C300: C300mk2 real world footage and user reviews.

about their arri lut, i can tell one thing, its not arri, from what i seen on youtube, its maybe pre production, but in any case as soon as i see the bright light i know its not arri.....
i guess we all (who did not pull the trigger just yet) wait for some serious test from guys who got it... and to be honest its a 1st time when i wait what BM came up with , with its 4.6 sensor (they say shipping somewhere this month).....
 
indiawilds said:
Dan Chung's piece about whether C300 Mark II is worth its price http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/10/08/canon-c300-mkii-is-the-image-worth-the-price/

He is an existing FS7 owner and says that "the images it produces are good, but without significant grading by someone much more experienced than myself, I can't get the images to look the way they come out from the C300 mII."

In production jobs time is money. Some of the channels don't even budget editing for c-log files. So nice colours straight out of the camera is required. Internet warriors can argue that any camera can be matched with any other. However, we don't get that time, budget and colourist to work on the files.
Click to expand...

I often times think about this. The money that people save getting a camera that has a lot of features but doesn't do them very well end up paying hundreds of times that amount into labor on the back end. When you have a camera that can give you a great result out of the gate you save a ton of money in post on every project. Not to say the Sony cameras are not capable but the Canon cameras can often times get you from point A to point B really quickly. That translates to a lot of time/money that you save in post.
 
just stepping back for a minute, I 'll ask since when is vimeo or youtube a critical viewing platform. THere are lots of judgements being thrown around about footage posted on line which makes no sense to me at all. Yes , perhaps you can get a basic idea of what the look is but so much footage is being shot log or cinema, not color corrected, or color corrected to what some one else's taste and even that doesn't show what he camera can do. I Have a Mk1 and a camera profile I built that is about 95% of the way there. I can shoot with that profile and hand off to my client and they can edit and output with minimal tweaks and be really happy. If the Mark 2 can have a color profile that works as well the one I have for the mark 1 then it will be worth the update given the other capabilities of the Mark 2,
I think we should not blather on too much about what the Mk2 can or can't do given the footage i've seen so far, and again using vimeo or youtube as a critical viewing platform is a real mistake in my mind.
 
Mark Smith said:
I Have a Mk1 and a camera profile I built that is about 95% of the way there. I can shoot with that profile and hand off to my client and they can edit and output with minimal tweaks and be really happy. If the Mark 2 can have a color profile that works as well the one I have for the mark 1 then it will be worth the update given the other capabilities of the Mark 2,
Click to expand...

If you are delivering HD footage with minimal/no colour grade for post I really don't see the point to upgrading to the Mk2. I guess if you need highspeed but in any ready baked colour profile for delivery you won't be using the extra DR anyway.
 
I actually prefer the top handle on the original C300 since it didn't require Allen wrenches to remove and I typically don't put enough extra weight on my setup to need a more study handle. I might need to get a Zacuto top handle for the Mark II since it's easily removable.
 
Okay, I guess I do have a bit of time before my next shoot. Here are a dozen or so other reasons to upgrade "f you are delivering HD footage with minimal/no colour grade." I could probably think of more reasons if I thought about it more.

Greatly improved auto-focus & manual focus assist (biggest reason for me)
Wider range of built-in ND filters
24 bit audio (Mark I was 16 bit)
4 channel audio (recently did a reality shoot where I found having just two channels to be limiting when working with a pro-sound guy; F800 for example has four channels)
Built-in mic on camera body
Probably better low light
Waveform in viewfinder
Improved OLED Viewfinder
Improved LCD with significantly higher brightness for better daylight viewability
10x magnification for checking focus
Can make display data on LCD go outside of the image to make it easier to view image
Can output all camera display data to external monitor via SDI
Stronger build on camera body
Better slow motion
 
Eric Coughlin said:
Okay, I guess I do have a bit of time before my next shoot. Here are a dozen or so other reasons to upgrade "f you are delivering HD footage with minimal/no colour grade." I could probably think of more reasons if I thought about it more.
Click to expand...


right , and same junky side handle. great body improvement! same pain in.... when u put it on, same pain in ... when u take it out, and same pain in .... when u use it run&gun. u guys saying gr8t for run & gun, so many of u record sound on board. so tell me the unwanted sound that stupid side handle attachment system produce...... is ok? its something what is impossible to correct? but canon keeps feeding us with same problems, but for our money!

about AF, i dont know anyone so far who would say its working perfect.... i would prefer things like that would stay in labs till it perfect, and not being advertised as a main improvement, its like we are being the testers, but we dont get payed, we pay them... To me it looks like a little twiks there and there, top handle , cords, the lcd got a little brighter (unbelievable!!! can i stay with same one and pay 5k less?), built in mic - definitely a wow factor, AF... well there was already AF that was not perfect, now its improved, and still not perfect, nice touch. Improved OLED Viewfinder - seems like still not that good to use, but yes a little better then before, cant believe no one told the new batteries looks much nicer...
Looks like everything they forgot to make good or did not care about in previous model, got some improvements, things that was suppose to be working the way it should from the beginning.

i am surprised the new sensor is there, the marketing guys most likely did not came up with "twiking solution" in that area... what makes me wonder is "Probably better low light", so its so much better that its not even obvious for a new user?
 
anatusa said:
Looks like everything they forgot to make good or did not care about in previous model, got some improvements, things that was suppose to be working the way it should from the beginning.
Click to expand...
To be fair: The C300 was the first of its kind. So besides becoming a 4K camera - why do people expect it to suddenly become radically different?
Of course they only improve stuff, that got complaints.
But in the end it will stay a C300, probably the most successful professional larger sensor HD camera of the last years.
For example: Even if the new "Alexa" mode is only 75% close to the Alexa, that still adds a lot of value to a camera, that is mainly used as an ENG/Docu camera.
Canon may seem closefisted when it comes to packing the newest and latest in their C-line - but that's just because there are alternatives now.
I don't know anyone who says the C300 was a bad investment for them.
 
anatusa said:
right , and same junky side handle. great body improvement! same pain in.... when u put it on, same pain in ... when u take it out, and same pain in .... when u use it run&gun. u guys saying gr8t for run & gun, so many of u record sound on board. so tell me the unwanted sound that stupid side handle attachment system produce...... is ok? its something what is impossible to correct? but canon keeps feeding us with same problems, but for our money!
Click to expand...

This sounds like an individual problem that you should fix. The handle on my camera works fine. I'm not a fan of the screw on method of attachment, but mine doesn't make noise.
 
cpreston said:
This sounds like an individual problem that you should fix. The handle on my camera works fine. I'm not a fan of the screw on method of attachment, but mine doesn't make noise.
Click to expand...

it moves just a very very very little, maybe 1mm, what is enough to make plastic noise, and i worked with several c300 all had same issue.... its the design issue... put your hands inside and shake it just a little.... if u hear nothing , i am surprised!
if sound recorded separately or if u dont need sound..... its not a problem, a little annoying, but nothing critical, with sound on board its an issue!
 
anatusa said:
right , and same junky side handle. great body improvement! same pain in.... when u put it on, same pain in ... when u take it out, and same pain in .... when u use it run&gun. u guys saying gr8t for run & gun, so many of u record sound on board. so tell me the unwanted sound that stupid side handle attachment system produce...... is ok? its something what is impossible to correct? but canon keeps feeding us with same problems, but for our money!

about AF, i dont know anyone so far who would say its working perfect.... i would prefer things like that would stay in labs till it perfect, and not being advertised as a main improvement, its like we are being the testers, but we dont get payed, we pay them... To me it looks like a little twiks there and there, top handle , cords, the lcd got a little brighter (unbelievable!!! can i stay with same one and pay 5k less?), built in mic - definitely a wow factor, AF... well there was already AF that was not perfect, now its improved, and still not perfect, nice touch. Improved OLED Viewfinder - seems like still not that good to use, but yes a little better then before, cant believe no one told the new batteries looks much nicer...
Looks like everything they forgot to make good or did not care about in previous model, got some improvements, things that was suppose to be working the way it should from the beginning.

i am surprised the new sensor is there, the marketing guys most likely did not came up with "twiking solution" in that area... what makes me wonder is "Probably better low light", so its so much better that its not even obvious for a new user?
Click to expand...
I don't use on-camera audio much aside from as a scratch track, but when I do use it or just listen to it I've never noticed any noise from the side handle. I leave the side handle on all the time, so taking it on and off isn't a problem for me.

Of course the AF isn't "perfect." Nothing's perfect, including a top level AC pulling focus manually with a wireless follow focus. It's a tool, it's incredibly useful (as I'm already using it regularly on my C100s), it doesn't work for everything, and that's that. If you're comparing to other manufacturers, the C100/C300 auto-focus blows Sony and Panasonic's auto-focus out of the water. Really, it's pretty absurd to suggest that a tool that is currently already extremely useful for working professionals (while not working perfectly for 100% of shots), that smokes the competition's auto-focus, should "stay in the labs till it perfect" and be excluded from the camera's features. That's like saying, "No camera is perfect, so manufacturers should just stop releasing imperfect cameras and us videographers should just use a canvas and a paint brush in the meantime while we wait for the perfect camera to be released." It's pretty simple; if you don't like how the auto-focus works, just turn it off.

I was on a music video shoot a couple days ago where the top handle of my C100 Mark II was causing a shadow from the HMI lights we had on set when I pushed in for a closeup on a Steadicam. So I removed the top handle to eliminate the shadow it was causing. The director/producer who owned a C100 Mark I freaked out for a moment, saying, "We need the top handle for the scratch track." I then reminded him that the Mark II has a built-in mic, so we were all set, thus allowing me to not use the top handle and get a shot that I would not have been able to get otherwise. So sure, a built-in mic may be no big deal to you. It is to me. Along with a lot of Steadicam/gimbal operators.

Most of the 14 improvements I listed are important to me and the majority of them are features that the competition (FS7, Ursa MIni) do not have. If they're not a big deal for you and "you are delivering HD footage with minimal/no colour grade" then probably best to stick with the C300 Mark I and stop complaining about price (which is the same as what the C300 Mark I was originally).
 
dpc said:
ISO test posted here:

https://vimeo.com/141282547

Also has C300 vs. C300mkii near the end.
Click to expand...

Not sure why for the same scene a narrow aperture is used in the C300 Mark II. Not sure what is happening.

Noel are listening? We are waiting for your C300 vs C300 Mark II tests.

As far as side handle (grip) is concerned, I have never faced any problem at all from it. It is rock solid and remains mounted on the camera all the time, except at times while packing in my bag for some travels. Else for most of the travels it remains attached. The top handle has play. I never use the top handle to carry when my camera is attached with a 5.3kg 400mm f2.8 lens or 800mm tele lens etc. Simple principle is to hold the heavier item. They cantilever principle of physics comes into play and will put lot of pressure on the lens mount if you are holding the camera and heavy lens with only the top handle. Despite the beefed up top handle of the Mark II, I will still not carry a heavy lens mounted to the Mark II by holding onto the top handle.

I don't like the Mark II top handle as it can only be removed by an allen key. Not good for quick packing into my long lens case or other bags in the field. Now I have to carry an allen key just to mount or unmount the top handle of Mark II. Not happy about it.
 
The Zacuto top handle looks like a good solution. Just a pain to have to spend another $500. I was also thinking, you could probably use the Canon C300 Mark I top handle on the Mark II. I wonder how much Canon sells that piece for individually. I'm guessing less than $500.
 
I would really be interested in seeing a CLog vs Clog test for the C300 Mki and ii. Internal and External. The Clog1 and Clog2 appear to be completely different ways of dealing handling footage.
 
Geoff Boyle of CML just evaluated a lot of lower cost cameras(mainly latitude and simple grade)and had this to say:


"Sony FS7 it’s a Sony so it has a lot of menus :-) the pictures are fine, if you like Sony cameras you’ll love this. It may help to make me like Sony more!

F55, not really part of tis series but we missed it last time, a good camera, simple if you want it to be and great pictures, a truly professional camera. Worth the money.

C300-2 I’ve kept this to last because it is a clear winner, miles ahead of anything else in the tests, easy to use, lock it in cine mode, easy to read the rushes, easy to grade, just drop the appropriate supplied LUT on and marvel :-) This is what a camera should be.
They should have called it the C400 justas the C500-2 should be the C600. It’s that big a change. In such a short test we didn’t have time to play with the looks function but if they work as we’ll as everything else…

It’s very simple really, if you want great images and a pain free life use Alexa or Amira, F65 or F55, Dragon, Varicam, C300-2."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top