C200 images

puredrifting said:
I somehow don't think Canon is too concerned about what Panasonic is doing right now ...
Click to expand...
Canon never does. It's how they roll, even if they're half a decade behind in specs. And here, with the DPAF and Raw Light, they're actually running ahead of the (colluded) market.

Run&Gun said:
Not necessarily. I used to think the "approved media" lists were BS and that as long as you used a major brand card that met the specs/speeds, you would be fine. When the SD 664 was brand new and I was buying cards for mine, I ignored the approved list and just bought Lexar Professional cards. I had been using Lexar Pro cards for years in my still cams and with my Nano Flash with no issues. Upon testing, the Lexar cards, despite surpassing the min. speed requirements, did not function properly. At first I thought it was an issue with the 664. Called my dealer. Called SD. Even sent SD the files and everyone was kind of at a loss, until I told them the cards I was using. Switched the cards out for approved ones(thank goodness B&H is so easy to deal with, with exchanges/returns) and everything was fine after that. It only took experiencing a problem with unapproved media ONCE, for me. Thank goodness it was discovered during a test and not during job.
Click to expand...

It's because - drum roll - the manufacturing companies test these cards and approve those that work before they hit the store shelves. Otherwise, headaches pile up. And up. And up.

The only problem is when there's a new manufacturer and the OEM testers are running behind.

And, naturally, YouTube'ers will test and retest everything anyway.
 
Danilo Del Tufo said:
I hope that this EgoDisk Cfast cards will be available worldwide because if it's a small company would be a problem to sell them, I think they could be available just in USA.
Click to expand...

I hope so, too. However, I wouldn't purchase ANY CFast cards until the C200 has been released for a few weeks and trustworthy people have reviewed it and determined which specific cards work well and which ones don't. The last thing you want to do is spend a couple thousand dollars on cards that aren't compatible with the camera, or they are at the beginning but then die in the middle of a shoot and you lose priceless footage.

I'm super excited about getting the C200, but I'm going to wait a bit to purchase it until the kinks have been ironed out and a good list of usable CFast cards has been created by people smarter than me.
 
Jaime Valles said:
The last thing you want to do is spend a couple thousand dollars on cards that aren't compatible with the camera, or they are at the beginning but then die in the middle of a shoot and you lose priceless footage.
Click to expand...

This is why we like Amazon. Buy a card, try it out, really put it through it's paces, repatedly for a few weeks. If it doesn't work perfectly, return and go to the next, little to no money lost, just some time. Amazon is pretty great about returns. Sometimes, depending on the vendor, they charge you return shipping but well worth it to find the perfect CFast 2.0 card for us to use in our C200s. Or like you said, the YouTubers and web reviewers will do the work for you if you wait a few weeks.

I am not sure if you should wait "a bit" Jaime. I have a feeling there will be shortages for quite a few months on C200 availability if you don't get in line. Not sure if Canon realizes what they have unleashed with the C200. I think they think it will do well but I see this camera as quite ground breaking, it is really a paradigm shifter. First inexpensive, practical swiss army knife camera that easily fulfills two, three or four roles all internally (depending on how good they make the internal XF-AVC next year). I feel Sony and Panasonic, as far as codec implementation in putting internal RAW Light into their cameras, are going to be lagging for a while. IF CFast cards get cheap and capacity goes up and assuming the big three editing software implement internal support quickly, this new workflow could be a game changer for the industry, at least at the low end. It kind of re-defines the sub $10k camera market IMHO. I am actually more impressed by Cinema RAW Light than I am by the C200. The camera is good but the new codec and the idea of what it allows users to do is relatively amazing. To me, it makes 10-bit 4:2:2 look a bit outdated, although TODAY, 10-bit 4:2:2 is obviously more practical for longer form workflows. But that could easily evolve over the next six months to making Cinema RAW Light a better workflow, at least for those who can spend the time and money to use the workflow. If we can get an hour of Cinema RAW Light per $600.00 512GB CFast 2.0, $1,800.00 for three hours of media is acceptable to most.
 
As a side, side, side, side, but still relevant, note - new PCI 4.0 specs have finally been released. In a nutshell, it's supposed to have a 16 GT/s max transfer rate.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/06/09/pcie-4-0-twice-as-fast/

If one adds up all the news on the storage, memory, media and SSD fronts, Raw recording should be within reach of the "consumer" grade cameras by 2019.
 
puredrifting said:
According to their website, their products will be available from Amazon in several countries all around the world, Italy included https://egodisk.com/IT-Authorized-Dealers
Click to expand...
Nice! By the way Sebastian Wöber that has reviewed the EOS C200 on Cinema5D's website, told me that he used Transcend Cfast card and it worked, and he thinks that maybe the Lexar will work too. I think that a Cfast Card of 512GB is a must with the EOS C200.
 
david_p said:
what would it be for internal 4k? any improvement over 420 8bit?
Click to expand...

It's 10-bit in 1080p. 8-bit in 4K MP4 and, unless someone puts a lot of pressure on Canon, expected to be 8-bit in XF-AVC 4K.

Raw Light is 12-bit in 24p and 10-bit in 60p.
 
greenheron said:
Weak Codec in both HD and 4K.
4K RAW is DCI not UHD.
No timecode in or out.

This is not a camera for serious documentary or broadcast work. Still aimed at the event and wedding market. Canon states in their advertising that it is targeted as a "B" camera for the C300 II but it is crippled with no timecode. Just finished a job using both the C300 II and an original C300 and it worked fine because we could jam sync the cameras. Independents may buy this camera hoping to shoot low end films, docs, etc, and if you are aiming for streaming online it might be the right camera. Too little too late for me. Might also work for some corporate work.
Click to expand...


so I shouldn't sell my canon c300 mk1 yet??
 
Cary Knoop said:
I'd be interested to know why anyone would perceive that as a negative?
Click to expand...

I know, right? All you do is crop the sides in post. Takes all of 3 seconds. The only way I could see it as a negative is if you're handing the footage to the client directly without first going into your computer, and they specifically require it already as UHD.
 
puredrifting said:
This is why we like Amazon. Buy a card, try it out, really put it through it's paces, repatedly for a few weeks. If it doesn't work perfectly, return and go to the next, little to no money lost, just some time. Amazon is pretty great about returns. Sometimes, depending on the vendor, they charge you return shipping but well worth it...
Click to expand...

Lots of counterfeit cards on Amazon, & eBay. Believe Sandisk even warned to only by cards that were sold directly by Amazon, & not "Fulfilled by Amazon".
 
Jaime Valles said:
I know, right? All you do is crop the sides in post. Takes all of 3 seconds. The only way I could see it as a negative is if you're handing the footage to the client directly without first going into your computer, and they specifically require it already as UHD.
Click to expand...
Right, and if anyone would find a simple crop too much of a hassle they should definitely not record in RAW.
 
Jaime Valles said:
I know, right? All you do is crop the sides in post. Takes all of 3 seconds. The only way I could see it as a negative is if you're handing the footage to the client directly without first going into your computer, and they specifically require it already as UHD.
Click to expand...

While not of an issue for some the lack of UHD is a serious omission for many working DPs/Ops who hand off raw footage, & certainly would be for me.
 
Bern Caughey said:
While not of an issue for some the lack of UHD is a serious omission for many working DPs/Ops who hand off raw footage, & certainly would be for me.
Click to expand...
Could you explain why that is a serious omission?

4K DCI = UHD + some extra footage on the sides.

Anyone who has to deal with processing RAW footage would certainly not have an issue setting the proper crop which is a few seconds work.

Am I perhaps missing something?
 
Cary Knoop said:
Anyone who has to deal with processing RAW footage would certainly not have an issue setting the proper crop which is a few seconds work.

Am I perhaps missing something?
Click to expand...
Always assume an editor you don't know is an idiot. An idiot may have figured out how to handle RAW, but doesn't know how or when to crop.
 
There’s one thing that I haven’t understood : When do you shot RAW you must select a LOG profile? The CRM files (RAW Light files) without C-LOG are fully colorized or they have a flat look?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top