C300: 5d Mark IV as B-Cam for C200?

brettsherman

brettsherman

Well-known member
It's looking increasingly likely I will be getting a C200 soon. I always travel with a B-cam for gimbal shots and one-man two-camera situations. I'm currently using the A7S II, but find it extremely difficult to get a match with my C300. I'm thinking with the C-Log update for the 5D IV and XF-AVC this would be a pretty good 4K B Cam for the C200. The crop factor actually works to my advantage since I prefer APS-C lenses anyways - it will reduce weight to get on my Zheyun Crane gimbal. 6D mark II is also an option, but I'm guessing there won't be a crop factor for that one. My real preference would be a 4K APS-C body that can do XF-AVC or MP4 C-Log, but I'm not sure there are any in the works.

Thoughts?
 
6d mark2 you will not get c-log . 5dmark4 seems good option ( c-log soon) , there is just one issue , huge file which hold me to buy one . Probably I will wait for c100mk3 . There is another option canon xc20 , its has c-log , but it is not great for low light , and you stick with one lens .
 
I can live with the 120Mbps (4:2:0) file size. But I'm not exactly clear whether that is just for HD. There is also a 200Mbps (4:2:2) which is likely for 4K. Lack of articulating screen is an issue for gimbal work, so I may end up staying with my Sony.
 
brettsherman said:
It's looking increasingly likely I will be getting a C200 soon. I always travel with a B-cam for gimbal shots and one-man two-camera situations. I'm currently using the A7S II, but find it extremely difficult to get a match with my C300. I'm thinking with the C-Log update for the 5D IV and XF-AVC this would be a pretty good 4K B Cam for the C200. The crop factor actually works to my advantage since I prefer APS-C lenses anyways - it will reduce weight to get on my Zheyun Crane gimbal. 6D mark II is also an option, but I'm guessing there won't be a crop factor for that one. My real preference would be a 4K APS-C body that can do XF-AVC or MP4 C-Log, but I'm not sure there are any in the works.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I work with the XC15 on the Crane. It's a decent alternative, although the depth of field is nearly infinite at the wide end and it isn't great in dim light. The 5d IV doesn't do XF-AVC as far as I know. In your situation, I would seriously consider the XC15.
 
cpreston said:
I work with the XC15 on the Crane. It's a decent alternative, although the depth of field is nearly infinite at the wide end and it isn't great in dim light. The 5d IV doesn't do XF-AVC as far as I know. In your situation, I would seriously consider the XC15.
Click to expand...

I just can't get with the XC15. The new soon-to-be available firmware adds both C-Log and XF-AVC to the 5D Mark IV. Supposedly.
 
Canon will not add XF-AVC to 5dmk4 , unfortunately . If you would like to get 4k from 5dmk4 you get huge file , something like raw from c200 . It is ridiculous with 5dmk4 . This could be nice B camera for c200 , all shoot 4k . I can live without nd filter , no waveform , no xlr , but how to store such a huge file ?
 
tom1 said:
Canon will not add XF-AVC to 5dmk4 , unfortunately . If you would like to get 4k from 5dmk4 you get huge file , something like raw from c200 . It is ridiculous with 5dmk4 . This could be nice B camera for c200 , all shoot 4k . I can live without nd filter , no waveform , no xlr , but how to store such a huge file ?
Click to expand...

I mistook a rumor site for a list of features. Too bad. I wish Canon would put some effort into their DSLRs. I'll stick with Sony for now. Once again, Canon does not seem to want my money. :)
 
For gimbal work, the Canon XC10 (or XC15) looks like the best option. Deep depth of field to keep your subject in focus while in motion, small & lightweight, built-in lens means no need to re-balance on the gimbal, and has C-Log, XF-AVC and Canon colors straight out of the camera. And it's only $2000 vs the 5D IV for $3300 + lens.
 
Jaime Valles said:
For gimbal work, the Canon XC10 (or XC15) looks like the best option. Deep depth of field to keep your subject in focus while in motion, small & lightweight, built-in lens means no need to re-balance on the gimbal, and has C-Log, XF-AVC and Canon colors straight out of the camera. And it's only $2000 vs the 5D IV for $3300 + lens.
Click to expand...

The Crane is pretty adept at handling the XC15. The lens does extend while zooming, but I can get perfectly steady shots without rebalancing. Also, the XC series has very good IS to help stabilize any extra jitters. It's not an especially wide lens, but I've never been a huge fan of the extreme wide angle gimbal shot. The main problem is the lowlight. And depth of field control if you feel that is important.
 
And consider auto-focus too (even after FW update)...the XC10 doesn't work as well as the 5D Mark IV.
 
Jaime Valles said:
For gimbal work, the Canon XC10 (or XC15) looks like the best option. Deep depth of field to keep your subject in focus while in motion, small & lightweight, built-in lens means no need to re-balance on the gimbal, and has C-Log, XF-AVC and Canon colors straight out of the camera. And it's only $2000 vs the 5D IV for $3300 + lens.
Click to expand...

Lack of low-light capability is mostly what keeps me away. And for a B-Cam - 305 kbps is more storage than I want. Worth considering though. What would you say is the highest ISO you'd be comfortable with?
 
what about with the c300 mk1

is this a second camera then..?

how does the image compare?
 
The AF on the XC series is perfectly fine for tracking due to the depth of field. Rack focuses are pretty organic. For ISO, 3200 in HD and 1600 in 4K are perfectly useable. The major problem isn't the noise at higher ISO's, it is the way the noise reduction messes with motion and the artifacts created. The HD on the XC is much better than on the 5D and the 4K is just as good but takes up much less memory. It also has a full compliment of picture profiles for video and professional audio capabilities. The XC series has the two main drawbacks of poor lowlight and high depth of field, but it is otherwise better than any Canon DSLR for video. As stupid as the camera sounds due to the fixed lens, I have found it extremely useful in any case in which I need to grab b-roll in a moderately well lit environment. Oh, also it needs more button choices.
 
4K is definitely not as good as the 5D Mark IV.

When you use high-quality lenses on the DSLRs, there is simply no comparison.

1DC, 1DX Mark II and 5D Mark IV are much better than the XC10/15 in pure 4K image quality.
 
cpreston said:
The XC series has the two main drawbacks of poor lowlight and high depth of field, but it is otherwise better than any Canon DSLR for video. As stupid as the camera sounds due to the fixed lens, I have found it extremely useful in any case in which I need to grab b-roll in a moderately well lit environment. Oh, also it needs more button choices.
Click to expand...

I actually like telephoto capabilities on a gimbal. I'm often at 70mm with my a6500, it's a nice look. But I don't know if I can go that low on ISO. I figure I need usable up to 6400.
 
NorBro said:
4K is definitely not as good as the 5D Mark IV.

When you use high-quality lenses on the DSLRs, there is simply no comparison.

1DC, 1DX Mark II and 5D Mark IV are much better than the XC10/15 in pure 4K image quality.
Click to expand...

I don't find the sharpness to be an issue. I did a green screen test with the XC10 vs the 1DC and they both pulled a key about the same with the same amount of detail. Not the perfect test, but It's hard to find any actual comparisons. My only real concern has been some CA and how the NR can mess with the image at high ISO. Also, Clog on the XC series is really desaturated and low contrast relative to clog on the 1st gen cinema cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top