seanarmada
Well-known member
Is there a huge DR difference between CLOG 2 and 3?
C300: C300 MKII projects?
- Thread starter seanarmada
- Start date
Is there a huge DR difference between CLOG 2 and 3?
Michel Talaïa
Member
One stop less in the shadows.
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
Thanks for jumping in there Jim.
Most every dealer will try to obfuscate how a camera performs head to head with another. Our shop does not. We encourage education not just in a seminar or event, but day in and out- we show our clients how to see the difference, we don't just read off the specs.
Other shops will try to sell you the product they have in stock, or what will give them a better commission. And while I understand Jim that you might assume it works that way at our shop (because frankly that's how it is everywhere else) it's quite the opposite at Hot Rod Cameras.
The fact is we always recommend what is best for our client and if we really can't sell a product, that's fine. We'll gladly tell our customers to shop somewhere else. We have a number of customers who will attest to this and they keep coming back.
We do this by having no "sales people" and by not putting ANYONE on commission. A specialty shop like ours is totally unique in this regard. Our team is smaller and better paid. They get to eat and pay their rent regardless if they sell a piece of equipment. It's also why we don't employ any "fast-talking used-car sales" type folks. Hard to miss these types in our competitors shops.
It didn't break my heart to sell a C300 Mk2 just today, but the client did spend a week debating the LT and ultimately price was the deciding factor. While not officially an "EOS Cnema" dealer Hot Rod has sold hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of Canon products, and some official dealers probably wouldn't make their quota if it wasn't for our help. Canon is a major brand that makes some good products, and depending on the situation they are such a prominent player that you can't avoid working with them on some levels. They are a considerable segment of a particular strata of the industry, however, they do not dominate all the strata and an honest dealer shouldn't supress practical and relevant information because of the conflict of interest that occurs with having salespeople working on commission.
To work at Hot Rod you have to take a sort of doctor-like hyporactic oath to "do no harm." We don't have to serve everybody nor sell everything, but we definitely sell the best stuff to the best clients. Our clients tell me everyday that they appreciate the very real ways in which we are different from EVERYBODY else. That's why Hot Rod in this business.
Jim, you should stop by sometime and see for yourself. I'll even take you to lunch.
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
Hi Don,
Good to hear from you!
In answer to your question, yes, the LT is now shipping. We are keeping them in stock and demo cameras in our Hollywood showroom. Please let me know if you'd like a demo. We have the ability get you a demo of LT and V35 in Phoenix (or anywhere else.)
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
I have used both cameras. Definitely the C300 Mk2 wins for small and lightweight, it also wins for price, even though the C300 Mk2 batteries will really set you back. The Canon is getting really squeezed in the market with the URSA Mini 4.6K and FS7 below in price, Red Raven at roughly the same price, and the LT at a slightly higher price (depending on apples to apples configuration.) The one big physical advantage of the LT is that it the only one of these cameras that has both a native active EF and a user changeable PL mount.
I'm from the generation of shooters that prefers a real viewfinder, this for me is a huge point of distinction between the LT and the other similarly (but lesser) priced cameras. Also the 5000 ISO mode is absolutely incredible. I was shooting it today and turned off all the lights in the room, stopped down to 2.8 and then added an ND filter to get the image on the screen to match what I was seeing by eye. The LT (and V35) also happens to see more colors then every other digital cinema camera in existence, this can't be over emphasized as Panasonic has been terrible at marketing this particular aspect of the camera. This is a big part of the reason that the LT colors look better is that they are frankly capturing far more of them when compared to everything else currently on the market. The LT should not be an "underdog" camera, and I'm glad to see now that it is getting picked up by more TV series than any other cameras I've mentioned in this post. I believe 14 major TV series are currently working with it. The LT firmware released this week unlocks both raw recording and "surround view" in the EVF, two major features requested by the ASC earlier this year, I'm going to try to play with both features on Friday.
It's already 2:00 AM, so I'm going to hold off on anymore of this post for now, but seanarmada I'm happy to go through more compare and contrast if you so desire. Please just contact me directly at the office.
Jim Martin
DVXuser Sponsor
Illya-
I've stopped by in the past and missed you but had a nice, brief talk with your guys....as I said, great place. I agree with everything you said and I've gone with the same philosophy when I was at Birns, Filmtools, and now EVS. One has to get clients exactly what they need in order to retain them and that's something you and I have been successful at for quite some time. We, like you, do not have the dreaded "sales types" because we both know it doesn't work well in our business and yes, there are some at our competitors.
In this case, it was a C300 MK II thread that you brought up the LT (great camera) so I did have to put my two cents in....
Jim Martin
EVSonline.com
Matt Turner
Well-known member
I disagree, for me it's completely different (internally) and a much better camera than the C300.
You could argue it's incremental but I'd have to counter that it's a huge increment.
Sure, the body (externally) has been incrementally updated, but if they changed that too much it wouldn't be a C300.
indiawilds
Veteran
The C300 is Full HD and the C300 Mark II is 4K. So only slightly more than double the resolution. It is not 8k. So obviously incremental update.
C300 has DPAF version 1 and C300 Mark II has DPAF version 2.0 which covers 80% of the frame, movable and has got face detection. Guess it is still an incremental update?
C300 shoots 1080p at 24/25p. C300 Mark II shoots at 1080 at 100/120p. If clients only demand 4k, then this is an incremental update.
C300 sound recorded at 16bits. Mark II records at 24bits. Cinematographers often ignore sound, so this is an incremental update.
C300 doesn't have built in microphones, c300 Mark II has built-in microphone for better syncing your sound. Incremental update?
C300 and C300 Mark II body looks similar - So no update?
C300 Mark II high ISO is about 2 stops better. Canon didn't put the 4 million ISO ability. So guess it is incremental update.
-----
Sorry for sounding sarcastic. However, everytime people use the work incremental update and run down the camera, so wanted to list down something. Some of the above features are not often used by people. However, the Mark II version is a better rounded camera than the Mark I. It would have been great if Canon would have done 4K 50/60p in the C300 Mark II. Pretty disappointed with Canon on that aspect. Also like everybody I would have been happy if the introductory pricing of the C300 II would have been 12K usd instead of 16k.
However, rest all is very good. No nonsense camera and it works all the time. The main question is whether one has got the clients for a particular camera and how fast someone can recover the cost. If it takes many months to recover the cost of a camera, then it is better not to be owned. Renting is better.
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
We will agree to disagree on this point.
Again, I'll respectfully disagree.
Even if there wasn't an actual NEED to put in two cents, I'm glad you did. It provided an opportunity to express my own personal philosophy, which surprisingly you parroted back to me. My understanding from clients, suppliers and other folks over the past decade is that our styles of doing business are quite contrasting.
To me, it's always preferable to include discussion of the camera(s) that are currently and proverbially eating the others lunch. This is not a non-sequitur, nor an off-limits topic in a public forum, and definitely not inside any legitimate camera shop.
Take me up on my lunch offer, happy to discuss all of this in detail, give me a call tomorrow and we'll set something up for next week. I'm also glad to extend the invitation to Shawn and Cody, so please bring them along.
jm.gardiner
Well-known member
Chiming in here in reference to the original posting.
Here's some mk2 projects that I've shot. I would note, that in order to make this camera "cinematic" you have to filter! The Japanese cameras are all overly sharp. If you want to take your footage to the next level, get a mattebox and filters to take that digital edge off! The first reference in the OP screams video when I can see someone's pores in a closeup.
Two short scenes I did with an actor friend as a camera test
Short: https://vimeo.com/155885339 (log2)
Short: https://vimeo.com/155863970 (log1)
Commercial https://vimeo.com/177628889
Short: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7gpbB1-9Y0
Book Trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ0R3DrPXco (log2)
Music Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsH19F85p-4 (log2, not a fan of the final color on this one)
And a handful of my current reel is mk2 footage now as well: https://vimeo.com/165626540
In reference to the mk2 vs Varicam LT debate. I picked up the mk2 pretty early, but later considered getting a Varicam LT as well. It's very subjective, but Panny's color just doens't vibe well with me. I own a M43 lumix camera that I love, but I see the color bias there too, it's a green/pink bias and it drives me crazy! Also checking out a few posts in the Varicam forum, someone posted some images of significant moire on the 12bit 2k footage, something I haven't seen on the mk2. Proprietary media is a bit of a turn off along with the reboots after changing settings. And as far as my clientele goes here in LA, Panasonic isn't even on their radar, it's Arri/Red/Canon. The dual ISO is attractive though.
Here's some mk2 projects that I've shot. I would note, that in order to make this camera "cinematic" you have to filter! The Japanese cameras are all overly sharp. If you want to take your footage to the next level, get a mattebox and filters to take that digital edge off! The first reference in the OP screams video when I can see someone's pores in a closeup.
Two short scenes I did with an actor friend as a camera test
Short: https://vimeo.com/155885339 (log2)
Short: https://vimeo.com/155863970 (log1)
Commercial https://vimeo.com/177628889
Short: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7gpbB1-9Y0
Book Trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ0R3DrPXco (log2)
Music Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsH19F85p-4 (log2, not a fan of the final color on this one)
And a handful of my current reel is mk2 footage now as well: https://vimeo.com/165626540
In reference to the mk2 vs Varicam LT debate. I picked up the mk2 pretty early, but later considered getting a Varicam LT as well. It's very subjective, but Panny's color just doens't vibe well with me. I own a M43 lumix camera that I love, but I see the color bias there too, it's a green/pink bias and it drives me crazy! Also checking out a few posts in the Varicam forum, someone posted some images of significant moire on the 12bit 2k footage, something I haven't seen on the mk2. Proprietary media is a bit of a turn off along with the reboots after changing settings. And as far as my clientele goes here in LA, Panasonic isn't even on their radar, it's Arri/Red/Canon. The dual ISO is attractive though.
seanarmada
Well-known member
Thanks so much for posting John. Your work is great, it really gives me a sense of what the C300 is capable of.
I have a few questions: Firstly, which filters would you recommend to take the digital edge off for the C300 specifically? And secondly, I'm wondering how you've been handling exposure/highlight roll off? To be honest more than half of the C300 MkII footage I've seen online is a bit disappointing in that respect, i.e. backgrounds with blown out windows look harshly clipped, with no highlight blooming, etc. But then I've seen a handful of footage which handles it nicely. I'm not sure if that's simply down to the competency of the camera operator or bad correction/grading which is the cause.
abreu-canedo
Well-known member
Very interesting. I really love how the Varicams have really true yellows, beautifully subtle cyans, and have really nailed their reds. However, in your opinion, do you think they capture more color than the F65? I'm not asking this rhetorically nor as a biased F65 owner. It's just that in all my research I had come to the conclusion that the F65 captured more colors than any other digital camera. But I could be wrong. I've never shot the LT, and only had one half day with the Varicam.
In any case, curious to hear more, if you would be willing to elaborate.
-Thanks in advance, Rafael
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
The F65 became the undisputed king of color gamut with the release of S-Gamut3 back in 2014 and it remained that way until the launch of the Varicam V35. Sony's S-Gamut3 encloses ITU-R BT.2020 color space on 2 sides (Blue/Green) by a decent margin, but clips the corner of 2020 in the Red.
The Varicam V35 and LT are the only cameras that can fully encompass BT.2020 on all side (RGB) which give it an edge, albeit a narrow victory over the color space of the F65. Sony does extend marginally farther into green than the Varicam V35/LT, but Panasonic matches or surpasses in blue and as I mentioned fully covers red.
I'm not aware of any commercially available display technology that can show beyond BT.2020, most can't even show beyond P3. I believe using 2020 as the yardstick makes the most sense so if we measure all cameras in existence against 2020 the V35/LT are the only digital cinema cameras who can capture beyond 100% of that color space. The fact that one costs only $16,500 is totally astounding.
I guarantee you if Sony or Red had achieved this they would be shouting it from the rooftops (and rightly so) but it's almost like a footnote in the Varicam marketing material.
jm.gardiner
Well-known member
Sensors don't bloom highlights, glass does. If you're after that look get some filtration. Try a low-con or pro-mist to start. I'm a fan of both black and white pro-mist and Hollywood Black Magic Filters. I own the two canon compact zooms and I find they look best with a 1/4 or 1/8 Black Promist to take that modern lens perfection back a notch.
All the latest cameras/sensors are amazing, but they all clip eventually and they all have noise, some are just more forgiving than others! The camera can't make up for a lack of production or post production. I've captured great images on set only to have post F- it all up and I've also had post save my a$$ a few times. Style of productions are different too, a lot of TV work I do for docu-series they don't mind if back grounds are blown, as long as the subject isn't.
Illya, I'm just scanning through the varicam/mk2 gamut options, it looks like V-Gamut and Canon's Cinema Gamut are very close in terms of scope according to white papers. I'm not an engineer, but with both cameras able to do a form of 12 bit raw out, does one best the other?
https://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2016/eosc300markii-colorspace.htmlp
http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/varicam/35/features/index.html
All the latest cameras/sensors are amazing, but they all clip eventually and they all have noise, some are just more forgiving than others! The camera can't make up for a lack of production or post production. I've captured great images on set only to have post F- it all up and I've also had post save my a$$ a few times. Style of productions are different too, a lot of TV work I do for docu-series they don't mind if back grounds are blown, as long as the subject isn't.
Illya, I'm just scanning through the varicam/mk2 gamut options, it looks like V-Gamut and Canon's Cinema Gamut are very close in terms of scope according to white papers. I'm not an engineer, but with both cameras able to do a form of 12 bit raw out, does one best the other?
https://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2016/eosc300markii-colorspace.htmlp
http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/varicam/35/features/index.html
Illya Friedman
Well-known member
I believe so.
And regardless of the lines on Canon's chart I believe that the Sony F65 and Panasonic V35/LT are both more accurately representing colors.
I known Loren who wrote the article you reference. He's a nice guy but not a color scientist and he doesn't explain or even mention the fact that Canon's Cinema Gamut is bounded on two sides, G & B, by virtual primaries rather than pure spectral primaries. Virtual primaries are of course NOT real colors, at least not a color you can see with the human eye, as they fall outside the visible spectrum of light.
Canon attempts to justifies this in their white paper and says virtual primaries should be trusted, they are throwing away the invisible colors and what's left is nearly ALL visible colors. Many folks more technical than myself will disagree that what's actually happening. In short it was explained to me as a form of interpolation.
All other manufacturers (that I am aware of) are using what we can see in the analog world as the point of reference for image acquisition, even though all these cameras are using a CFA and highly sophisticated math to derive their colors, Canon is saying they are recording beyond what is visible by eye, and that their math then clips this signal down.
Glen Kennel's book references some research doing this in post and how many bits you will need before this clipping created more problems.
If you read Canon's white paper (not the Loren Simon article) on the subject they argue that their "Cinema" color space is bigger because of these virtual primaries, maybe if you are specifically shooting for false color UV you'd maybe get some benefit (and even then?!), I'm really not convinced. We have plenty of gamuts that utilize virtual primaries as bounders and there's a good reason post production tools and mastering have the fixed points offered by gamuts like ACES and CIE XYZ. Canon are the only people I know putting virtual primaries in the camera and claiming that the camera is utilizing a gamut featuring invisible colors outside the human vision and then math to clip them into visible colors, and that this is also a benefit.
I'm actually still a bit irked by Canon's marketing of "15-stops" of DR with the C300 Mk2, and then it was shown repeatedly that others were unable to duplicate their numbers even under the most optimistic counting. Then Canon made a statement to someone/somewhere (can't recall who) than Canon was counting in a way that was basically meaningless to their customers.
I mean I can't really pile all the blame on Canon for pushing specs their DR and Gamut- they have one major competitor who is wildly over "optimistic" about performance specs.
There's a good 2-min primer regarding color space here if you are feeling in the dark, no pun intended.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0-qoXOCOow
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
Specs are rather irrelevant if the image itself isn't as good. Maybe specs show the Varicam having more color information than the Alexa, but I still find the Alexa's colors a good step better than the Varicam. And the F65 looks better than the Varicam to my eye as well.
Varicam has a pretty comparable image to the C300 Mark II to my eye, perhaps slightly better, but I prefer the C300 Mark II's feature set, work-ability, and ergonomics better than the Varicam LT. Amira is also a way better camera than the Varicam LT (perhaps aside from low light), of course at a much higher price.
In my limited (judging by the viewfinder and LCD image) testing of the Varicam at B&H Photo, I found 5000 ISO to be pretty noisy, perhaps worse than the C300 Mark II's 5000 ISO. It's kind of a gimmick how they market 5000 ISO to be about as clean as 800 ISO when it's actually a lot noisier. Sure, you can add noise reduction, but that doesn't change how much noisier it is to start with, and a lot of quick turn around productions don't have time to add noise reduction in post.
I'd also say that one of the biggest issues with the Varicam LT at least for now, from an owner/op standpoint, is that it's not a proven and popular camera, so it'd likely be a more difficult sell to producers as an owner/op. Of course if you're producing your own content, then this aspect wouldn't matter nearly as much.
The C300 Mark II, on the other hand, is the step up from the very proven and popular camera, the C300 Mark I. Arri Amira is the step down from the very popular Arri Alexa. FS7 is a step up from the FS700, and step down from the F5/F55, both popular cameras. Varicam LT is the new kid on the block, a step down from the also pretty new and never popular Varicam 35. That makes it a tougher sell as it has no popular camera from which it is following up.
Producers are often a good 2-4 years behind the current tech, so often aren't familiar with newer cameras, hence why some producers still ask for 5D's even though there are now better cameras than the 5D at a similar price point. Thus, when a new camera is a followup to an older camera, such as a producer who likes the C300 Mark I, as many have, then having a C300 Mark II will generally make those producers happy, as well as other producers who are more up-to-date on current tech.
It always seemed to me that those who agreed with Cinema5D's conclusions, ignoring the other reputable sources that disagreed, did not even question Cinema5D's testing methods, and likely agreed with their conclusions because of their own biases, such as thinking the camera was overpriced and them being annoyed they couldn't afford it, so they were overly eager to accept the idea that the camera they wanted but couldn't afford was not as great as advertised.
Varicam has a pretty comparable image to the C300 Mark II to my eye, perhaps slightly better, but I prefer the C300 Mark II's feature set, work-ability, and ergonomics better than the Varicam LT. Amira is also a way better camera than the Varicam LT (perhaps aside from low light), of course at a much higher price.
In my limited (judging by the viewfinder and LCD image) testing of the Varicam at B&H Photo, I found 5000 ISO to be pretty noisy, perhaps worse than the C300 Mark II's 5000 ISO. It's kind of a gimmick how they market 5000 ISO to be about as clean as 800 ISO when it's actually a lot noisier. Sure, you can add noise reduction, but that doesn't change how much noisier it is to start with, and a lot of quick turn around productions don't have time to add noise reduction in post.
I'd also say that one of the biggest issues with the Varicam LT at least for now, from an owner/op standpoint, is that it's not a proven and popular camera, so it'd likely be a more difficult sell to producers as an owner/op. Of course if you're producing your own content, then this aspect wouldn't matter nearly as much.
The C300 Mark II, on the other hand, is the step up from the very proven and popular camera, the C300 Mark I. Arri Amira is the step down from the very popular Arri Alexa. FS7 is a step up from the FS700, and step down from the F5/F55, both popular cameras. Varicam LT is the new kid on the block, a step down from the also pretty new and never popular Varicam 35. That makes it a tougher sell as it has no popular camera from which it is following up.
Producers are often a good 2-4 years behind the current tech, so often aren't familiar with newer cameras, hence why some producers still ask for 5D's even though there are now better cameras than the 5D at a similar price point. Thus, when a new camera is a followup to an older camera, such as a producer who likes the C300 Mark I, as many have, then having a C300 Mark II will generally make those producers happy, as well as other producers who are more up-to-date on current tech.
Was it shown repeatedly? All I remember was one source (Cinema5D) stating a lower dynamic range than advertised, everybody made a big hullabaloo about that one source, which in my opinion and many others' opinions had very flawed methods for testing, while several other reputable sources (such as Geoff Boyle, Alan Roberts, and Philip Bloom) agreed it was pretty much as advertised, at 15 stops.
It always seemed to me that those who agreed with Cinema5D's conclusions, ignoring the other reputable sources that disagreed, did not even question Cinema5D's testing methods, and likely agreed with their conclusions because of their own biases, such as thinking the camera was overpriced and them being annoyed they couldn't afford it, so they were overly eager to accept the idea that the camera they wanted but couldn't afford was not as great as advertised.
Last edited:
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I didn't notice anywhere where the windows are blown out. I'm not clear on what you're referring to. I believe the sky wasn't blown out as well. I lit most of interior b-roll scenes with one or two Litepanel Astras, which helped balance out brightness from inside and outside. I probably could have used more light on the inside at times to help balance things out more, but that's a matter of lighting and not dynamic range as I already had enough dynamic range to keep the windows from blowing out.Thanks for sharing these Eric, I've seen your work floating around the net
Of course windows will blow out on any camera as John said if the contrast is too high. An 18 stop scene will blow out (or have shadows crushed) on a 12 stop camera and a 15 stop camera. So in my opinion the main advantage of a 15 stop camera over a 12 stop camera is in those not very common scenes where you just happen to be filming a scene that is 12-15 stops.
It was shot mostly in Wide DR, with a few Canon Log 2 shots here and there. I found Canon Log 2 a pain to grade sometimes. I'm going try Canon Log 3.
John, I forget if you mentioned elsewhere; are you using Canon Log 3 now instead of Canon Log 2?
Last edited:
seanarmada
Well-known member
Point taken, it wasn't so much that they're blown out, it's that I'm obsessing a little over the highlight roll-off issue. Didn't mean any offence, the pieces are really well produced, I've just been obsessively looking for examples of clipped highlights vs. bloomy highlights. As has been mentioned a few times though that often has more to do with filters/lenses than the cameras themselves, which is a good learning lesson for me.
jm.gardiner
Well-known member
In reference to filters and bloomy highlights. Here are a series of images with the canon Compact Cinema Zooms paired with various strengths of black promist or HBM.
Here's a good examples: First two images, 1/4 black promist shot in Log2/Production camera.
These below, nearly same setup, but shot WIDE DR without filtration.
Here are some images with a much cheaper lens (24mm pancake)and no filtration:
Here's a good examples: First two images, 1/4 black promist shot in Log2/Production camera.
These below, nearly same setup, but shot WIDE DR without filtration.
Here are some images with a much cheaper lens (24mm pancake)and no filtration:
Attachments
dp90068
Well-known member
Illya - I'll give you a shout if I am able to get out to the IDA Getting Real conf later this month.
Good to know the LT is shipping. You're right about Panasonic not getting the color space information out there and right about the importance of a real viewfinder. I found this especially frustrating when I was first looking at 1080p cameras. The C300 viewfinder was the first one that met my basic requirements which is why I bought the camera. Zacuto resolved this with the Gratical Eye. Now we're all cooking...
I think people misunderstand the importance of doing business with an A List dealer and staff. It makes all the difference in the world.
Good to know the LT is shipping. You're right about Panasonic not getting the color space information out there and right about the importance of a real viewfinder. I found this especially frustrating when I was first looking at 1080p cameras. The C300 viewfinder was the first one that met my basic requirements which is why I bought the camera. Zacuto resolved this with the Gratical Eye. Now we're all cooking...
I think people misunderstand the importance of doing business with an A List dealer and staff. It makes all the difference in the world.