C300 is up for sale at BH.
- Thread starter Lustgarten
- Start date
"I bet we see a lot of the footage on TV very shortly. "
Certainly possible... but I'll bet that bigger shows will stay with Alexa, while smaller reality TV shows are just as likely to stick with cheaper solutions - esp shows featuring numerous cameras. The workflow's already done for the Alexa shows, and new (reality) shows will be going for best bang for buck - which IMO is not this camera. The C300 will have its buyers for sure, but it's clearly a camera that will be totally outclassed in two years by 10 bit cameras that do the same thing (but better).
Which again points to people buying now only if they can make money from it right away. Indie movie companies - particularly ones shooting a lot of SFX work - may want to wait it out a bit longer, or buy into a FS100 w/ something like a Ninja.
Certainly possible... but I'll bet that bigger shows will stay with Alexa, while smaller reality TV shows are just as likely to stick with cheaper solutions - esp shows featuring numerous cameras. The workflow's already done for the Alexa shows, and new (reality) shows will be going for best bang for buck - which IMO is not this camera. The C300 will have its buyers for sure, but it's clearly a camera that will be totally outclassed in two years by 10 bit cameras that do the same thing (but better).
Which again points to people buying now only if they can make money from it right away. Indie movie companies - particularly ones shooting a lot of SFX work - may want to wait it out a bit longer, or buy into a FS100 w/ something like a Ninja.
Philip Goetz
Well-known member
Two segments of charles barkley episode of saturday night live were shot on it. I just saw our ad pop up at the top here that we are selling the camera.
Jim Martin
DVXuser Sponsor
Some of you are making way too much out of this 8 bit debate that has been gone over & over way too many times. Dana Christiianson ASC (the DP on XXIT) has repeatedly said the 8 bit is NO issue...he said the camera performed like it was 10 or 12 bit.....so I respect his opinion more than most.
Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
GaryinCalifornia
Veteran
What about the price of the EF primes anyone on those...
NewYorkLion
Well-known member
I'm in,
Fits perfectly in with my workflow and improves on the current af100 setup I'm working with. Sure I'd rather pay less, but I know this will be playing in the same exact market as the f3, and this one suits my needs better.
Fits perfectly in with my workflow and improves on the current af100 setup I'm working with. Sure I'd rather pay less, but I know this will be playing in the same exact market as the f3, and this one suits my needs better.
Elton
Veteran
Went to a c300 presentation today in Salt Lake City. Watched all the films on a huge cinema screen--what's there to say? Everyone's said the same thing that's seen the footage in a quality cinema presentation--the images were just plain superb.
Now getting to play around with the camera and kick the tires a little...that's something else entirely.
The interface is reasonable and logical. Waveform is great, peaking is nice. ND's, VF--the list goes on and on.
To me, the c300 has an appeal that's different than its competitors. It easily feels the best in your hand. At first I wasn't too hot about the modular LCD, but seeing how easily the camera can be stripped down to whatever degree of minimalism you prefer...I saw the light. It can go as stealth as DSLR, or pimped out the wazoo interfacing with anything you could possibly need, including iPads.
Beyond all that, it just felt really nice. To hold it is to love it.
I use the FS100 a lot (love it, still the bang for the buck champ in my book), but the c300's hand grip easily outclasses it--and it better for that nosebleed price. It's just got ergonomics that feel exactly right for it's purposes.
And Jim--I mostly agree with your post about 8 bit.
It's an interesting competitor to the F3. I think it hits that sweet spot of "totally pro" and yet so potentially minimalist and fun...like a DSLR.
Now getting to play around with the camera and kick the tires a little...that's something else entirely.
The interface is reasonable and logical. Waveform is great, peaking is nice. ND's, VF--the list goes on and on.
To me, the c300 has an appeal that's different than its competitors. It easily feels the best in your hand. At first I wasn't too hot about the modular LCD, but seeing how easily the camera can be stripped down to whatever degree of minimalism you prefer...I saw the light. It can go as stealth as DSLR, or pimped out the wazoo interfacing with anything you could possibly need, including iPads.
Beyond all that, it just felt really nice. To hold it is to love it.
I use the FS100 a lot (love it, still the bang for the buck champ in my book), but the c300's hand grip easily outclasses it--and it better for that nosebleed price. It's just got ergonomics that feel exactly right for it's purposes.
And Jim--I mostly agree with your post about 8 bit.
It's an interesting competitor to the F3. I think it hits that sweet spot of "totally pro" and yet so potentially minimalist and fun...like a DSLR.
Andrew McCarrick
Carbonite Member
I am... Saving up. Looking to buy 2 with the PL mount in February or March.
This by far beats the standard F3 (4:2:2 50mbps vs. 4:2:0 35mbps), and is significantly cheaper than the F3 with S-Log and recorder.
Eh...opinions are like DSLR's...everybody has one
(Please don't take offense to that as i'm joking around) I just can't see 16k for the feature set. Maybe i'll change my mind after playing with one in person, and believe me I am not a "future proof" fanboy. 16k is a lot of money for many of the perceived things this cam lacks in it's class. Again i'll have to see it side by side with other cams in its class/price range on YouTube in 380p so I can see exactly how it stacks up.Not to mention the bulk of the F3 with a recorder strapped onto it.
alaskacameradude
Veteran
Is it? I thought the F3 was 13 grand at B&H. Recorder would be a grand and SLog 3 grand? What is the Canon going for?I believe it's cheaper but I would have thought it would be close
ripupthehwy
Well-known member
how can u compare this to an Fs100 are you serious??? No sdi, no waveform, terrible codec,.....and the biggie i think is gonna be the contrast and latitude of this camera over the fs100/af100 and all hdslr's. However at $16k it should be at least 2k, not 1080.
Andrew McCarrick
Carbonite Member
F3 with S-Log and a Recorder is ~$25k.
F3 is roughly $14k
Recorder with 4:4:4 Uncompressed (Gemini) (which is in my opinion the only proper way to use S-Log) is almost $6k (cheapest recorder I can find is $2k.).
S-Log upgrade is $4k.
$24k not including media for the recorder.
Without the recorder F3 with S-Log is $18k, and you're recording at 4:2:0
The C300 is currently $16k with everything. B&H will probably drop that few hundred bucks once shipping.
I'm not saying the C300 is a better camera than the F3 with S-Log and 4:4:4 Recorder, because it's not. But for the price, you're getting something pretty close, for almost half the price.
Last edited:
alaskacameradude
Veteran
Well, I mean if we are going to try to compare them as closely as possible to being equal, I'd say
take the F3 price and add a 4:2:2 recorder to it. That's all the C300 is. The C300 does NOT have
4:4:4 uncompressed, S-Log, or 10 bit recording. And at that price (say 14K for F3 and 2k for 4:2:2 recorder) they would be pretty much very close to the same price and very similar specs. Which says to
me, that the C300 is priced about right, but I don't see how it is something that is a 'way better'
deal than the F3......I'd say it was very similar to the same 'cost/performance' ratio as an F3 with
a 4:2:2 external recorder.
Andrew McCarrick
Carbonite Member
You're forgetting SLog in your comparison. Add another $4k to the Sony. The C300 has C-Log, relatively the same thing.
And theoretically Canon could offer an Upgrade to get 4:4:4 over the single link SDI using 3G-SDI.
Last edited:
I still think if image quality is your ultimate goal the F3 is the camera to go between these 2. For bang for the buck the F3 is unbeatable- its a mini Alexa in terms of dynamic range and low light performance. A 10bit 4:2:2 recorder (specially with the new software update!) is plenty enough to take advantage of SLOG in a 10bit space. I like the Sony SLOG footage a LOT- but hate the non SLog footage with the Sony matrix with a passion, go figure!
HOWEVER, for high end broadcast work, I would say the C300 is truly bang for the buck. It outperforms in image quality cameras with above 20k price tag- most 2/3rd Broadcast cameras, in fact. Of course, these broadcast cameras have the advantage of power zoom lenses and in some case superior internal codecs, like AVC Intra, but 8 bit 4:2:2 is what, for example, one of the sweethearts of tv production used, the Panasonic Varicam (in DVCPRO HD 720p). Its form factor is also much more guerrila and support gear friendly, and the workflow is cheap, fast and proven. Like I said before, I believe this camera is going to be a huge success on television work. Out of the box is probably what 80% of the professional user base will ever need, in fact. But, of course , its no Scarlet.
The Red Scarlet has poorer low light, needs a bigger investment in post (if you want a similar speed of edit and transcode than both the Sony and Canon), needs you to fork out a heavy sum for media and if you order today you will have to wait for a while. However, its in a different "world" completely: 4K Raw capture, 16bit, 4:4:4 just completely places it in another championship. Its the ultimate under 20K cinema camera currently on the market. But its not a camera for everything. Comparing these 3, the closest one to provide the highest professional versatility out of the box (as to be able to respond to the vast majority o the video jobs out there) is definitely, due to its form factor, fast workflow, broadcast codec, the Canon C300. But its not the camera for me .
HOWEVER, for high end broadcast work, I would say the C300 is truly bang for the buck. It outperforms in image quality cameras with above 20k price tag- most 2/3rd Broadcast cameras, in fact. Of course, these broadcast cameras have the advantage of power zoom lenses and in some case superior internal codecs, like AVC Intra, but 8 bit 4:2:2 is what, for example, one of the sweethearts of tv production used, the Panasonic Varicam (in DVCPRO HD 720p). Its form factor is also much more guerrila and support gear friendly, and the workflow is cheap, fast and proven. Like I said before, I believe this camera is going to be a huge success on television work. Out of the box is probably what 80% of the professional user base will ever need, in fact. But, of course , its no Scarlet.
The Red Scarlet has poorer low light, needs a bigger investment in post (if you want a similar speed of edit and transcode than both the Sony and Canon), needs you to fork out a heavy sum for media and if you order today you will have to wait for a while. However, its in a different "world" completely: 4K Raw capture, 16bit, 4:4:4 just completely places it in another championship. Its the ultimate under 20K cinema camera currently on the market. But its not a camera for everything. Comparing these 3, the closest one to provide the highest professional versatility out of the box (as to be able to respond to the vast majority o the video jobs out there) is definitely, due to its form factor, fast workflow, broadcast codec, the Canon C300. But its not the camera for me
.
Last edited:
Danielvilliers
Veteran
Every-time people talk about the F3 vs c300 price they just inflate the price of the F3. The F3 at BH is not $ 14k, it is $ 13 200 with rebates and been for a long time. A recorder like the samurai is $ 1500. So adding both you are less than $ 15 000 with media. Yes, forgot, people are saying add the media to the cost, it is as if red media prices!!!! The samurai uses laptop HD with price/storage ratio lower than flash media. With the two combined, you have 10 bit 422 200 mbit prores codec, with a sensor that has nothing less in term of resolution and low light than the c300, look at the Philip bloom shoot-out.
Now the F3 is upgradable to S-log for $ 3600, that is usable in 10 bit, look at all the test in the F3 forum. It can even be upgraded to 444 with some external recorder that are indeed quite costly. Don't get me wrong, I am sure that the C300 will have a market with its small size form factor and image quality. But I think people should be a bit more objective when they make a comparison between these two camera. It is not as if you need $ 24k for the F3 to be able to shoot with a better codec than the C300.
The C300 is at the mercy of other competitors. If something like the D4 has some high image quality (for me resolution is the only big unknown) then it could corner the C300 a bit more in the low end reportage/tv style. A D4 with a PIX 220 would be a killer combo for these application. It even has some functionality that the c300 does not have like auto-focus.
Canon marketing has been the best until now. They have use some very talented and established movie makers with Hollywood crews to promote the camera. Don't get me wrong, I am sure that it is a very capable camera. But I am also sure that these people would have done at least the same with an F3. When you look at Bloom shootout, you see one thing, that the F3 is at least if not better than C300 in low light, even the fs-100 is very very close. While just after the launch of the c300, you would have thought that it was by far the best low light camera in the business.
Now the F3 is upgradable to S-log for $ 3600, that is usable in 10 bit, look at all the test in the F3 forum. It can even be upgraded to 444 with some external recorder that are indeed quite costly. Don't get me wrong, I am sure that the C300 will have a market with its small size form factor and image quality. But I think people should be a bit more objective when they make a comparison between these two camera. It is not as if you need $ 24k for the F3 to be able to shoot with a better codec than the C300.
The C300 is at the mercy of other competitors. If something like the D4 has some high image quality (for me resolution is the only big unknown) then it could corner the C300 a bit more in the low end reportage/tv style. A D4 with a PIX 220 would be a killer combo for these application. It even has some functionality that the c300 does not have like auto-focus.
Canon marketing has been the best until now. They have use some very talented and established movie makers with Hollywood crews to promote the camera. Don't get me wrong, I am sure that it is a very capable camera. But I am also sure that these people would have done at least the same with an F3. When you look at Bloom shootout, you see one thing, that the F3 is at least if not better than C300 in low light, even the fs-100 is very very close. While just after the launch of the c300, you would have thought that it was by far the best low light camera in the business.
Last edited: