with this camera/lens combination?
PS: Any rumors about an updated C200 version in the near future or firmware updates for the current version. I believe the C200 was introduced in 2017.
mothmachine
Active member
First question: yes it's 4:2:2 10 bit at 1080, but if 4k won't be 10-bit. ... look at the chart in the manual p139, there are a few quirky distinctions between SDI and HDMI as well for the output depending on frame rate.
Second Question: I have the V1 and I think it's great, I've never heard of an issue and it's sold as a kit with the v2.
Second Question: I have the V1 and I think it's great, I've never heard of an issue and it's sold as a kit with the v2.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I've been shooting the EF 24-105mm f/4.0 IS II with the C200 for about a year and a half, shooting both XF-AVC and Cinema RAW Light. The V2 is much better than the V1, pretty sharp and no vignetting in the corners like my EF S lenses.
No issues for me other than 24mm on a S35 imager isn't wide at all and 105mm isn't long enough for an all purpose lens. I'd much prefer an 18-135 FF with the latest L glass and the latest IS, the EF S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM is crap on the C200.
nutmegger
Well-known member
Mothmachine, Puredrifting, thanks to both of you for your responses. Downloaded the C200 manual. Noticed the inconsistency between SDI and HDMI outputs mentioned. Regarding zoom lenses, I prefer constant aperture lenses. The 24-105 would meet 60-70% of my needs. I would buy Canon’s 18-80 if it was lower in price. Thanks again.
Generally speaking, Canon doesn't do firmware upgrades. They keep lowering the price on the old models while introducing new ones. C200 opened at $7,500 (+ whatever you needed for the CFast 2.0 cards, which weren't cheap) and is now $5,500 (and C200B is $4,000 now). CFast 2.0 cards are much cheaper too now.
nutmegger
Well-known member
I also looked at the tables on pages 149-151 in the C200 Instruction Manual http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/3/0300027483/07/eosc200-200b-im7-en.pdf .
It appears when shooting in MP4 or XF-AVC SDI /HDMI outputs can be either 10-Bit 4:2:2 or 8-Bit 4:2:2 depending on the frame rate. Looks like MP4/XF-AVC outputs at 24 or 30fps is 10-bit 4:2:2 and 60fps is 8-Bit 4:2:2. Am I correct? 25 and 50fps and interlaced is another story.
Last edited: