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

dustylense said:
The price drop? Because they have released 2 new cameras in the C-line both with updated sensors and new processors. No eloquence needed, just plain logic.

I've still yet to see a Fs7 on any production around LA. I see the C300 nearly everyday in multitudes.

I'm not trying to knock the Fs7. It looks like a fine camera.
Click to expand...

I agree with dusty and the others. Nobody in LA uses the FS7 on anything professional as far as entertainment. All I see are C300s on low end shoots, REDs, F55/65, Alexas and Amiras on medium to higher end shoots. Other than mine, I also don't see any C100s, ever. Luckily my clients love what the C100 gives them. Shot BTS on a short film yesterday and my client was just marveling at the C100 on set (I was shooting BTS, the main camera was a RED Epic), she thought what I was shooting with the same lighting looked 85% as good as the Epic and she has a pretty trained eye. Not trying to knock the FS7 either, I may be buying a few of them if we sell a series we are pitching. But the motion is off and the colors are not as good as even the C300 MKI, but it out-specs and out-features the C300 by a mile. These are all just tools, they are all good, all can make beautiful images with good lighting/shooting. In LA, though, I do not see FS7s ever.
 
puredrifting said:
Nobody in LA uses the FS7 on anything professional as far as entertainment. All I see are C300s on low end shoots, REDs, F55/65, Alexas and Amiras on medium to higher end shoots.
Click to expand...

I don't buy cameras because other people buy them, I test them compare them and pick the one what better suite my needs, at this point the FS7 is a not brainer, when C300MKII will be available I certainly will make the comparison. I love about the FS7: the Cheap Media, all in one package only need a zacuto shoulder pad, The skin color are great using Slog. For Outdoors, indoors you name it is the best value camera for money.

puredrifting said:
But the motion is off and the colors are not as good as even the C300 MKI
Click to expand...

I would love to see you test showing this, I had used C300s and FS7s a lot, I can confident said at 1080p properly exposed graded Footage they look almost the same. now at 4K FS7 obviously win the battle. Slog Files on the FS7 offer more room for errors during shooting than what Clog offer.
 
TheDingo said:
So you shoot C300 RAW with an external recorder instead. ( the CD Odyssey Q7+ records 4K RAW up to 60 fps with the C300 )
Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with Canon RAW on the Odyssey (I did some RAW filming with the FS700 and files are HUGE) If I need RAW I shoot my RED without doubts.
 
He had to be talking about the current one as he saids "Odyssey........records 4k RAW....from the C300" not "will record". Actually though, will even the mkII do 60fps in 4k to the Odyssey if it only does 30fps internally?
Steve
 
TheDingo said:
What I'm wondering about is... Do you still get 15 stops of DR in RAW mode ?
Click to expand...

Most likely. Even if they have some image processing to get to 15 stops (like dual ISO or whatever), they will put out the signal after that stage is complete.

Raw in todays video cameras isn't really raw sensor data. I think Mitch from CD made a loose statement in that direction and he has experience with many of the raw protocols.

Also, the only benefit with raw out-it seems to me-would be the higher framerate. Both raw and internal is 10bit. Apart from compression, the amount of image data (e.g. highlight recovery) should be the same.
 
Mitch from CD was corrected shortly after NAB. Apparently it won't do 4k 60p out. Perhaps later on with firmware, but at launch it doesn't seem it'll be supported from canon.
 
morgan_moore said:
Indeed 'one click' is not graded.. it is 'normalised'

At the mid/low level a very normal LUT would be used to give a client a 'one click' solution to normalise the Log footage - this should work as well as baking a 709 look in camera.

So a LUT should get you to where you would have been if you had baked.

The advantage is that the base log file holds a huge amount in reserve - either to correct on set error, match cameras, or to allow true colour work where the skilled colourist moves the story forward through colour.

I feel like a parrot too :)

S
Click to expand...

I covered this... You would still need to normalise all files before applying the LUT. This is the point Im making, you can't drop it on and boom.

Also a point on ACES. You really don't need to follow an ACES workflow unless you're having different post houses / people work on different components of the final piece. The ACES workflow is designed for a uniform colour workflow across a production when its being dealt with by multiple components of post production. It's not going to offer anything otherwise.
 
Noel Evans said:
I covered this... You would still need to normalise all files before applying the LUT. This is the point Im making, you can't drop it on and boom.
Click to expand...


It's not clear what you mean by that. Normalize to what? You can just use a LUT built for your particular input curve, no extra step needed.
 
Thats my point, you can't. A LUT cannot determine the intention in the shot. A LUT takes the input values and says put those here as output values. Unless this LUT was applied on set as a colour grade with the input of the cinematographer as to where and how he/she wants things to be it doesn't work. LUT's are like clothes - and the one size fits all may work in many instances, but it's far from something you try on to size or going further bespoke clothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top