C300: Any new news for the C300 Mk2?
- Thread starter klk
- Start date
Pascal Parvex
Well-known member
The C300 Mark II has two Digic DV5, not 6 processors as the C200 has, so I doubt it could process Raw Lite. But maybe there will be a 2K Raw Lite mode.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
The real new feature of the C300 MKII is that I saw two of them, used, for sale today for $7,500.00 ;-)
Spartacus
Veteran
Don't want to dive into conspiracy theories, but considering what MagicLantern can do with Canons older stills-tech, I'm always wondering if this "now with Digic XYZ, so we can finally implement XYZ" is just a marketing thing.
Not saying they just swap the label on the processors, I'm sure the new Digics are always more powerful, than the previous generation.
But in theory RAW should put less strain on processing power, so if the C300mII is able to compress the 4K sensors data into AVC-HD, it should handle RAW Lite just fine.
My guess is, the C200 is just Canon's FrankenCam, consisting of their currently available tech (C700 leftover sensors, their foray into internal RAW, improvements in ergonomics, touchscreen from the stills department aso).
In the meantime the cam between C300 and C700 is being worked on and I don't think it is too far stretched to expect a full frame Cinema EOS from Canon as their true "next big thing".
Not saying they just swap the label on the processors, I'm sure the new Digics are always more powerful, than the previous generation.
But in theory RAW should put less strain on processing power, so if the C300mII is able to compress the 4K sensors data into AVC-HD, it should handle RAW Lite just fine.
My guess is, the C200 is just Canon's FrankenCam, consisting of their currently available tech (C700 leftover sensors, their foray into internal RAW, improvements in ergonomics, touchscreen from the stills department aso).
In the meantime the cam between C300 and C700 is being worked on and I don't think it is too far stretched to expect a full frame Cinema EOS from Canon as their true "next big thing".
cpreston
Veteran
Where?
Believe me, I'm not selling mine in light of the C200, If I was freelancing as a DP still, I would be hanging on to my C300MKII, it's very hard to sell after using it in the field, the C200 would not cut it for me at all.
I can't see the C300 MKII going anywhere for awhile yet, it's too much of a great workhorse, the image really does stand up to most cameras in that niche and I've edited and compared the image from most of them including FS7, Red and Ursa 4.6K.
Ursa 4.6K is also a great cam but not a huge jump, the trump card for the C300 MKII is the low light and the Dual AF, no matter how you break all these cams down, they all seem to have some USP better than the other.
FS7 is still a great workhorse and higher frame rates are nice but I honestly prefer the image of the C300 MKII and prefer the quality of the camera as whole.
Don't forget, if you really need raw on the C300 MKII, it's available via a recorder and probably easier handling data compared to the 1 Cfast card slot you get with the C200, I'm sure in the future we will see bigger, cheaper CFast cards but not anytime soon so it's not going to be an easy camera to get on with for one man shooter, owner operators.
Last edited:
Michael Thames
Carbonite Member
kohl-sudduth
Well-known member
mis-typed. apologies for the interruption.
I would think it's easier to process RAW or RAW Lite in camera. The C500 and C300 Mk1 couldn't do it for data write requirements- no? CF too slow, cFast fast enough-
Higher frame rates from Canon would be the golden ticket. As would that C200 touch screen...
I'm not a camera dealer- no reason for me to keep track of price at this time. As long as the image is "good enough" the C300M2 can slowly work it's way down from A cam, to B cam to C cam to expendable cam...
Hypothetically speaking, Canon could do a "minor" upgrade into MKIII but the corporate may not be willing to go along and will delay it until C400 or something in that vein is ready. Meanwhile, its retail price will be lowered since the manufacturing costs will go down even more and the profits per unit sold will get very very fat.
PS. If a corporate or even engineering team is paid - bonuses and what not - on a particular model's profitability, there's a not-so-hidden motivation from those members to keep the model number going to the detriment of the company as a whole. It's like in the NFL - a QB will want top OL/WR/RB regardless of the quality of the team's defense. His contract depends on the rating and the TD's thrown, not on the team's defensive stats.
PS. If a corporate or even engineering team is paid - bonuses and what not - on a particular model's profitability, there's a not-so-hidden motivation from those members to keep the model number going to the detriment of the company as a whole. It's like in the NFL - a QB will want top OL/WR/RB regardless of the quality of the team's defense. His contract depends on the rating and the TD's thrown, not on the team's defensive stats.
Exactly this, I think we've almost reached a similar plateau to stills cameras where the resolution and quality is more than enough for the majority at this point in time and we could easily keep shooting with C300mkii's, FS7's or Ursa Mini 4.6 for a few years yet until they just sit on the shelf...
There is still some great work being shot on the C500 and no one is complaining :smile: there's also amazing work still being shot on the RED One or Epic MX and those cameras are fraction of what they where so as long as the image has that spark, it's not going anywhere for a good while.
Last edited: