C100: C100( or C300) vs BMCC ProRes 1080p
- Thread starter shuenwang
- Start date
marvinhello
Well-known member
C100/C300 shows a bit more compression artifacts and banding when graded heavily. But they have far less moire than BMCC.
C300 doesnt show compression artefacts when graded... Heavily? If over graded you can potentially introduce some noise if the image is poorly exposed. RAW will do the same.
Can't say much about C100, C300 I have seen side by sides and the C300 will deliver a slightly more resolute image, will have far less moire and much less aliasing as far as a 1080P deliverable goes.
Right out of camera, the C300 exhibits less noise at any given ISO, ProRes is slightly less noisy coming out of BV1 (Blackmagic V1), depending on tastes it can be reduced and -- as far as Resolve is concerned, it cleans up very well. The RAW is slightly better with noise clean up.
The rest is a more subjective set of trials.
First of all, thanks for everyone's input.
Interesting, I didn't really imagine that. On paper it would make sense I suppose.
I'm a little curious how much small detail is preserved (especially things in the distance like forests or something) on the final 1080p image.
I generally assume BMCC to win in dynamic range, but the C100/C300 cameras seem to still be pretty good and well above the 5D. Does BMCC get about 13 stops in ProRes?
Interesting, I didn't really imagine that. On paper it would make sense I suppose.
I'm a little curious how much small detail is preserved (especially things in the distance like forests or something) on the final 1080p image.
I generally assume BMCC to win in dynamic range, but the C100/C300 cameras seem to still be pretty good and well above the 5D. Does BMCC get about 13 stops in ProRes?
The detail isn't an issue, it's the moire and aliasing that get in the way, sadly. I know for a fact there's more than one solution coming for it, I do not know how effective but they're right around the corner. It [moire] is last gripe I have with the camera, the rest is fine by me (me meaning myself, and I, maybe not others).
But, yeah, C300 will top in this area.
I should clarify, the Aliasing and Moire aren't always killers, just when they are, they are definitely killer.
I've only seen one or two shots ruined by it in my experience (personal working experience, various jobs) since September, and those shots still went into the cuts.
You can watch footage from Andrew Julian, he captures a ton of detail on his trips and moire/aliasing never get in the way.
I've only seen one or two shots ruined by it in my experience (personal working experience, various jobs) since September, and those shots still went into the cuts.
You can watch footage from Andrew Julian, he captures a ton of detail on his trips and moire/aliasing never get in the way.
All Blackmagic, all raw. I'm not sure I would say that, unless this is what one would qualify as a lot of motion and thin depth then sure.
You can see more from Andrew on his vimeo page: https://vimeo.com/andrewjulian
It's generally just bad with fine patterns or odd patterns, rooftops, brick walls, etc. But for whatever reason, when it comes to cityscapes, it's harder to spot amidst all the color and range.
Again, though, I think the C300 would net more detail in these same situations.
My post did not reflect the idea that aliasing is not present, it generally always is even if you can't see it. The response was specifically targeting the idea that the camera may not be for someone that shoots these kinds of things, and there are plenty of people doing just that.
It's a matter of what one will tolerate, and likely something that needs to be tested by that person if possible.
indiawilds
Veteran
I had wanted to buy the BMC to go with my C300. But the moire shots posted by dusty made me realise that BMC is not for me. In my wildlife shots, I like more depth of field. Though I shoot even at f2.8 at 400mm.
Lets see what Black magic does about OLPF.
Lets see what Black magic does about OLPF.