F3: C300 vs. F3

A

amarss

New member
Hello all,

First post here. I realise the thousands of posts everywhere on this very topic. However the budget and time of make me want to post this again here.

I am in the market for a camera and I have two options. Brand new C300 for £10.5k vs. second hand F3 for £7K. F3 does not have S-Log which can be bought for 600. I will also buy a PL to EF adapter just in case.

C300:
8 Bit
C-Log
BBC Approved
Only 8bit out of HD SDI

F3:
10 Bit
S-Log
444 out of HDSDI but need external recorder

I didn't mention all pros cons as these are the one that matters. I am sure I have missed a few, if so, do let me know. Is S-Log better than C-Log?

Also wanted your advice on the F3 vs. FS700 with it's 4k option. I personally don't think 4k is catching up for a while. Besides a 4k slog out from f3 should scale up well on 4k projectors in cinema I would think.

Your advice is much appreciated. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
amarss said:
Hello all,

First post here. I realise the thousands of posts everywhere on this very topic. However the budget and time of make me want to post this again here.

I am in the market for a camera and I have two options. Brand new C300 for 10.5k vs. second hand F3 for 7K. F3 does not have S-Log which can be bought for 600. I will also buy a PL to EF adapter just in case.

C300:
8 Bit
C-Log
BBC Approved
Only 8bit out of HD SDI

F3:
10 Bit
S-Log
444 out of HDSDI but need external recorder

I didn't mention all pros cons as these are the one that matters. I am sure I have missed a few, if so, do let me know. Is S-Log better than C-Log?

Also wanted your advice on the F3 vs. FS700 with it's 4k option. I personally don't think 4k is catching up for a while. Besides a 4k slog out from f3 should scale up well on 4k projectors in cinema I would think.

Your advice is much appreciated. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Be careful not to get hosed with a "brand new C300" for $10.5k. No such thing that I'm aware of.
 
I had the option last year to choose between the C300 and F3 and I went for the F3 due it's superior image quality. F3 is also a very simple camera to use once set up.

If I'd went for a C300 it would have been lurking in the back of my head that the F3 was the better camera iq wise.
 
Last edited:
The C300 is the better setup camera from an operational point of view. It just works simpler and better than the Sony does, its layout makes more sense than the F3's super-heavy-handicam setup.

That said, the 10-bit SLOG output from the F3 is in another league image quality wise to the C300's 8-bit 50mbps recording (although that's a great codec in and of itself).

So it's really a question of image-quality versus ergonomics IMO. If I were working more exclusively in broadcast or corporate video, I think the C300 would suit me better, but as it is, having the time to push my footage as far as I can with 10-bit SLOG on the F3, wins out in the end for my needs.

Both cameras take great pictures, but for the price at the moment, a used F3 (which has 4:2:2 SLOG on it for free) represents the better deal by far.
 
I've shot with both on several occassions but owned the F3. My advise is to pick the camera based on your shooting style not which you think makes "better" images. Both will make great images once you get use to the camera and its settings and you manage the workflow from beginning to end.

The biggest difference between the two cams:

- F3 is a massive block. Fine for dolly's, sticks, over shoulder but you won't be doing handheld for example or laying low in a crowd with it for long for example.
- C300 will control EOS lenses to some degree. The F3 will not control EOS unless you go with a $2000 EOS adapter with teather & box.

NOTE in your comparison: The F3 is not 10-bit unless you add a recorder, so in you should list that the F3 is 8-bit 420.


As for FS700 with 4k. Although its not really known yet what it will be like, I am all over that and have been since they announced it. Once you bypass the camera's internal codec and its limitations and read directly off the sensor ANY camera (doesn't matter which one) becomes a totally different camera. Look at the DVX100 with the Andromeda modification that bypassed the internal electronics of the panasonic. The footage looked 20 times better yet it was the same camera. Andromeda is what lead RED to develop the RED One in 2006. I can not say it enough, the FS700 is a hidden gem and even better is the fact that it is RAW in 12-bit as opposed to 16-bit like the F5/F55 which means you're still going to get plenty of lattitude from it but slightly smaller files. It would have been great if on the F5/F55 there was 12-bit option but it would require different internal processing to make it switchable so they stuck with 16-bit to make it more competative. Once downside to the Fs700 so far is the length of the camera once you add the intermediate module (HXS) to the AXS-R5. Regardless, if you can get a great deal on a FS700 and the upgrade ends up being cheap or free, this is still a great option.
 
Last edited:
If you want the 300, get used to switching off camera, on every lens change. Then you need to buy a cage for it, that adds more weight, if you want to run handheld. And then you have that flip up screen too deal with, that can only go on top of camera. Have been using this camera on a show lately and I can't stand it. Pretty pictures, but terrible design. It's like, it can't decide whether to be consumer or professional...
 
I worked with C300, numerous times. At first, I was in envy how small the body is and how easy was to hand hold (not shoulder hold...)... Perfect, just like Bolex16 was... And then the eye finder was far more usable on c300 than F3. But, having an only EOS mount or PL mount puts some limitations on "universality" of the system. If you have a lot of Canon glass, decision is easy. If you are starting your system, budget wise (used)Sony is better option. Especially since lot of folks trying hard to dump thier almost no use F3s all over the net... I am not going in to image quality. That is an endless argument on any board... Choose what suits you better ergonomicly and financially (look at the cost of complete system, not just the body of the camera).
 
Thanks all.

The C300 is a great camera which only needs a lens to become functioning.
F3 will need the SLog purchase, battery and mount and an external recorder. It all adds up to more than C300 and still is a second hand camera.

How would you compare the SLog to Clog?

Also, can you get uncompressed out from C300 via HDMI or HDSDI?
I take it the C300 uncompressed out is still 8bit 422 but since the sensor is s35 and its 8mp is there gonna be a future possibility of 10bit out?
 
slog is free using the v1.4 firmware upgrade. The only thing the "paid" RGB upgrade gives you now is RGB out SDI if you want to do RGB recording with something like a Gemini, Cinedeck or PIX240 RGB recorder ranging in price from $2749-$8999, plus power and media requirements. The paid RGB upgrade also gives you viewing LUT's. You don't really need the upgrade once you get use to shooting with SLOG and learn how to expose it properly using the F3 exposure tools built in.

Speaking of exposure, the C300 has a waveform monitor without the digits, so kind of helpful but the F3 gives you ACTUAL IRE % read outs so you can nail 38% grey exposure on a grey card for shooting SLOG.
 
Last edited:
starcentral said:
slog is free using the v1.4 firmware upgrade. The only thing the "paid" RGB upgrade gives you now is RGB out SDI if you want to do RGB recording with the Cinedeck $6000 recorder.
Click to expand...

You don't need a cinedeck to record the 444 out, there are other recorders out there, gemini comes to mind,, although still in the same ballpark as far as pricing.

The cinedeck is FAR more than "just a recorder". for $4-5K it is a steal (talking used market). It can pretty much accept any output you can throw at it, and record any format you want, from 4:2:0-4:4:4, xdcam to dnxhd, proress, cineform, to completely uncompressed.


And as far as the whole C300 Vs F3.

Go rent both cameras, and see which one you like better. You might not, or your clients might not need, what a specific camera does.
One person will say one thing, one another, you are the only one you can make the final decision.

my thoughts!

Ryan
 
Hey,
it think that's a tough call...
i'm the only one of my friends having a F3, and they started to add things like cages etc so almost all of them ended up having a heavier and even bulkier rig than i do.
On my Garmin projects last year we almost always shot with both cameras, sometimes with the very same lenses, and we always preferred the look of the f3.
that being said i did a project for Manu Delago with the London Symphony Orchestra last year, and i simply loved the stabilized 100-400 lens on the c300 hip-style-shooting. on an F3 you're quite limited to 85mm (max 100) where you can get away handheld hip-style (shoulder's better, but bulkier with pads etc...)

I like the look of the F3's slog better (even with the same lens), but how big of a deal is it really?
the only thing i don't like are the cheaper canon fotolenses. but as well a matter of taste...

i think it's what you want to do. shoot a lot of handheld Docs or outdoors(c300 is weather sealed), or go more narrative which i would prefer the f3 for...

you also have to consider that the c300 will drop the price as soon as canon takes on the Sony F challenge. that might be sooner than later (c200??).
so if you plan/want to sell in a year you surely loose less money with the f3...

just my 2 cents...
 
amarss said:
Thanks all.

The C300 is a great camera which only needs a lens to become functioning.
F3 will need the SLog purchase, battery and mount and an external recorder. It all adds up to more than C300 and still is a second hand camera.
Click to expand...

This is a strange statement at least. Every camera needs a lens not just C300. F3 still delivers even with no Slog. Come on! Don't get "warped in " with Internet forums mentality that the camera is somehow less functional if it does not have an Slog...
Back to your quote, c300 also needs battery and mount just like F3. What is your point here?
Yes, f3 is "only" 35mbits, compared to c300 (50)... Again, if you read too many pro video forums you can get depresses in wanting and "needing" the best and the latest in technology. Examples are numerous where real time productions or broadcast shows (I am not sure where you put your work at?) did just fine with out Slog or 4K or 8K or whatever...

As far as F3 not being robust enough camera compared to C300, I have taken my F3 to all kinds of extreme conditions all over the world and the camera never failed. Never crashed. Never a lost clip. My very first shoot with brand new F3 was a feature story at the dusty Cement Factory. All over the place, lens changes in the open and came back home with out even dust on the sensor... And, even a Sony EX1 I had before, same story. But, then again if you abuse or misuse your gear not even a bullet proof construction will be enough.

Again, don't get sidetracked by comments of "behind the computer desk" DPs who consider only top of the line equipment as option to create "their art"...
Rant end.
 
Ryman said:
You don't need a cinedeck to record the 444 out, there are other recorders out there, gemini comes to mind,, although still in the same ballpark as far as pricing.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can use Gemini or now even a PIX240 with firmware upgrade. Cinedeck is just what came to mind when typing.
 
amarss said:
The C300 is a great camera which only needs a lens to become functioning.
F3 will need the SLog purchase, battery and mount and an external recorder. It all adds up to more than C300 and still is a second hand camera.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is right, although it depends on the external recorder you buy. I've been doing the math a lot lately and a used F3 even with a recorder (pix240 and down) is going to come in for significantly less than a C300 body. The issue with both of these cameras for me is 1080p slo mo which for my work is essential. Used F3s are a remarkable value right now.
 
Speaking of slo-mo, 720p 60p on the F3 even upscaled 50% in post to match 1080p is not as bad as most would think. You have to try it for yourself to see, in most cases it works very well.
 
starcentral said:
Speaking of slo-mo, 720p 60p on the F3 even upscaled 50% in post to match 1080p is not as bad as most would think. You have to try it for yourself to see, in most cases it works very well.
Click to expand...


Exactly!
That is just one of the examples on how pure numbers don't mean that much for "real life"... Content is the issue, hardware can not be more important. If it is, something strong then!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top