C300: C300 II vs. C700 FF vs. Alexa (skin tones)

J

jcs

Veteran
I recently tested the C700 FF and found the image and color quality to be excellent using the exact same settings I'm using on the C300 II:


This C300 II example only has contrast and slight diffusion in post (shot in RGB 444 12-bit and upscaled to 4K & sharpened, which is doing a better job keying (PP CC Ultra) fine blonde hair vs. 4K YUV 422 10-bit. Ultra is an OK keyer- a better keyer would do an even better job (note motion blur areas still green: tweaking to remove those artifacts nukes the fine hair)). Once the C700 FF is officially released, I'll look into recording footage which can be compared side-by-side to the C300 II. From what I observed at Samy's, I'd expect them to match very closely in terms of color. The C700 FF will have more detail (5.9K sensor => 4K) and of course shallower DOF / wider angles (if using the same lens). The C700 FF also has updated DPAF: eye tracking. Curious to see how that compares to the C300 II's face-only tracking.

With these tweaked settings and post work, can the C300 II / C700 FF (by extension) hang with the Alexas for skintones? Would be cool to do a side-by-side shoot sometime in LA if anyone has access to an Alexa (I think James0b57 would be interested to do a comparison with the F35).
 
jcs said:
I recently tested the C700 FF and found the image and color quality to be excellent using the exact same settings I'm using on the C300 II:


This C300 II example only has contrast and slight diffusion in post (shot in RGB 444 12-bit and upscaled to 4K & sharpened, which is doing a better job keying (PP CC Ultra) fine blonde hair vs. 4K YUV 422 10-bit. Ultra is an OK keyer- a better keyer would do an even better job (note motion blur areas still green: tweaking to remove those artifacts nukes the fine hair)). Once the C700 FF is officially released, I'll look into recording footage which can be compared side-by-side to the C300 II. From what I observed at Samy's, I'd expect them to match very closely in terms of color. The C700 FF will have more detail (5.9K sensor => 4K) and of course shallower DOF / wider angles (if using the same lens). The C700 FF also has updated DPAF: eye tracking. Curious to see how that compares to the C300 II's face-only tracking.

With these tweaked settings and post work, can the C300 II / C700 FF (by extension) hang with the Alexas for skintones? Would be cool to do a side-by-side shoot sometime in LA if anyone has access to an Alexa (I think James0b57 would be interested to do a comparison with the F35).
Click to expand...

See what I meant when I said it is a very nice camera? I definitely wouldn't mind owning it, although not for $33k. But for $23k?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jcs
would love to see any canon vs alexa side by sides. Shane Hurlbut did this years ago with the c500, and would like to see if any of the newer canon cameras have caught up in dynamic range.
 
Did you see the eye-tracking in action?

First time I'm hearing about this...amazing.
 
puredrifting said:
See what I meant when I said it is a very nice camera? I definitely wouldn't mind owning it, although not for $33k. But for $23k?
Click to expand...

In terms of value, would need to test side-by-side with the VENICE. Similar specs: 5.9/6K sensors, fairly close in price, would expect similar low light performance, similar (limited) slomo options. From the online demos so far, the VENICE looks spectacular, possibly competing/exceeding the Alexa LF in captured, artifact-free detail (it has the specs to do so). Would expect ARRI to maintain lead in highlights, real DR, and pleasing color performance under varied lighting conditions. The only way to know for sure is shooting both cameras at the same time with the same lenses (the Alexa LF currently bests both cameras in slow motion options). I didn't see most of the issues shown in prior C700 FF demos online, however I do have some questions still about the quality of finest details (need to shoot with another True 4K camera side by side, with e.g. fine blonde hair).

Fishflavour said:
would love to see any canon vs alexa side by sides. Shane Hurlbut did this years ago with the c500, and would like to see if any of the newer canon cameras have caught up in dynamic range.
Click to expand...

Here's Shane's C500 / Alexa tests: https://www.thehurlblog.com/film-education-arri-alexa-vs-canon-c500/ . He mentions that the C500 has 'golden tones' that he likes and also mentions that the Alexa in LogC has a greenish tint they have to 'fight' in post. Sounds like they weren't using ACES or a Rec709 transform for the Alexa footage? In testing the C500 compatible settings vs. the Alexa compatible settings on the C300 II, the C500 settings are indeed more yellow, however the Alexa compatible settings are more magenta, not green (after the LogC to 709 LUTs (any of them)). To be honest, I'd prefer that these camera simply accurately capture what's there, in reality, and leave any coloring choices for post work. In-camera color bias can have unwanted consequences: ideally we'll have truly accurate color-calibrated cameras in the future (apparently a very hard problem, though I'm confident it will be solved and presented as a future feature).

NorBro said:
Did you see the eye-tracking in action?

First time I'm hearing about this...amazing.
Click to expand...

Once you have face tracking, eye-tracking is relatively easy. Face tracking algorithms scan the entire frame with a sliding window. Once the face (or faces) are found, (human) eyes are known to be in statistically relative offsets from the corner of the face rectangle (same with mouth and nose). The same sliding window algorithm is then applied inside the face rectangle to accurately find other desired features, such as the nose and mouth. If you've played with Instagram recently you'll see there are video features which track the entire face as well as expressions, and handle rotations too (basically construct a 3D model to which 3D rendered elements can be composited). Thus, eye tracking, once face tracking is available on the (embedded / phone) system, is easy to add.

I hadn't used Boosted MF on the C300 II in a while, and went to check it. I noticed that I had left Boosted MF enabled and the camera was still operating in Continuous mode. Then I remembered I had to switch the lens to manual focus. That's when I noticed the green Boosted MF rectangle was active... and doing eye tracking! So it's been on the C300 II all along haha. I then titled my head and it keep tracking the eye. Then I rotated my head (yaw) to make one eye closer than the other to the camera and it correctly switched to the nearest eye. When testing the C700 FF, I only had Jacqui turn her head left and right, and the tracking was at least as good as the C300 II. Hopefully they've improved it a bit, as FF's DOF at wide apertures is super shallow. I would expect Canon's face tracking, when in continuous mode, to be doing eye tracking and focusing to the nearest eye, even though they are not rendering the eye box on the display.

For moving shots where face tracking can be used, there's no way a human being can nail focus as accurately vs. DPAF locking focus on the nearest eye, especially in full frame 4K at wide apertures (even when giving the human 100ms reaction time (which is generous, average is over 200ms)).
 
With the C300 Mark II, you're talking about eye-tracking in manual mode, right?

But with the C700FF, I'm assuming there was a high-end cinema lens on the camera and you don't know/couldn't see how the camera performed everything automatically?

It was in manual eye-tracking mode too? Nothing automatic?

---

Just trying to figure out if someone will finally put this into a cinema camera in automatic movie mode.

(Sony's eye-tracking via photos is insane as well, but there is no video implementation yet.)
 
NorBro said:
With the C300 Mark II, you're talking about eye-tracking in manual mode, right?

But with the C700FF, I'm assuming there was a high-end cinema lens on the camera and you don't know/couldn't see how the camera performed everything automatically?

It was in manual eye-tracking mode too? Nothing automatic?

---

Just trying to figure out if someone will finally put this into a cinema camera in automatic movie mode.

(Sony's eye-tracking via photos is insane as well, but there is no video implementation yet.)
Click to expand...

It was the Canon CN-E 24mm (which Jacqui complained about being too "fish eye" haha once the camera was moved in close) then the CN-E 85mm. These are manual-only lenses and support Boosted MF mode, which after reviewing the manual for the C300 II didn't match behavior (as noted in the manual). Both the C300 II with the EF lens set to manual (24-70 F2.8 II) and the CN-E manual lenses behaved the same: green eye box with "rabbit ears" which move together when in focus (full manual)). The C300 II says Boosted MF will be manual until 'close', then AF will lock the last bit (when the EF lens is set to Manual, Boosted MF looks the same as Continuous). Will test again to look more closely. [EDIT] Focus Guide must be turned on, and when in Boosted MF and lens set to AF, no green focus box shown. When lens set to MF, green focus box shown, and then the camera will AF full face, and focusing the lens will dial in final focus under green box. If you move around, it will continue to keep the face in focus, perhaps with the relative offset from the last MF focus event. This seems different/opposite to the manual (perhaps a translation issue). The C700 FF shows the full face box and green focus box with the CN-E lenses, and works the same as the C300 II except that there's no AF happening with the CN-E lenses. Also it appears there's a lot of processing lag for face tracking vs. what I recall for the latest Sony A7x III cameras (C300 II). Perhaps the C700 FF is faster (will check next time).

With EF lenses, the C700 FF provides full autofocus (didn't test yet, should be the same or better than the C300 II). For continuous tracked shots, the EF lenses focus breathing won't be a problem. And when enabling chromatic/peripheral illumination correction in camera, these lenses will produce pretty excellent quality.

I would be cool if the 1DX II had eye-tracking focus in still camera live view... Hmm, actually after writing these posts, it probably does! (face tracking locking onto the nearest eye, they're just not drawing it). Will test on the next photoshoot- might be a good time saver with sharper shots vs. 'focus lock and recompose' which can be blurry when working fast (pressing the shutter too quickly before fully stopping after recompose).
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the responses...so much info but I still don't know if the answer is yes or no, lol.

Face vs. eye isn't too much of a difference in most situations, but just curious to see if they actually now offer an eye-only option with AF photo lenses.

Basically trying to figure out if a box follows an eye now and not the face for super shallow shooting where the box on the face may accidentally focus on the nose/chin/certain part of the face you don't want.
 
I think Canon's face detection always tracked the nearest eye. They just don't draw it or mention it in the docs (Continuous AF mode). Boosted MF shows they are indeed tracking the nearest eye- that's the most important facial feature for photography/film. If the display rendering lag represents what the camera is doing for focus, then Canon has some room for improvement vs. Sony, which looks faster.
 
If you expose correctly and control highlights and shadows every camera has it's own style.
Some are more pleasing than the Alexa depending on your tastes.
However, none of them have the forgiving aspect of the Alexa.
The capacity to pull down blown highlights in post with the Alexa is unbeatable. Nothing touches it.
 
That's probably related to the Alexa's ALEV III sensor's dual-gain readout (2 14-bit reads combined to 16-bit), which no one has rivaled (patents etc.). That said I can do pretty amazing highlight/over-exposure recovery with the 5D3 and 1DX II for stills in Adobe Camera Raw (and major underexposure as well too- e.g. flash didn't fire). The 5D3 with ML RAW when processed through ACR looked and felt like a baby Alexa: very flexible (even with only 11 or so stops) and the colors looked great without much work (just noticed they got 4K working, cool).

Another thing about the Alexas- really just one mode: LogC with ARRI's gamut, and options for 709 output as well as 3D LUT support. Canon has all these modes & settings and it takes a while to figure out which combination is best. Sony has even more complexity! Would prefer to have less options and simply accurate color, like the Alexas and the 5D3 when shooting raw (+ add 3D LUT support for any custom in-camera looks).
 
Greg Hughes said:
Can you explain what the custom settings are? I think the image your pulling from the C300 mkii looks great
Click to expand...

Thanks Greg! If you look at my older posts, you'll see I used to give this kind of information away for free (not just on this forum). I figured out the C300 II settings by comparing to my optimized settings for the 1DX II. It was a huge amount of time and effort to find these settings, and when I showed Canon on the C700 FF, they were impressed and asked if it was all trial and error! It was a bit more structured, and took quite some time to find the right combination to get these results. Honestly, I think these settings should be the default: I really don't want to do this much work with camera settings ever again. Again, I see now why the Alexa is so popular: the default settings just work. Google "filmic skin C300 II" for more info (not a vendor or moderator: can't provide a link).
 
I agree Greg- these settings should be default from Canon! Would love to see the C700 FF with these settings compared side-by-side with the Alexa LF and Sony VENICE.
 
Greg Hughes said:
I'm slightly disappointed that I have to pay for the settings. Thanks for the point in the direction though
Click to expand...

I'm not. I paid a few bucks for the Neat Video Settings I use for my noisy DJI Mavic Pro footage and the presets were developed in the same way. Why not throw a few bucks to JCS IF you like the look he created?
 
puredrifting said:
I'm not. I paid a few bucks for the Neat Video Settings I use for my noisy DJI Mavic Pro footage and the presets were developed in the same way. Why not throw a few bucks to JCS IF you like the look he created?
Click to expand...

I think he just meant that Canon should ship the camera with this(or similar) setting as one of the built-in scene files, not that JCS doesn't deserve to paid for his hard work developing his look.
 
Run&Gun said:
I think he just meant that Canon should ship the camera with this(or similar) setting as one of the built-in scene files, not that JCS doesn't deserve to paid for his hard work developing his look.
Click to expand...
Canon did ship with a picture profile called "Production Camera" which Canon said is meant to emulate the Alexa. How well it actually does emulate it is another matter, though.
 
@jcs I'm assuming Canon has to achieve a better all round colour out of the camera, but your settings are better specifically for nailing skin tones?

Did improving the skin tones mean sacrificing the accuracy of another colour? e.g. shifting blue more towards puce?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top