C300: C300 Mark II or Sony FS7? Need help to pick one out, Will be buying either one

Well do you need it now or in 6months? And do you want to spend $10k or $20k? And do you care about internal 4k60 or 2k180, or is 4k30 and 2k120 cropped fine? These differentiators are probably the main dealbreakers for most since both can create very nice images and have great sensitivity.



Yes but the FS7 does up to 180fps and no doubt Canon 120fps will be sharper and less aliased but only because it is cropped instead of binned/skipped, so you may need to carry some extra 16mm PL or super-wide EF lenses to compensate. But perhaps the OP is used to that with the Epic?

In the end some of it may come to C300II image performance. From the sample film nothing looks particularly impressive, but perhaps the C300II will outperform expectations. I do like the way canon implements their gain, with software gain below ISO800 and hardware above, where in the FS7 you can only chose between software gain in CineEI or hardware gain in Custom...

I may get the FS7 for now and wait for the C300II.
 
My only advice to you is to make sure you know all the things you are in for with the FS7. Take into consider the glass you are using, the oddities with adapters, and all the other "Sony-isms" you are in for. Just make sure its the right decisions for you.

I mean no offense to other owners or advocates. For me, personally, I know for 100% that I am not going with an FS7 or anywhere near an A7s. I look forward to owning a C300 II sometime this year though.


Ultimately, think money aside...think workflow, IQ, and what works best for you. Don't think money. Think about what you want to ultimately end up with. Head towards that goal. Anything else is a stop gap solution.
 
Last edited:
If you are in the market for a camera and have regular work it really makes sense to just buy the Sony and save on constant rentals. When the C300II is released test both out and sell the FS7 or just keep earning with it. At the price point it will have paid itself off many times over before 14 stops, 4K60p HD180p, 10bit 422 becomes outdated for acquisition.
Exactly :) And by the time C300II will be released Sony may do a big firmware update to push people away from C300II towards FS7. That may keep me from buying it - instead buying second FS7 ;)
 
My only advice to you is to make sure you know all the things you are in for with the FS7. Take into consider the glass you are using, the oddities with adapters, and all the other "Sony-isms" you are in for. Just make sure its the right decisions for you.

I mean no offense to other owners or advocates. For me, personally, I know for 100% that I am not going with an FS7 or anywhere near an A7s. I look forward to owning a C300 II sometime this year though.


Ultimately, think money aside...think workflow, IQ, and what works best for you. Don't think money. Think about what you want to ultimately end up with. Head towards that goal. Anything else is a stop gap solution.

You make it sound like buying the Sony involves locking into a crazy lifestyle. :) come try the special punch. These cameras are just money making tools so of course money factors in. They are all stop gap solutions just like your last camera was and the one before that.
 
If you are freelance as I am, the C300 is more popular and asked for. No one has ever asked for the Sony line, except if I could afford the F55 that is the default high end model for the better TV shows such as Dateline, Frontline, etc. Seems the C300 became the workhorse of the medium level shows.
 
I would expect that the Canon would be better than the Epic as well.
The Epic only has 12 stops of DR and the sensor tech in the Canon's is exceptional. Really

But no way would it be better than the Alexa, F65 or Dragon.

The Dragon has around 13/13.5 stops of DR. So shy C300 Mark II with 15 stops of DR is not better? Add to that great low light capability, nice Dual pixel af with face detection, built in XLRs, 24 bits audio, no noisy fans.... So wondering why is dragon better?
 
Yes but the FS7 does up to 180fps


Indeed it does but it is a bit wooly, so you may end up with a situation where your producer bans you from the FS7 HFR mode and you find you actually have a 60p camera - vs getting approval for 120 on the Canon.

This is where spec sheets mean nothing and actual performance means every thing.

S
 
Indeed it does but it is a bit wooly, so you may end up with a situation where your producer bans you from the FS7 HFR mode and you find you actually have a 60p camera - vs getting approval for 120 on the Canon.

This is where spec sheets mean nothing and actual performance means every thing.

S

Right, versus the C300II crop mode HFR being far less useable because you'll likely have to change to a shorter focal length (likely a slower superwide EF lens) and end up not having enough light for HFR. I'd rather have a "wooly" HFR (I assume you mean more susceptible to aliasing) than one that I can't use because I don't have the time, lenses, exposure to use it and doesn't match the DOF of any of my other shots.
 
It is not what you would like - it is what your producer would like.

The point is until the cameras are actually put side by side and used we cant really comment on which is 'better'

BTW I have an FS7 and think it is 80% excellent.

S
 
The Dragon has around 13/13.5 stops of DR. So shy C300 Mark II with 15 stops of DR is not better? Add to that great low light capability, nice Dual pixel af with face detection, built in XLRs, 24 bits audio, no noisy fans.... So wondering why is dragon better?

The dragon has 15-16.5 stops(verified by many). Even Dxomark(which is often conservative rates it at 15), The epic on the other hand does have 13.5

vs getting approval for 120 on the Canon.

I realize its a bit early to make this claim, but if the mk ii's slow motion is anything like the c500's it will suffer from the same soft, aliased and moired image as the fs7/fs700 when over cranked.
 
Last edited:
The Dragon has around 13/13.5 stops of DR. So shy C300 Mark II with 15 stops of DR is not better? Add to that great low light capability, nice Dual pixel af with face detection, built in XLRs, 24 bits audio, no noisy fans.... So wondering why is dragon better?

Well it seems likely that dragon may have more DR despite the DR numbers you are throwing out there. Dragon is advertised as 16.5+ stops as opposed to Canon's 15, though of course we take manufacturer DR ratings with a grain of salt. I've seen at least 14-15stops of DR on Dragon, so it's likely your 13-13.5 stop number is some very subjective qualitative assessment. The only manufacturer I've ever seen to under-advertise DR is ARRI, who I've never seen quote a spec higher than 14-stops when it's closer to 16-stops.
 
There are some very cranky views in this thread and some good ones too...

My advice to the OP, as someone who has owned a C300 and currently owns an FS7, is don't make an emotional decision. Weigh up what you need from the camera and when you need it, make a decision, go out and shoot. Simple.
 
The dragon has 15-16.5 stops(verified by many). Even Dxomark(which is often conservative rates it at 15), The epic on the other hand does have 13.5



I realize its a bit early to make this claim, but if the mk ii's slow motion is anything like the c500's it will suffer from the same soft, aliased and moired image as the fs7/fs700 when over cranked.

Well my understanding is that the C500 uses half-raw to do 100/120fps which skips rows but not columns so I'm sure it did alias but didn't require lens changes. The C300II seems to only do 100/120fps by cropping to 2k/HD which should not alias but will introduce a host of other problems on set as I mentioned.
 
There are some very cranky views in this thread and some good ones too...

My advice to the OP, as someone who has owned a C300 and currently owns an FS7, is don't make an emotional decision. Weigh up what you need from the camera and when you need it, make a decision, go out and shoot. Simple.

Thank you and you are correct.

I do need a cam now but after watching some of the FS7 videos, I am not quite feeling it for this camera. I feel like my C100 shoots probably even better, it could be me though.
 
Having graded C100 footage I can say the FS7 eats it for breakfast, the C100 is ungradable.

Im looking for a b cam for my FS7 - first spec? 10bit.
 
"Having graded C100 footage I can say the FS7 eats it for breakfast, the C100 is ungradable"

Is this with or without an external recorder?
 
Internal Codec. Office - green yellow light with blue daylight spill from the windows and a cronky cheap LED - which is exactly the setup the FS7 can handle :)
 
Thank you and you are correct.

I do need a cam now but after watching some of the FS7 videos, I am not quite feeling it for this camera. I feel like my C100 shoots probably even better, it could be me though.

There's a lot of dross shot with the FS7, but that's due to the price point. There's also some great stuff. Lots of great stuff. Certainly, I can get a much nicer image from the FS7 than my old C300. I'm also sure I'll get a much nicer image from the C300 mkII than my old camera, but there's no magic bullet with this stuff, you still need to know what you are doing.
 
Last edited:
There's a lot of dross shot with the FS7, but that's due to the price point. There's also some great stuff. Lots of great stuff. Certainly, I can get a much nicer image from the FS7 than my old C300. I'm also sure I'll get a much nicer image from the C300 mkII than my old camera, but there's no magic bullet with this stuff, you still need to know what you are doing.
Exactly, my same impression. There's also plenty of C100 and C300 awful footage on vimeo or yt. But when you'll find those little gems here and there your eyes will go out of orbit. Look a this small sample:
I'm blown away how filmic this looks. Grading wise FS7 will take you almost anywhere you want but it needs some work.

Edit:
More stuff that I've found
 
Last edited:
Back
Top