C300: C300 mkii in 2020...with BRAW

Doug_EX

Doug_EX

Well-known member
Hi,

I was wondering what are you thoughts on having/buying a C300 mkii in 2020, especially now that we will be able to record BRAW with the BMD Video Assist HDR.
I own a C100 and a Ursa mini pro G2 (for sale) and I have to say that I love working with BRAW. It’s fantastic!
I do a lot of interviews for docs and corporate stuff as well and some run n gun.

I will need in the next year or 2 a camera that will be able to shoot up to 12 800 ISO (not often, but it will open when shooting docs). Slow motion is not something that I will need often. This is pretty much the only feature that is lacking in the C300 mkii. I kinda need autofocus when I am alone interviewing someone.
I am not considering the C200 because of the codecs. Don’t want 420 8 bit nor RAW lite. BRAW is much more efficient and the C300 mkii has already some good codec options built in.

What do you guys think?
 
C300 Mark II prints money for me. I was thinking about investing in a money printer but due to the legalities I decided to stick with the C300 Mark II instead.
 
C400 (or C300 MKIII) might be announced at the NAB, so I wouldn't buy MKII new.

Buying a used one may be worth it. Then, push comes to shove, you should be able to resell it later without taking too much of a haircut.

I'd also consider 1D X MKIII, as it might work for your style of shooting. The ergonomics are not so great but the overall value seems decent. (full video reviews aren't out yet)
 
Not to hijack your thread but curious why you're selling the G2 and considering a C300mkii instead? I only ask because I was curious about the G2 for a while as an upgrade from my C300mkii, and checked it out at a store here in Toronto. I found some aspects of build quality and QA problematic, I didnt feel like it would withstand serious outdoor documentary work (esp. in Canada). Otherwise the specs are great, and the price is right. In the end I'm leaning towards a C500mkii in the next few months.

Anyways sorry this is off-topic, just noticed the G2 and thought I'd chime in!
 
Like I said in my original post, I will need, for the next year or two, a camera capable of shooting at relatively high ISO(6400-12800). This is something the G2 can’t do. Also, autofocus during interviews would be welcome.
 
I have a G3, but you could do all this with the older G2 as well. What I do is I have a Zacuto VCT plate with a Kessler Kwik release plate on top, then I mount a Canon 15.5-47 with a Zacuto lens support, and use masking tape to secure it in place. I then plug a Countryman B6 microphone into the back of the Canon lens, using masking tape to secure the cable and lens cap in place. Then I mount the G3 transmitter to the back of the Zacuto, put an Atomos Ninja star video recorder on top of the transmitter, secure it with masking tape, and put the G3 receiver on the Zacuto as well, also secured with masking tape. I then plug the receiver into the Ninja Star. The transmitter then transmits to the receiver which is plugged into the Ninja Star which records the video.

As for how it's done, what happens is the Countryman B6 picks up noise vibrations which are amplified by the Canon cinema lens, and through AI in the Ninja Star it converts it to colorized video signals. Like how Daredevil works. The best part about this, regarding Doug's need for low light, is you don't need any light whatsoever to get a video image.

Photos of my setup below.






































































thumbnail-8.jpg


thumbnail-5.jpg


thumbnail-4.jpg


thumbnail-9.jpg
 
But your biggest problem will be that you will not be too happy with the high iso RAW image without some post noise reduction. I've gotten useable images out of the C300 MKII at 12,800, but it is only with some added NR set in camera.
 
cpreston said:
But your biggest problem will be that you will not be too happy with the high iso RAW image without some post noise reduction. I've gotten useable images out of the C300 MKII at 12,800, but it is only with some added NR set in camera.
Click to expand...

It’s not a problem. I know I won’t have a noise free image at 6400-12800 ISO, but sometimes doing run n gun doc shooting you need that extra boost just to get the shot.
 
Doug_EX said:
It’s not a problem. I know I won’t have a noise free image at 6400-12800 ISO, but sometimes doing run n gun doc shooting you need that extra boost just to get the shot.
Click to expand...

Guess I'm a video noise snob, I never shoot over ISO2500, but I don't do events or weddings. ISO 12,800 looks terrible on all cameras, even the FF A7s as far as I've experienced. If my image I am shooting needs more than ISO 2500, time to light it, or go home ;-)
 
puredrifting said:
Guess I'm a video noise snob, I never shoot over ISO2500, but I don't do events or weddings. ISO 12,800 looks terrible on all cameras, even the FF A7s as far as I've experienced. If my image I am shooting needs more than ISO 2500, time to light it, or go home ;-)
Click to expand...
I usually shoot between 400 and 1600 ISO. But sometimes in run n gun situation you just can’t add lights, you just have to get the shot. Might be that we don’t do the same kind of work.
For example, I was filming a music performer and I had to film her backstage but no lights were allowed. We had to follow her in very dark corridors. It’s the kind of situation that it’s better to have a noisy image with good sound than nothing at all.
 
Doug_EX said:
Eric, like I told you before, you know that you don’t HAVE to comment on every post? Especially if it’s gonna be a sarcastic comment. You sure seem to have a lot of time on your hands to comment as you do.
Click to expand...

I think he's missing Amadou and his FS7 rants, raves and blunders! That was a strange time on the forum, 8 threads all started by Amadou, sometimes the same topic.
 
puredrifting said:
Guess I'm a video noise snob, I never shoot over ISO2500, but I don't do events or weddings. ISO 12,800 looks terrible on all cameras, even the FF A7s as far as I've experienced. If my image I am shooting needs more than ISO 2500, time to light it, or go home ;-)
Click to expand...

Yes sounds pretty snobby to me, there's plenty of real documentary situations that aren't 'events or weddings' where you can't just set up lights every time your subject moves out of the spotlight
 
Doug_EX said:
It’s not a problem. I know I won’t have a noise free image at 6400-12800 ISO, but sometimes doing run n gun doc shooting you need that extra boost just to get the shot.
Click to expand...

I forgot that you can't actually crank the ISO on the Blackmagic. I will shoot a decently lit scene at 6400 on a C300 MKII and not feel so bad. At 12,500, the image starts to fall apart in an obvious way even at 1080p. But it is useable if you want it. This is with the in built noise reduction on the C300 MKII, though. In RAW, you see noise at 800 ISO. My guess is that you would just start using the internal recording at the high ISO so that you didn't have to do as much work in post with noise reduction.

Also, in case you didn't know, the C300 MK II RAW is 10bit.
 
Doug_EX said:
Eric, like I told you before, you know that you don’t HAVE to comment on every post? Especially if it’s gonna be a sarcastic comment. You sure seem to have a lot of time on your hands to comment as you do.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I laughed at the pictures. It did take me a bit to realize that he had associated "G2" with Sennheiser. I guess I've been around Black Magic folks long enough to picture the camera. Also, Sennheiser is all the way up to G4 now so those G2's are really obsolete equipment.
 
Doug_EX said:
I usually shoot between 400 and 1600 ISO. But sometimes in run n gun situation you just can’t add lights, you just have to get the shot. Might be that we don’t do the same kind of work.
For example, I was filming a music performer and I had to film her backstage but no lights were allowed. We had to follow her in very dark corridors. It’s the kind of situation that it’s better to have a noisy image with good sound than nothing at all.
Click to expand...

Of course, it depends on your work. I was shooting BTS on a TV series in Africa and the outdoor scene at night was being blocked with the director as she gave talent notes and direction. It was just a few seconds before camera rolled
and the scene begins in the dark with an group of soliders staging a surprise raid on a farmhouse where the talent is hiding. I had a wireless hop from production sound so I could hear the director and talent in a huddle but we were in the
country in the middle of nowhere so no ambient light. My scene of all of this happening basically was unlit save for a cell phone screen. So I cranked up to ISO 6400 and shot it. It looks like crap, even with Neat Video but it's a good little
scene so I get it.

I just hate shooting at high ISOs and avoid it whenever possible. If you have to crank it, you do, but even with NR, high ISOs have lack of color, color smear, images are soft even when in focus, etc. Garbage in, garbage out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top