C500 MKII Leaked on Canon Rumors

puredrifting said:
I've only shot with the Amira twice and it's a beast, I had to have a PA carry around my batteries in his backpack all day. Great camera and image but it's a burden to shoot with shoulder mounted.
Click to expand...
If you were a pro athlete like Aaron Rodgers then the weight would not be as much of a burden. More weight equals more inertia which means steadier footage.

I'm curious to see the quality of the C500 Mark II IS. IS can make footage look better or worse depending.
 
TheDingo said:
Apparently it's $16,000 US. I wonder how well it will sell at this price ? ( there are so many lower priced cameras )
Click to expand...

$16,000 ... but you get a free SanDisk 512 GB CFexpress card with it. Hey, it's $600 retail, so it's something.

There are some less expensive third party EVF's too.

 
AndreeOnline said:
I would guess $17995 or $18995, but this camera really needs to drop a wee bit more. $15995 would be a better starting point, but that would surprise me a lot.
Click to expand...

I'm pleasantly surprised.

For this category of camera, it's pretty aggressive.

The C500 mkII actually seems pretty "complete": sensor size, color science/log curves, mount options, codec internal/external, media, power, DPAF, NDs, modularity....

I wouldn't be surprised if this camera fares a bit better than some recent 'high end' Canons. And I'm hoping that this is the first sign that Canon is re-committing to the Cinema EOS System.
 
NorBro said:
Old-timers never learn...LOL, j/k!

(You might appreciate that as you refer to yourself as a geezer here and there.)
Click to expand...

I totally own I'm a geezer. I started out in linear editing and even cut a couple of projects on a flatbed film editor. Even back in the 90s though, I was always dreaming of smaller, cheaper, lighter and how far I could push the cheaper stuff versus buying the top of the line. I had a couple of colleagues who bought used Arri BL4s but I ended up buying an Arri SR2 instead because the BL4 was a monster, really expensive, all of the accessories and you needed two ACs to use one. The SR2, if I preloaded my mags, I could shoot with alone. I was totally in love with my DVX100, that was a super fun, creative camera to shoot with. FF to 2019 and I have the most fun and am at my creative best shooting with the XT-3, on a gimbal or hand held, even though it's an ergonomic kludge, it's small and light enough to just deal with the awful ergonomics. Shooting with a one handed gimbal, to me, it like carrying around a small living room floor lamp with a tiny computer on it, it's pretty bad from a design viewpoint, but it works in spite of it.

Shoulder mount isn't my preferred way of shooting these days, but I still appreciate the pure design genius of those 2/3" B4 broadcast cameras versus the ergonomic disasters we shoot with today.
We shot a thing at the beach last weekend with the BMD UMP G2 with my EF 70-200 2.8 IS II on it and a big V-Mount and that thing was a beast, especially trudging around in the sand with it all day.
I only shoot an occasional EPK thing or BTS thing shoulder mounted these days. But I still hate the clutter of cables, plates, adapters, awkward EVF add-ons that almost all modern cameras
have to have to be functional. Just like Run&Gun says, the design of the Varicam was so good and today I don't think there is much design in the cameras we use, it's just put a sensor in a box and third party a rig
together, with a few exceptions.
 
scorsesefan said:
From what I can see they don't offer a package with the EVF/LCD included like the C200?
Click to expand...

NorBro said:
Included in the box:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1503484-REG/canon_3794c007_eos_c500_ii_4k.html

At least the LCD is, but not sure they would actually try to sell the little EVF separately.
Click to expand...

The EVF is indeed separate:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1503487-REG/canon_3938c001_oled_viewfinder_for_c500.html

___

And anyone with a C500 Mark II is of course going to need one of these:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1503492-REG/canon_4274c002_dp_v3120_31_4k_reference.html

Canon Monitor.jpg
 
TheDingo said:
Apparently it's $16,000 US. I wonder how well it will sell at this price ? ( there are so many lower priced cameras )
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't think you can find a single camera with the same feature set at a lower price.

And to extend that thought: I don't think you can find a similar camera at ANY price... but feel free to give me a few suggestions.
 
AndreeOnline said:
I'm pleasantly surprised...
Click to expand...
I guessed $20,000, which it sort of is with all the options (actually, slightly above with the best EVF) but $16,000 ready to shoot with a 512 GB CFExpress card included is a pretty good deal.

I thought that this could be a jack-of-all-trades and still very good in all of those trades and this appears to be the case.

In many respects, it's a shot against the Reds and Alexa Minis - more features, solid performance, great price.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
If you were a pro athlete like Aaron Rodgers then the weight would not be as much of a burden. More weight equals more inertia which means steadier footage.

I'm curious to see the quality of the C500 Mark II IS. IS can make footage look better or worse depending.
Click to expand...

It apparently uses the same sensor as the C700FF so overall, your overall picture-wise, it should look identical to the C700FF, which I know you dislike.
As far as the IS, I too am curious, going to have to see if we can think of some kind of good A/B test to see it and compare it to non IS. I know it uses a crop factor.
 
AndreeOnline said:
I'm pleasantly surprised.

For this category of camera, it's pretty aggressive.

The C500 mkII actually seems pretty "complete": sensor size, color science/log curves, mount options, codec internal/external, media, power, DPAF, NDs, modularity....

I wouldn't be surprised if this camera fares a bit better than some recent 'high end' Canons. And I'm hoping that this is the first sign that Canon is re-committing to the Cinema EOS System.
Click to expand...

I get the feeling they are, but I wonder if the digital cinema market from an over $10k camera has just moved on?
Personally I would rather rent an Alexa or Amira if I have a decent budget or a higher end thing, or just spend $6 or $7K for a C200.
I think if Canon was offering this admittedly exciting camera that checks a lot of boxes, at $12k, I'd be selling my C200 and buying one.
But at $20k with a mount or two and a back or two, it seems to be in a "no mans land" as far as price.

It's premature to say that this camera won't blow me out of the water once I actually do some shoots with it, cameras are so much more than
the sum of their specs, there is still a feeling you get from actually shooting with it and getting back to the edit and seeing that you captured
magic and that camera enhanced the experience rather than you had to fight with it to get the image. I think Canon did their homework and there
is some cool actual innovation and outside of the box thinking put into this camera and they should be commended for that.

But really, what most of us have to worry about is, would this camera be a smart tool to buy that could elevate our position in the marketplace and will clients want and ask for
the camera and be willing to pay a day rate premium with this camera over a C200/300 MKII/FS7/FS7MKII? Will they accept the images this camera makes
over a lower end RED? Can't really say at this point. I hope they hire a good DP and make some good preview films because the last few, even though they had talented DPs
with Tyler, Russell and Nancy, didn't really do much to sell the cameras.
 
This has been out for a year but, as an example of Raw grades, I am not sure how many have seen it.

The (mostly) uninterrupted C700 FF footage starts about 4 minutes in.

 
NorBro said:
The EVF is indeed separate:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1503487-REG/canon_3938c001_oled_viewfinder_for_c500.html

___

And anyone with a C500 Mark II is of course going to need one of these:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1503492-REG/canon_4274c002_dp_v3120_31_4k_reference.html

View attachment 136774
Click to expand...

Yeah, they covered this monitor on the same meeting as the camera. It's sweet but talk about a small market product. It's for high end post houses and A list video village projects pretty much and that's it. I liked the old Canon 24" monitor that this replaces, they have it in the edit bay at Canon USA in Burbank and it looked great. But how many people are buying $40k reference monitors? At that price, they all are good.
 
Last edited:
DLD said:
I guessed $20,000, which it sort of is with all the options (actually, slightly above with the best EVF) but $16,000 ready to shoot with a 512 GB CFExpress card included is a pretty good deal.

I thought that this could be a jack-of-all-trades and still very good in all of those trades and this appears to be the case.

In many respects, it's a shot against the Reds and Alexa Minis - more features, solid performance, great price.
Click to expand...

The proof will be in the pudding. I'd love to see this shot on real production, not test charts and boring stuff but stuff with a real production team, in blind tests to see if people can even tell the difference beyween this $20k package and the probably much more expensive RED and Arri.
That would simply test performance and image perception. But then you still have market perception and in today's market, no Canon is in the same customer/quality/reputation/perception realm as the REDs or Arris. Perceptions can change and shift, this camera could elevate Canon's image in the market
in a way that the C700/FF couldn't. It remains to be seen. If people think of it as the "modern C300 MKII replacement, $20k is a lot. If people think if it as "that cool new Canon than so and so used to shoot this project or that", it could be a game changer for Canon.
 
This is what Canon should have released in the C300 II- that would have made an impact back then (and they could have!). In 2019 at that price point there's too many other options.

I wasn't a fan of the stock color science on the C300 II: if they improved the color science of the C500 II that would help. Otherwise, doesn't seem like many owner/ops will be upgrading from the C200 and C300 II at $16K. It could find a niche for doc/verite (rental) work where usable AF is absolutely required along with real 4K and 10-bit + XLR (pro) audio (currently nothing on the market has those features in one camera).
 
puredrifting said:
It apparently uses the same sensor as the C700FF so overall, your overall picture-wise, it should look identical to the C700FF, which I know you dislike.
As far as the IS, I too am curious, going to have to see if we can think of some kind of good A/B test to see it and compare it to non IS. I know it uses a crop factor.
Click to expand...
Dislike isn't exactly accurate. I consider the C700 to be a mid-range image at a high end price ($60k+ with Codex), and I dislike that, while the C500 Mark II is a mid-range image at a mid-range price, so it makes a lot more sense to me, with the added benefit of being smaller and lighter so offering something that Arri does not (even an Alexa Mini ends up at twice the weight in most configurations). The size and weight of the C700 with it's mid-range image is why I still woudn't buy it even if it was priced lower than a C500 Mark II, as if I want a camera of that size and weight I'd just use the superior image of my Arri.

If you're shooting 4K Super35 I don't see why IS wouldn't just crop off of the 5.9k sensor such that you'd still be at Super35 with no quality loss.
 
 
Last edited:
Depending on how IS is implemented and the mode you're in (enhanced if that's what it's called, etc.) the crop could be minor and the resulting image - if you're using the FF mode - could actually still be larger than S35.

I haven't read any specifics so I'm not sure how it works, but regular digital IS crops are usually small in cameras (like the EOS R) until you choose the more "advanced" ones.
 
Considering this camera came in at the same price as both of the past two C300s, I really feel they should have called this the C300 Mark II. I get that C500 Mark II make it seem like a higher end camera, but at the end of the day, producers and clients know the C300 name, and if you suggest a camera they aren't familiar with, they sometimes start to balk, even if you try to explain it's better. I suppose it may be more difficult to upcharge if it's just a newer iteration of the C300, but, I certainly charged more for my Mark II than the going rates for Mark Is, so I don't see that as a problem. I've had to explain the C200 to clients before and it's never fun explaining to a client who isn't aware of new camera models that such and such camera can do the same thing as a C300. C300 Mark III and the conversation is as basic as, "It's a C300 and that's what you want, so we're all set."
 
Terry Nixon said:
Here's the pricing for the Canon C500 Mark II and accessories below:

Canon C500 Mark II Body 3794C007 $15,999
Canon LM-V2 LCD Monitor 3941C001 $749
Canon LA-V2 LCD Attachment Unit 3942C001 $249
Canon EVF-V50 Viewfinder 3938C001 $699
Canon Canon EU-V1 Expansion Unit 1 3939C001 $499
Canon EU-V2 Expansion Unit 2 3940C001 $1,599
Canon PM-V1 PL Mount Kit 3936C001 $1,599
Canon CM-V1 EF Cinema Lock Mount Kit 3937C001 $2,199
Click to expand...
Will there be version that starts out as EF lock? $2,199 is a difficult pill to swallow just to get a locking mount.
 
jcs said:
This is what Canon should have released in the C300 II- that would have made an impact back then (and they could have!). In 2019 at that price point there's too many other options.

I wasn't a fan of the stock color science on the C300 II: if they improved the color science of the C500 II that would help. Otherwise, doesn't seem like many owner/ops will be upgrading from the C200 and C300 II at $16K. It could find a niche for doc/verite (rental) work where usable AF is absolutely required along with real 4K and 10-bit + XLR (pro) audio (currently nothing on the market has those features in one camera).
Click to expand...

As the owner/op of a couple of C300 II's, I can say that the C500 II seems like a significant upgrade at a justifiable price. 4k60p, full frame for when requested, internal RAW, the more adaptable form factor, internal stabilization (if isn't useless). If they also manage to increase the DR, handle shadows better, and provide better implementation of NR then I think it is well worth it for commercial work. I also don't quite understand the complaint about stock color science. The C300 II definitely had it's look, but it also had a relatively large number of stock color profiles to choose from. It wasn't like you were stuck choosing s-log 3 and a general white balance like on the Sony cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top