C300: C300MKIII at NAB????

Barry G said:
I bought the xt-3 to live on a ronin - s, and while I love the form factor and the flexibility it brings to my kit, it's in no way a replacement for the c200 (or in my case the c300II). The AF, while fast isn't in the same league as DPAF (it tends to rock in and out of focus when the subject distance changes). I find it hard to grade in almost every situation...the color is just really different than the canon's and its near impossible to get it to "look" like what I like about canon's color science. In lower light situations it's just a different beast, and the color issues get more difficult to control. Finally...to me, it's a little too sharp...which probably flies in the face of all the criticism the canon camera's get here. It almost has a still image quality, which isn't what I'm after in a cinema camera. To each his own on this, but I prefer the image I get off the C300 by a huge mile --output raw to PR on the Atomos. I would never shoot a doc with the xt-3 as my A camera. Still trying to figure out if it's even usable B camera.
Click to expand...

Exposure invariant color is certainly a desired aspect of color science. If one is ok with 8-bit, for gimbal use the Sony $900 A6400 with AI AF looks really good for detail, low light, and even skin tones now. RS is poor, though not really an issue for gimbal use.

Have you tried a lens diffusion filter or doing diffusion in post with the X-T3? As long as there’s no aliasing (as with C300 II), real detail is never a problem. After owning the 5D2 with aliasing, then appreciative of Canon fixing aliasing with the 5D3, I was very disappointed to see aliasing again after spending $16,000 for the C300 II, especially with the soft image!

For those looking to remove the plastic wrap off C300 II skin, external ProRes Raw is a great option. Expose to the right to minimize noise, and highlight recovery is awesome with raw (if you don’t clip).
 
Barry G said:
I bought the xt-3 to live on a ronin - s, and while I love the form factor and the flexibility it brings to my kit, it's in no way a replacement for the c200 (or in my case the c300II). The AF, while fast isn't in the same league as DPAF (it tends to rock in and out of focus when the subject distance changes). I find it hard to grade in almost every situation...the color is just really different than the canon's and its near impossible to get it to "look" like what I like about canon's color science. In lower light situations it's just a different beast, and the color issues get more difficult to control. Finally...to me, it's a little too sharp...which probably flies in the face of all the criticism the canon camera's get here. It almost has a still image quality, which isn't what I'm after in a cinema camera. To each his own on this, but I prefer the image I get off the C300 by a huge mile --output raw to PR on the Atomos. I would never shoot a doc with the xt-3 as my A camera. Still trying to figure out if it's even usable B camera.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anything from the x-t3 that's blown me away. Partly because they're used for small projects and don't walk away with the same production value as bigger shoots.

But for me, cameras in that space used the way you described, pure image quality is much lower on the priority list vs. ease of use, ability to get shots big cameras can't i.e. small gimbal, headshot stills or any stills, lighting fast ROI etc.

This is why I'm still eyeing up the EOS R. Most samples I've seen have been decent at best but that's not the reason I'd buy one.

(I also sympathise with people's want for small cameras to have much better IQ but I don't care as much).
 
rob norton said:
I haven't seen anything from the x-t3 that's blown me away. Partly because they're used for small projects and don't walk away with the same production value as bigger shoots.

But for me, cameras in that space used the way you described, pure image quality is much lower on the priority list vs. ease of use, ability to get shots big cameras can't i.e. small gimbal, headshot stills or any stills, lighting fast ROI etc.
Click to expand...

https://www.facebook.com/FujifilmXUS/videos/287925871808372/?v=287925871808372

You may or may not like the work, but you can't say the XT3 didn't get the full blown treatment on this project.
 
puredrifting said:
I'm there. I'm done with buying new cameras for the foreseeable future. I've reached the point of what I have is so good, so competent compared to what our clients need/want, that I'm done. If I could sell the two documentaries I am producing and actually make a little profit, I would probably sell off the C200 and just buy a second X-T3 or X-H2 body when it comes out. One rigged for interviews and tripod shooting with a cage, port protector, monitor and one bone stock for gimbal. No documentary I am going to produce would require anything better. I love small and light and cheap. I'm heading to a Jiu Jitsu studio this morning to shoot b-roll of our ultra marathon runner training and getting thrown all over the place. C200 with the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS II on tripod, X-T3 on gimbal with the XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4.0 OIS on gimbal and I will alternate between them. I know it will look great, will be shooting 4K 60p on both cams, maybe a little 1080 120fps just for social media?

It's so great not lusting after "better" cameras because for what I am doing, both are perfect.
Click to expand...

I'm with you here, with a few exceptions. 1. The primary one being: cameras are getting very affordable to RENT. It's a hassle cause I live outside the zone, but in the NYC market I'm amazed how affordable some rigs are to put together.
2. If you're producing you can choose what to shoot. IF you have media savvy clients they are often picky about what gear we work with. Also known as the dog and pony show, it is a real element in some markets.

But if the XT3 can be setup to intercut seamlessly with the C300M2 I'm in.
 
klk said:
I'm with you here, with a few exceptions. 1. The primary one being: cameras are getting very affordable to RENT. It's a hassle cause I live outside the zone, but in the NYC market I'm amazed how affordable some rigs are to put together.
2. If you're producing you can choose what to shoot. IF you have media savvy clients they are often picky about what gear we work with. Also known as the dog and pony show, it is a real element in some markets.

But if the XT3 can be setup to intercut seamlessly with the C300M2 I'm in.
Click to expand...

I'd like to collaborate with a real colorist to get there, only for me with would be C200. Interesting, did several shoots last year with my C200 and rented C300 MKIIs and they don't color match very well either. Different imager and processing I found. I have not tried to color match C-Log 3 from both, I have a feeling it would be closer but I am not a good colorist.
The Fuji X-T3 makes different looking images than the Canons but if we can get the colors to match, I think they will intercut fine. After watching a lot of YT videos from talented colorists, the X-T3 can be made to color match, but it's going to take someone far more talented than me to do it!
 
puredrifting said:
I'd like to collaborate with a real colorist to get there, only for me with would be C200. Interesting, did several shoots last year with my C200 and rented C300 MKIIs and they don't color match very well either. Different imager and processing I found. I have not tried to color match C-Log 3 from both, I have a feeling it would be closer but I am not a good colorist.
The Fuji X-T3 makes different looking images than the Canons but if we can get the colors to match, I think they will intercut fine. After watching a lot of YT videos from talented colorists, the X-T3 can be made to color match, but it's going to take someone far more talented than me to do it!
Click to expand...

What do you use to grade footage? I'm about to move to Resolve 15, although I'll keep using PP 5.5 for fast turnaround projects.
 
Can I make a prediction? Can I? May I? Come on, I logged in for the first time in a year and a half just for this.

So, here it goes. Two cameras, as mentioned by Canon Rumors.

C100 MKIII. $3,500, essentially C200 without CRL. I debate with myself on the codec (I always lose those debates). I'd say, 75% probability, it's going to be 8-bit 100 Mbps H264/MP4, with the 25% of it being 10-bit H-264 or H265 at 150-200 rate equivalency (as shown with the C-200, the far improved processing power makes H-264 good enough for the run&gun and baked-in interview/corporate shooting)

C500 MKII - (in two versions) - with the s35 sensor from C700 for ~ $15,000 and, with the FF sensor from C700FF, for $20,000. EF mounts. Canon Raw Lite on the lower priced unit (CFast 2.0 cards) and full Raw in various compression ratios on the CFexpress cards.

My third prediction is that my my first two will be wrong.

My fourth is Rams over Patriots in the Superbowl. I'll log in later to see how that one came out.
 
Side note - Canon's ace up its sleeve is the RF 28-70 F2 ... except, so far it's available only in RF. Now, if they can adapt or redesign it for the C500's ....
 
rob norton said:
What do you use to grade footage? I'm about to move to Resolve 15, although I'll keep using PP 5.5 for fast turnaround projects.
Click to expand...

Color Wheels in FCP X 10.4.5 but trying to teach myself Resolve. I know Resolve is much more capable, but I'm not. Yet.
 
WhereTF were you DLD? We had discussions about your absence here. Like Trump can't do without his twitter, people can't do without your posts

DLD said:
Can I make a prediction? Can I? May I? Come on, I logged in for the first time in a year and a half just for this.

So, here it goes. Two cameras, as mentioned by Canon Rumors.

C100 MKIII. $3,500, essentially C200 without CRL. I debate with myself on the codec (I always lose those debates). I'd say, 75% probability, it's going to be 8-bit 100 Mbps H264/MP4, with the 25% of it being 10-bit H-264 or H265 at 150-200 rate equivalency (as shown with the C-200, the far improved processing power makes H-264 good enough for the run&gun and baked-in interview/corporate shooting)

C500 MKII - (in two versions) - with the s35 sensor from C700 for ~ $15,000 and, with the FF sensor from C700FF, for $20,000. EF mounts. Canon Raw Lite on the lower priced unit (CFast 2.0 cards) and full Raw in various compression ratios on the CFexpress cards.

My third prediction is that my my first two will be wrong.

My fourth is Rams over Patriots in the Superbowl. I'll log in later to see how that one came out.
Click to expand...
 
puredrifting said:
Color Wheels in FCP X 10.4.5 but trying to teach myself Resolve. I know Resolve is much more capable, but I'm not. Yet.
Click to expand...

I too use colour wheels in FCPX and am pretty happy with it. Have never tried Resolve. Looking for something which can help me in graphics. Am not great in motion.
 
I think FCPX and Motion is a pretty slick combo for today's fast pace. I would consider Motion to have one of the lowest thresholds for getting up to speed with basic graphics work. But I'm not sure that means it's very intuitive. After Effects has been the de facto standard for a long time and Motion works a little bit differently (still, many similarities too).

I would recommend any Apple user to try to get over that first little hump with Motion. Motions ready-to-go behaviours make it relatively easy to create animation and adjust it. A good way might be to visit any of the sites that sell 'lower thirds' and 'titles' and find something that doesn't look too intimidating and then try to recreate it in Motion, or wherever. That takes the whole "creativity problem" out of the equation.

That said, since starting out with Resolve on the side with version... hmm.. 11 I think it was, I now find that I don't open FCPX for long periods of time. BMD just keeps updating and expanding Resolve and they've promised another MAJOR release for NAB. Considering how easy it is to move from editing to compositing in Fusion to the color page... well, time invested in learning Resolve certainly must be time well spent.
 
AndreeOnline said:
I think FCPX and Motion is a pretty slick combo for today's fast pace. I would consider Motion to have one of the lowest thresholds for getting up to speed with basic graphics work. But I'm not sure that means it's very intuitive. After Effects has been the de facto standard for a long time and Motion works a little bit differently (still, many similarities too).

I would recommend any Apple user to try to get over that first little hump with Motion. Motions ready-to-go behaviours make it relatively easy to create animation and adjust it. A good way might be to visit any of the sites that sell 'lower thirds' and 'titles' and find something that doesn't look too intimidating and then try to recreate it in Motion, or wherever. That takes the whole "creativity problem" out of the equation.

That said, since starting out with Resolve on the side with version... hmm.. 11 I think it was, I now find that I don't open FCPX for long periods of time. BMD just keeps updating and expanding Resolve and they've promised another MAJOR release for NAB. Considering how easy it is to move from editing to compositing in Fusion to the color page... well, time invested in learning Resolve certainly must be time well spent.
Click to expand...

I'm about to finalize a new computer build and plan to do everything in resolve 15. Any advice on learning Fusion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top