C300 is up for sale at BH.

Andrew McCarrick said:
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.
Click to expand...

I still don't think what you are saying is fair. SLog is NOT the same as C-Log
(10 bit vs 8 bit for one thing.) And even with just the F3 and 4:2:2 recorder,
you are looking at 10bit for the F3 vs. 8 bit for the C300. Sure Canon COULD offer
an upgrade......do you figure they are going to do that for free and not charge for
it? Cause once they charge for it, again you are looking at the same kind of thing
the F3 does. I just don't see the big 'superiority' in specs or price on the C300.
When you spend about the same amount of money on the F3 and add ons......it looks
to me like you get about the same 'amount of camera' as with the C300.
Not a big surprise to me, it makes a lot of sense but that's just my opinion.
 
alaskacameradude said:
I still don't think what you are saying is fair. SLog is NOT the same as C-Log
(10 bit vs 8 bit for one thing.) And even with just the F3 and 4:2:2 recorder,
you are looking at 10bit for the F3 vs. 8 bit for the C300. Sure Canon COULD offer
an upgrade......do you figure they are going to do that for free and not charge for
it? Cause once they charge for it, again you are looking at the same kind of thing
the F3 does. I just don't see the big 'superiority' in specs or price on the C300.
When you spend about the same amount of money on the F3 and add ons......it looks
to me like you get about the same 'amount of camera' as with the C300.
Not a big surprise to me, it makes a lot of sense but that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Who knows? They gave you 24P and a bunch of other updates in their DSLRs absolutely free.


Also, it's not just about "matching performance", it's utility: once you add an external recorder you add another layer of complication to a set. Powering it, managing it, so on and so forth. And don't forget the price of batteries and powering solutions if you can't run the recorder reliably off of an XLR port.

C300 seems more appealing to me because it gets what you need in the camera, no extra add ons etc. To a lot of people that's very valuable.
 
Kholi said:
I find it odd that, in 2012, people here think that Broadcast and Cinema are that far apart in terms of production workflow and acquisition tools.

Baffling.
Click to expand...

They are, depending on the type of work, the budget and the type of show you're doing.
 
Kholi said:
I find it odd that, in 2012, people here think that Broadcast and Cinema are that far apart in terms of production workflow and acquisition tools.

Baffling.
Click to expand...

I'm more baffled by the constant back and forth about the F3 and C300. They both make BEAUTIFUL images. We've all seen what each camera is capable of. So why the arguing still? When the pictures are this good, who cares? No audience in the world is going to complain about images produced by either of these cameras (even projected on a full-size cinema screen). So why waste any more time and energy arguing?

We've got what we wanted, all our bickering and twittering all over the internet has convinced the camera companies to put out these cameras that make the sort of images we've always wanted them to make.

We won. We got what we wanted - so let's get out and shoot stuff for goodness sake!
 
SPZ said:
They are, depending on the type of work, the budget and the type of show you're doing.
Click to expand...

Very few (scant) shows are going to go with a large sensor camera to acquire reality or news. They'll still use what's created for that.

A vast majority of narrative broadcast has moved on to Alexa earlier last year. I don't see much of a difference in that workflow... or I could be missing something? What else would you use an S35 sized sensor camera for other than narrative or commercial?
 
Grug said:
I'm more baffled by the constant back and forth about the F3 and C300. They both make BEAUTIFUL images. We've all seen what each camera is capable of. So why the arguing still? When the pictures are this good, who cares? No audience in the world is going to complain about images produced by either of these cameras (even projected on a full-size cinema screen). So why waste any more time and energy arguing?

We've got what we wanted, all our bickering and twittering all over the internet has convinced the camera companies to put out these cameras that make the sort of images we've always wanted them to make.

We won. We got what we wanted - so let's get out and shoot stuff for goodness sake!
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Seems like until everyone gets an Alexa for GH2 prices there'll be some complaining.

Oh well.... and by the way, the GH2 + Hack pretty much satisfies me enough to the point where I think twice about going to kit up an Epic.

I can only imagine the C300 being a step up from that world.
 
In any case of complaints on the price range for a 1080p offer for a couple of years in the same year RED is releasing and JVC and Canon itself are unveiling 4K, take a look at this link:


No idea if this has been posted in these boards, no much time to read them lately :-)
 
Kholi said:
Very few (scant) shows are going to go with a large sensor camera to acquire reality or news. They'll still use what's created for that.

A vast majority of narrative broadcast has moved on to Alexa earlier last year. I don't see much of a difference in that workflow... or I could be missing something? What else would you use an S35 sized sensor camera for other than narrative or commercial?
Click to expand...
Im glad you still sticking with the GH series. I moved on. I think a need for the 4K is essential for my kind of work, plus I wasn't too happy with the lowlight on the GH2.
 
JoeJITSU said:
(...) plus I wasn't too happy with the lowlight on the GH2.
Click to expand...
Then you have this one for 20,000 ISO work!


Emanuel said:
In any case of complaints on the price range for a 1080p offer for a couple of years in the same year RED is releasing and JVC and Canon itself are unveiling 4K, take a look at this link:


No idea if this has been posted in these boards, no much time to read them lately :-)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The most interesting thing to me about the C300, and what everyone seems to ignore in their F3 comparisons, is what you get in that tiny form factor. The C300 is extremely small, light and ergonomic, easy to handhold and mount in all kinds of places. Add to that the wifi control, and there are many things you can do with the C300 that would be far more difficult if not impossible to do with an F3 with external recorder. On-board broadcast approved c-log codec in such a configurable form factor is a very welcome and unique tool for the industry. As i've said before, i currently work on two two network television productions that have plans to incorporate the C300 into their workflows and phase out their DSLR's. Personally, I plan on purchasing an EF mount version in late february/early march.
 
I can't wait to use this thing. I'm sure it is going to be sweet. When announced the 720/60p was a bit of a bummer but I was still willing to talk if it came in way under the $20,000 mark. For $13k it would have been very tempting, but as it stands I think I'll be giving money to RED next week instead of Canon. So great to have the choices!
 
Elton said:
I think it hits that sweet spot of "totally pro" and yet so potentially minimalist and fun...like a DSLR.
Click to expand...

Kholi said:
I find it odd that, in 2012, people here think that Broadcast and Cinema are that far apart in terms of production workflow and acquisition tools. Baffling.
Click to expand...

Emanuel said:
Then you have this one for 20,000 ISO work!
Click to expand...

Simon Shasha said:
Beautiful camera, ugly price. C300 should have come out for $8000 - tops.
Click to expand...

No comments, totally agree.
 
Kholi said:
C300 seems more appealing to me because it gets what you need in the camera, no extra add ons etc. To a lot of people that's very valuable.
Click to expand...

$16k seems a bit steep to me for the c300 - I was hoping for $13k. That being said, it has so much to offer in an easy to use package. No more synching with outboard audio recorder, no more external NDs, no aliasing, no external monitors, no need for a beast multi-core tower to transcode/edit. I might just be selling some gear and going the c300 route.


Jason
 
AwakenedFilms said:
$16k seems a bit steep to me for the c300 - I was hoping for $13k. That being said, it has so much to offer in an easy to use package. No more synching with outboard audio recorder, no more external NDs, no aliasing, no external monitors, no need for a beast multi-core tower to transcode/edit. I might just be selling some gear and going the c300 route.


Jason
Click to expand...

You've practically described an AF100 there :) And I do consider the monitor on the C300 external. I think that's a good thing, personally, but given it is not permanently attached and is a bit strange in design (having the XLR inputs on it as well).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top