C200: C200 Firmware Update Spring 2018

I think the only move Canon has now is to release a paid upgrade.

From a marketing/psychological perspective, people who need 10 bit/422 feel the C200 is intentionally hobbled, and are not going to buy the C300-II instead because they feel the competition has this feature in much less expensive models and all the equivalent models. But if you just bought a C300-II for $10k (or $16k when it was first released), you'd feel burned with the addition of a 10-bit 422 C200 that, with the exception of TC, does everything your camera does and some things your camera doesn't do, including 4k60p. A paid update for $500-$1000 would make the most people happy I think.

Sure you're going to have those that will complain about having to pay for something that they feel should have been there initially, but looking at the bigger picture (not just "what I want"), I'm not sure what else Canon can do.
 
Last edited:
johnniebutters said:
You shouldn't buy the C200 unless you are willing to shoot RAW, sorry but they don't care about 422 10 Bit on the C200. It was never the goal. You would be a lot happier with a C300 Mark II.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Once you include recording media for both cameras, the price difference becomes almost negligible (because C200 raw requires so much more card space), so as a thought exercise you really can act as though they're the same price and then determine: Do I want to shoot in 4K raw internally or do I want to shoot in a great 10bit compressed format internally? and then just pick your camera.
 
chris f said:
Agreed. Once you include recording media for both cameras, the price difference becomes almost negligible (because C200 raw requires so much more card space), so as a thought exercise you really can act as though they're the same price and then determine: Do I want to shoot in 4K raw internally or do I want to shoot in a great 10bit compressed format internally? and then just pick your camera.
Click to expand...

And when you want to shoot 4K60 10bit, what would you buy?
 
Fahnon said:
If you shoot 4k/60 all the time, and don't want to use a RAW workflow, then you should buy another company's camera or hold out for a C300-III (I'd be surprised if it doesn't come this year). But you can shoot 4k/60 10-bit on the C200 and it looks great.
Click to expand...
And here we are. This is the field where Canon is loosing customers.
 
And when you want to shoot 4K60 10bit, what would you buy?
Click to expand...
I just use my C200 and shoot 4K60 10bit raw, problem solved.

KrocanX said:
And here we are. This is the field where Canon is loosing customers.
Click to expand...

I've never understood why shooters are so concerned with giant corporations losing customers.

FWIW, shooters who want 4k 60P 10bit AND for whom shooting raw is a deal breaker is a pretty small group of people I imagine (and those people most certainly don't use Canon anyways)
 
The thing I've realized about Canon is that they look at 4K vs 2K the same way they look at 8bit vs 10bit/12bit. In the end, it is just about the bit rate and information. If you are going for 4K then you obviously want a high bit rate because otherwise you would just be shooting at 2K at a low bit rate. All or nothing. If they give you a low bit rate file no matter whether it is 4K or 2K, they call it a proxy. It isn't meant to be used for grading. For each new camera, they give you the maximum bit rate they can handle and everything below that is considered proxy. They did give an intermediate 2K codec in the C300II, but it is basically the same as the 4K RAW lite on the C200 at a 1/4 the bit rate.
 
chris f said:
I just use my C200 and shoot 4K60 10bit raw, problem solved.
Click to expand...

Oh, c'mon.. Good for you, but is it so hard to understand that they are people who don't want to shoot raw?

chris f said:
I've never understood why shooters are so concerned with giant corporations losing customers.
Click to expand...

:)) I am not concerned with Canon's business. I am just saying that with their decision they are loosing customers. Since I don't have any Canon's stocks they can go down like a Titanic and I wouldn't care.

chris f said:
FWIW, shooters who want 4k 60P 10bit AND for whom shooting raw is a deal breaker is a pretty small group of people I imagine (and those people most certainly don't use Canon anyways)
Click to expand...

You don't get why people care about giant corporations and I don't get why always people on forums start with "we" or "them" need or don't need something. It's like Social Bubble on social media - "I don't know anyone who voted for Trump!" style.. Btw you last sentence sums everything - they are not using Canon since there is no Canon option.

I don't want to argue or force you my thoughts, but try to look at it from different side..
 
johnniebutters said:
There are so many videos online from the C200 of people not utilizing what the camera is meant to do and that is shoot raw. Video description: MP4 4k 60 etc, Like what did you buy this camera for? If your looking to get into broadcast or interviewing people, C300 Mark II is a much better option.
Click to expand...

What you think the camera is meant to do is personal, and your views might not align with others. I've been using mp4 and have no immediate plans to shoot raw. Image quality isn't always paramount. Tiny mp4 files mean rapid transfer times, which I'd use still use if there was a 10 bit option. In this case the camera was meant to deliver images that needed nothing done in post, for an almost instant turnaround. How can someone who's never touched the mp4 recording claim that it's useless? You shouldn't spread this around, it's the type of thing people hiring video production professionals latch onto then make the illogical decision to not use camera x or piece of equipment y.
 
johnniebutters said:
This is not an attack on you but I really don't understand why this bothers so many people. The entire point of the C200 is internal RAW and it shocks me to see most users of the camera not even touch RAW. If you want 10 Bit MP4, you bought the wrong camera. This is where the C300 Mark II shines and if they add 10 bit MP4 the C300 II becomes useless.
Click to expand...
Did I say 10 bit? It's the lack of 422 that's the shocker. The original C300 has it. The C100 can output it. Disappointing to say the least.
 
johnniebutters said:
You shouldn't buy the C200 unless you are willing to shoot RAW, sorry but they don't care about 422 10 Bit on the C200. It was never the goal. You would be a lot happier with a C300 Mark II.
Click to expand...

BTW, huge fan of RAW. Great if we had a UHD version. Assuming you've seen Steve Yedlin's side by sides... yedlin.net/ResDemo/#
 
rob norton said:
What you think the camera is meant to do is personal, and your views might not align with others. I've been using mp4 and have no immediate plans to shoot raw. Image quality isn't always paramount. Tiny mp4 files mean rapid transfer times, which I'd use still use if there was a 10 bit option. In this case the camera was meant to deliver images that needed nothing done in post, for an almost instant turnaround. How can someone who's never touched the mp4 recording claim that it's useless? You shouldn't spread this around, it's the type of thing people hiring video production professionals latch onto then make the illogical decision to not use camera x or piece of equipment y.
Click to expand...

You bought the wrong camera dude, The whole pitch is Internal DCI 4k RAW and at 60fps just like most DSLRs / Mirrorless cameras still don't have 4k 60. This is where the 1DX Mark II still shines in that department.

Also let me correct myself, of course I have tried the MP4 recording, I thought it sucked compared to RAW and because of that I will never use it on a shoot because RAW is the point of me upgrading and the point of the camera. We get people have different needs but your needs doesn't fit this camera, That's what a few of us are trying to get everyone to understand. The only benefit with MP4 is proxies. Once the update is released ill give that a proper try.

We all have different needs for what we want in a camera, but I think people just jump on the hype of new cameras and don't really research before they purchase. They complained about the RAW file sizes being too big which is so annoying. I have 3 256GB CFast Cards and I can shoot all day. You know how? Off loading to a Hard drive when the first card becomes full. There are several ways to do this ie Laptop, USB Hard Drive etc. I use a Wireless Pro (No Laptop required), This allows me to continue shooting if need be. Now of course for long Interviews or Broadcast type work, I would either switch to MP4 or rent / look at another camera but I'm not invested into that type of work so this camera fits perfectly for me.

brm said:
BTW, huge fan of RAW. Great if we had a UHD version. Assuming you've seen Steve Yedlin's side by sides... yedlin.net/ResDemo/#
Click to expand...

Why would anyone want different size of RAW, You either shoot RAW or not lol, I get REDs compression feature which would be super useful for a lot of people but me personally I just hate the middle ground aspect of it, If i'm shooting RAW i'm shooting RAW because I want the best quality and flexibility in post. It's not a matter of file size because A. That's what you get with Higher Quality video and B. Storage is cheap and the files handle great for me in Resolve.
 
Last edited:
johnniebutters said:
You bought the wrong camera dude, The whole pitch is Internal DCI 4k RAW and at 60fps just like most DSLRs / Mirrorless cameras still don't have 4k 60. This is where the 1DX Mark II still shines in that department.

We all have different needs for what we want in a camera, but I think people just jump on the hype of new cameras and don't really research before they purchase. They complained about the RAW file sizes being too big which is so annoying. I have 3 256GB CFast Cards and I can shoot all day. You know how? Off loading to a Hard drive when the first card becomes full. There are several ways to do this ie Laptop, USB Hard Drive etc. I use a Wireless Pro (No Laptop required), This allows me to continue shooting if need be. Now of course for long Interviews or Broadcast type work, I would either switch to MP4 or rent / look at another camera but I'm not invested into that type of work so this camera fits perfectly for me.
Click to expand...

I don't think you do get people have different needs, otherwise you wouldn't tell me I bought the wrong camera - you have no clue. It doesn't matter what a company's pitch is, it matters if a tool fits.
 
Reading a lot of ‘price point’ comparisons between the C200 and Eva-1. With what you get, the EVA1 should only be compared to the C200B. The C200B is $1,345 cheaper than the EVA-1.
 
johnniebutters said:
I have 3 256GB CFast Cards and I can shoot all day..... I use a Wireless Pro (No Laptop required) this allows me to continue shooting if need be.
Click to expand...
Hmm...the Wireless Pro ingests with USB 2.0. That's 1 hr 18 minutes to read 1 256GB card.
Since you can only shoot 34 minutes to one card, you can't shoot continuously.
 
rob norton said:
I don't think you do get people have different needs, otherwise you wouldn't tell me I bought the wrong camera - you have no clue. It doesn't matter what a company's pitch is, it matters if a tool fits.
Click to expand...

Is the C200 not known for Internal 4k RAW? Wasn't it their pitch? So if you are not using the main feature, whats the point in owning it? Sure you can be attached to other features like DPAF, Audio Inputs, Touch focus etc, but what I'm saying is there's other cameras in the market that will fit your needs better and save you money.

Stills2HDConvert said:
Hmm...the Wireless Pro ingests with USB 2.0. That's 1 hr 18 minutes to read 1 256GB card.
Since you can only shoot 34 minutes to one card, you can't shoot continuously.
Click to expand...

Assuming I'm shooting 24/7. By the time I fill up the second card, the first card is done copying.
 
Last edited:
Stills2HDConvert said:
Your math is off. 1 hour 20 minutes is a lot more than 34 minutes.
Click to expand...

Again assuming I shoot for 34 minutes straight, switch cards and shoot for 34 minutes again. I have three 256GB CFast Cards, I technically have 68 minutes to copy the first card which is still not enough but I don't constantly shoot otherwise I would not have a C200. When I venture into Short Films and Interviews of such, Ill grab a few more CFast cards but for what I do currently, I've yet to completely fill up all three cards. Always end up only copying one card. These are all day shoots typically too.

Edit: I do hate that it's USB 2 though, looking for another option that doesn't require a Laptop.
 
johnniebutters said:
Is the C200 not known for Internal 4k RAW? Wasn't it their pitch? So if you are not using the main feature, whats the point in owning it? Sure you can be attached to other features like DPAF, Audio Inputs, Touch focus etc, but what I'm saying is there's other cameras in the market that will fit your needs better and save you money.
Click to expand...

Johnnie, you're making assumptions which are incorrect, while not taking much on board. This back and forth is too exhausting for me - I'm out.

Sorry for the thread derail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top