C200: C200 vs C300 III, High ISO

A

Arturo Sánchez Becerra

Active member
Hi guys, I'm a happy c200 user, I own two of them for my architecture and interior design video works.

I haven't seen a test yet comparing the C200 vs the C300 III in terms of high ISO performance. I'm curious to see if there's a difference between the two cameras at ISO 5400, 12800 and 25600 at all.
I know it's not ideal to shoot at a high ISO value, but I can't properly lit a huge house and sometimes I see myself cranking the ISO bit, especially during dusk shots.

Another question, I'd be curious to see a C200 vs C300 III dynamic range test too, is there anything online illustrating it?
 
Last edited:
Just started shipping...without tests we can only speculate for now, but you can most likely expect the C300 Mark III to be a bit cleaner because it's 3 years newer, and the dynamic range to be half of a stop better (because realistically if they rate the C200 at 15 stops and the C300 Mark III at 16 stops then at best it would be 1 stop on their PowerPoint slide, but more conservatively half a stop in the field with difficult lighting).

IMO, everything on YouTube (where most of the world's videos go) shows no $11,000 worth of improvements in this camera (if you were upgrading for very noticeable differences), but it may be the overall package and all of its other features that make it desirable.
 
There's a Vimeo version too if you would like to download it and take a closer look: https://vimeo.com/433446339

The concept of wide dynamic range is underrated, but it's also not uncommon either as it's more known as the process of burning in proper LUTs over LOG profiles in other cameras, either internally or via a recorder. You'd have to be pretty sure about the look, but you'd burn those colors and saturation into your video without affecting the dynamic range, and it's essentially ready out of the box.

That's mostly my workflow for about 5 years now. Just cut and export. Minor adjustments here and there.

Canon's Wide DR is pretty much that, but we could have better from them if they really dedicated more time to it.

Blackmagic calls it 'extended video': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNX0s4OU0xw
 
It's into the sun so it's worthy in some way. Not much else out there to share.

Don't you have the camera? You like it?
 
Some of that C300mk3 stuff looks so good

I think I like the look of Canon Wide DR more than BM extended video
 
Although I like a lot of videos from Canon cameras, there haven't been many that I thought had a really impressive cinematic vibe to them.

But I forgot about this C300 Mark II example I used to like a lot years ago until I came across it the other day during a random search for C300 Mark III videos.

I probably like it as much as I do because it reminds me of Breaking Bad (which I've now watched 8x) and one of those intro scenes where not much is said but just weird (and awesome) ambient music is played until the intro all of a sudden hits with those chords/notes from the dobro guitar.

 
Woof 8x thru Breaking Bad. That explains a lot ;)

I remember that clip. Are you sure you don't just like it because it has the cool shadows / warm highlights palette that you like?
 
Knowing you, you probably didn't like BB. lol

I link to dozens of videos per week, so it would be tough to draw a conclusion unless one only saw a link or two and then made an assumption.

I like a lot of variety. Depends on the purpose, really.
 
NorBro said:
Knowing you, you probably didn't like BB. lol
Click to expand...

I loved Breaking Bad. One of the greatest shows ever made (except for a bit of weaker plot/character writing a few seasons in and a bit of zany outdoing themselves with complex capers later on like erasing the HDD with a supermagnet). And the best TV cinematography of all time in my opinion.

Just dark. Very very dark. A lot of junky scenes that make your skin crawl and make you wanna take a shower for days. And the incredibly convincing evil of the main character. 8x thru all of that could drive you crazy ;)

But it's sort of like the OG Blade Runner. It was beautifully ugly and made me feel dirty watching it and for all those reasons I loved it.
 
It's very beautifully ugly and dark, exactly like life.

Walt's entire journey and the connections and ruined relationships and the breakdown of everything was a sad mesmerizing wonder for me.

We all know though, there are millions of write-ups about it.

I only watched it 100% three times. I think everyone should watch their favorite show again all the way through at least once after the first time. Then I just did once more after that (fully).

And then caught the rest here and there via Netflix and also when AMC had their random marathons on TV like this recent one in January leading up to the new Better Call Saul season. When you're watching like that, you'll miss an episode here and there, but at that point you know which ones are the really good ones.
 
NorBro said:
It's into the sun so it's worthy in some way. Not much else out there to share.

Don't you have the camera? You like it?
Click to expand...

I love it!
Unfortunately I don’t have footage to show that would hit what the TO asked

Edit
Wasn’t BB shot on 35mm film?
 
Last edited:
Yes, it was - and at that time many were (and it's impressive they stayed true to the format until the end) - but it would be hard to imagine them not using other cameras here and there with all of the insane angles and tight spaces they had shots.

The timelapses were supposedly from Canons.

I think it's actually a pretty normal-looking show. Nothing too cinematic about it. And with all of the crazy grading that I like, it's a perfect and ironic example of how I and millions of others could so care less about the camera quality when you're so hypnotized by everything else.
 
I don't think BB was a normal looking show at all.

There were plenty of normal looking shots. But what defined the style of the show was the incredible diversity of coverage they captured that enabled such creative edits. Expressive wide angle shots. Long zooms. Macro shots with super shallow dof.

There were also a lot of low-key scenes with colored lighting. Like in drug deals and drug dens.

A few shots that come to mind - super long lens with a zoom out (I think) when walt steps onto train tracks to evaluate the spot for the train robbery. The long crane shot when mike walks up from the stream to meet walt's car before he gets shot. Macro shot of fly racking to walt's face. Shot of car window covered in snow before walt wipes it off as he leaves his hideout towards the end. Wide angle shot of Walt passed out while woman in background enters her Ferrari in the pilot. And of course all the meth-cooking montages. And the environmental montages. And the landscapes. And the snorricam shot of walt falling to the ground after hank is shot.

The cinematography was incredibly creative and expressionist for tv
 
Talking about the color if it wasn't clear...very normal for the most part.

As far as shots, editing, telling the stories (in different ways including in the intros or flashbacks), anything but normal.

Very creative and the amount of effort that was put in was like no other.
 
NorBro said:
Talking about the color if it wasn't clear...very normal for the most part.
Click to expand...

My bad! I think that color grading is the spice and composition/lighting/movement is the meat and potatoes.

I agree, it was largely a normal looking show. Perhaps because it was about a (previously) very normal guy. Most of the dinner scenes looked straight out of Malcolm in the Middle:

b00fde4cb5576b5c81e5d2b942ca1b6f.jpg

Although Mike got a heavenly golden glow (albeit at golden hour) to send him off:
maxresdefault.jpg

And they definitely had the yellow Mexico look going:
Juarez_Cartel_1989.PNG.jpg

As this hilarious meme picked up on:
ac7446e76bd50d1f1ef3c7cabce70b61.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top