C500: 4K 120p

Tim Nitsch

Tim Nitsch

Well-known member
As C500 Mk II owner, am I the only one here feeling a little bummed that the C300 MkIII and the EOS R5 both have 4K at 120p (non cropped in their respective sensor sizes), but the C500 Mk II doesn't?

I can understand not getting it in full frame (even though the EOS R5 has it in full frame), but I can't imagine that it's not possible at least in S35 mode.

Thoughts?
 
You're not the only one...happens all of the time which is why I stopped purchasing cameras over $3000.

IMO, camera technology is fresh for only about 1 year before it starts to become outdated in this new world (as far as building new cameras), and the next models are better in various ways. In 2 years, 4K/240p will be an afterthought like 1080/120p has been while 6K and 8K will be standard at 24p for most if not all models moving forward.

As far as the C500, it was most likely built way before it was released hence the limit. Maybe FW can help.
 
Tim Nitsch said:
As C500 Mk II owner, am I the only one here feeling a little bummed that the C300 MkIII and the EOS R5 both have 4K at 120p (non cropped in their respective sensor sizes), but the C500 Mk II doesn't?....

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Not really. I knew what I was buying. 120p is such a rare thing in my world. 5.9k 60p FF is a way more useful tool for me.

The reality is the C500 was a "bargainizing" moment...essentially a C700FF for half price. The sensor on the C700FF wasn't capable of 120/4k, so one shouldn't expect them to simply "add" a feature you might want. Canon has always used the C300 for "new" sensor tech, and so here is where they put it. I think the dual gain is the important feature, and I'm curious if it will add real benefits...and bring canon's DR into line with Arri.
 
I'm still waiting for my accessories for the C500MKII. Not sure what the logic of this release is, but it does hack me off, more than a little.
 
I guessed this would happen. Canon has a history of making each of their cameras have a feature that another camera in their lineup does not have in order to encourage people to buy multiple camera bodies. C300 Mark II came out with no 4K 60p and shortly after the 1DX Mark II came out with 4K 60p, then C200 did internal RAW but no 10 bit 4:2:2. So, if you want to have all of the capabilities, you need to buy all of the camera models. I'm not so sure this is a bad idea purely from a sales perspective.

Aside from considering they're intentionally doing this, another theory would just be that newer cameras have new technology with new capabilities that they weren't able to implement in their older models.
 
I'm with Barry, I'm more happy with my C500's Full Frame 6K than the 120fps s35 4K. It's certainly a neat feature, but not something I'd ever really use. 95% of my shots are 24p. Would I like 120? Sure. Do I need or even "want" it? Only for fun.
 
puredrifting said:
Does the world really need more 120fps 4K footage? Slow motion abuse is real, it's terrible and it should be a prosecutable crime ;-)
Click to expand...

Haha. And I think we're about to see shallow depth of field abuse with so many full frame options out there. Get ready for a lot of shots with the one eye in focus.
 
No, it won't be because not many people are buying $11K-$16K cameras.

And those that do hopefully will know how to get both eyes in focus...on purpose.
 
robotfist said:
Haha. And I think we're about to see shallow depth of field abuse with so many full frame options out there. Get ready for a lot of shots with the one eye in focus.
Click to expand...

Wakes up in a cold sweat, shaking. Clutches pillow with a forelorn look. "Dear God, it's like the first six months of the 5D MKII all over again. We called it...the Cyclops effect."
 
puredrifting said:
Wakes up in a cold sweat, shaking. Clutches pillow with a forelorn look. "Dear God, it's like the first six months of the 5D MKII all over again. We called it...the Cyclops effect."
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I've used slowmo ONCE in two years for a client who needed it for a specific action on one product. And remember the "crushed blacks" craze? One of my personal hates currently is unnecessary camera movement. Bought a slider? Better use it on everything...
 
puredrifting said:
Does the world really need more 120fps 4K footage? Slow motion abuse is real, it's terrible and it should be a prosecutable crime ;-)
Click to expand...

I have a director I work with who storyboards commercials with 1-2 second cuts and then wants every thing slo-mo.... "So what you want is a slide show, am I right?" ....one of the shots I remember was 4-assisted living seniors doing a "Reservoir Dogs" walk towards the camera, one on a walker. Looked like 4 statues.
 
stewhem said:
Totally agree. I've used slowmo ONCE in two years for a client who needed it for a specific action on one product. And remember the "crushed blacks" craze? One of my personal hates currently is unnecessary camera movement. Bought a slider? Better use it on everything...
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a funny thing how stuff like 120fps gnaws at your brain. In the entirety of my career to-date, I think I've probably shot over 60fps on maybe a dozen projects. 90% of the slow-mo I do is at 48 or 50 fps (depending on whether I'm shooting 25p or 24p) and rest is even lower .

So realistically, I shouldn't have a moments hesitation in seeing the clear advantage of a larger sensor over a faster one, since one of those things will affect (and improve) 99% of the things I shoot, while the other will be the thing I need literally 1% of the time.

And yet... the heart wants what it wants!
 
I will confess, I am starting to like 4K 60p on a 23.976 timeline, slowing the 4K 60p by 15%. It gives it a nice, almost real time but not quite, floaty look that's nice in documentary when it's b-roll over talking heads.
But regular slow motion? Everytime I try to use it, it just triggers my gag reflex because it's so artificial. I like when there is a point to it, in my case, someone jumping out of a boat into the water when they do relay changes
but generally slow motion to me is too gimmicky, it's usually calling attention to things that are boring, insignificant looking. Looking at most DP reels lately, OMG, the slow motion abuse is rampant! Characters smoking in slow motion,
ultra slow motion reaction shots with talent blinking, girls running through wheat fields with there hand trailing through the wheat, gag! So contrived.
 
Putting my editor hat on, I've had to speed up a 50/60fps shot more times than I've needed a shot to be slower.

On Arri cameras you can add any random frame rate to get you there in-camera - e.g. 37 fps. Just enough to take the edge off real life without making it too boring.

Having said that, if the technology is there 120 fps is good to have up your sleeve. Great if you're filming fast moving objects.

I wonder if we'll see an increase in stunts in corporate films/branded docs as a result. Maybe parkour will make a comeback.
 
Unless it is action details that 24p can't quite capture due to motion blur, I am bored by 60p. I just want to fast forward the video to get it back to normal speed. That being said, I tend to shoot all of my b-roll in 60p with a a 360 shutter angle. It almost always ends up being used in real time, but if I need to slow it down to capture a moment that isn't long enough, I can ramp it down. I also have the audio available at 60p if I want it. Since I can't do that with 120p, I doubt I would ever use it. I've never even used the available 120p at 1080p. I do really wish that Canon would release a mode for 48p with audio. I would probably shoot everything in 48p.
 
puredrifting said:
I will confess, I am starting to like 4K 60p on a 23.976 timeline, slowing the 4K 60p by 15%. It gives it a nice, almost real time but not quite, floaty look that's nice in documentary when it's b-roll over talking heads.
But regular slow motion? Everytime I try to use it, it just triggers my gag reflex because it's so artificial. I like when there is a point to it, in my case, someone jumping out of a boat into the water when they do relay changes
but generally slow motion to me is too gimmicky, it's usually calling attention to things that are boring, insignificant looking. Looking at most DP reels lately, OMG, the slow motion abuse is rampant! Characters smoking in slow motion,
ultra slow motion reaction shots with talent blinking, girls running through wheat fields with there hand trailing through the wheat, gag! So contrived.
Click to expand...

Why don't you just shoot 30 fps and set the speed to 80%? That would give you a much more natural almost real time feel than 60 fps down by 15%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top