C200: C200 Footage

Fahnon said:
Well now I'm confused... I thought you were saying the C200 is 14 (I did assume you were being conservative). And that 14 isn't really, really impressive...
Click to expand...

I am saying that even if the C200 was 14 out of its 15 claimed stops in Cinema RAW Light C-Log2 filming then that's still great. (14 is very impressive.)

That was just part of a point I was making when describing my opinion about paying for other features in a Canon camera rather than much improved image quality.
 
Fahnon said:
Well now I'm confused... I thought you were saying the C200 is 14 (I did assume you were being conservative). And that 14 isn't really, really impressive...
Click to expand...

Hey, it's one F'in'-stop.

As to Alexa - great camera, used by the top notch pros with top quality lenses and on a pro set.

Howevah (to quote the Screaming Stephen A. Smith), I've seen some telenovelas that were very blah. Most of those also use Alexa but the lighting can be uneven, the overall budgets are a lot lower and the need to ramp up the output is a lot higher. And they generally stay with the "video" look too.

And don't even start me on the Russian films.

 
My 1DC cut perfectly with my C100 without even grading. It looks like the C200 should cut perfectly with the C100 II. I'm really intrigued by how well it cuts with the C300 II. If it has the same image at the same settings as the C300II, I will probably dump my two C100II's and grab the C200. It's always a pain to me that Canon is constantly changing their color science since I regularly shoot two camera interviews.
 
Danilo Del Tufo said:
Here is the downloadable link of the original 4K Raw Light file (you can use it with Da Vinci Resolve 14 Public Beta) :

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B-c50wihjKJzUlM1Z3ZCMHpLRW8
Click to expand...

Thanks! I took it into Canon's development software and really pushed it around. I was able to push it 2+ stops without any FPN or colored noise, which was my big gripe with my old Ursa Mini 4.6k. Was able to pull it and get back details from most overexposed highlights, except the woman on the left's shoulder; that was clipped. Not exactly scientific, but it looks like there's more room to play in the shadows than highlights.
 
I posted this in the bit c200 announcement thread but in case anyone missed it -https://vimeo.com/228634805

Yes another AF test but pretty encouraging, gimbal work will be an absolute breeze. sigma 18-35, mostly wide open and canon 70-200 2.8 ii for the Dana dolly push ins at the end. I only had the camera for an hour, someone stole my tripod but you you can start to see what you can and can't get away with, which is the main point.
 
laverdir said:
That's politically correct term for wedding shooters.
Click to expand...
Good one:)
But actually not that bad of a comparison, since wedding shooters need to work fast and deliver beauty shots in the end.

For me the decision for the C200 boiled down to the combination of RAW and DPAF with facial and object recognition.
Not "most cinematic image". People seem to confuse the later with "RAW recording".

Oh, more new footage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEomRfHKBlY
 
This is the same in 4K + a few extra shots.


The most impressive is that ISO 20,000 sequence. It's watchable.

Autofocus test on a crop duster. (skip the slow-mo, as it is in manual)

 
Last edited:
IMO, Canon cinema cameras need to be heavily graded to 'wow'.

People might be figuring out this particular RAW workflow for now, but eventually you'll find some impressive material.

Took the C300 Mark II a bit to get going too. (I saw more impressive samples with that camera 1-2 years after it was released than initially.)
 
NorBro said:
IMO, Canon cinema cameras need to be heavily graded to 'wow'.

People might be figuring out this particular RAW workflow for now, but eventually you'll find some impressive material.

Took the C300 Mark II a bit to get going too. (I saw more impressive samples with that camera 1-2 years after it was released than initially.)
Click to expand...

This ^^^^^^^^^^^

I am still working with the camera, testing it, trying different lighting for it. A friend who has a RED told me to watch out for the noise in RAW, he was right, he said he was surprised when he bought the RED at how grainy REDCode footage can be, depending on compression ratio and exposure. When I look at C-Log 2 in particular, in CRD, there is a decent amount of grain. Luckily, coming from a background in shooting a lot 16/S16 and owning most of the Panasonic small chip P2 cameras, a little grain doesn't bother me in the least if it is "filmic", which the C200 definitely is. There is a time for sterile ultra clean footage (cough, cough many models of Sony, cough) and a time when some grain looks pretty cool (Panasonic small chip cameras, Canon C cameras). Wish that Neat video wasn't such a render pig, it works so well on my noisy Mavic Pro 4k I am sure it could do wonderful things on C200 RAW, if I had a spare month to render it all out, but if you light it and expose it well, you are eliminating most of the grain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top