By that same specious logic you could try to argue that the RAW from the FX9 is superior to the 12-bit log encoded RAW from the Alexa 65 and the Alexa LF but no one would take you seriously.
C500 MKII Leaked on Canon Rumors
- Thread starter Run&Gun
- Start date
By that same specious logic you could try to argue that the RAW from the FX9 is superior to the 12-bit log encoded RAW from the Alexa 65 and the Alexa LF but no one would take you seriously.
Grug
Veteran
We have no way of knowing until they can be tested side-by-side.
Personally I'll take a lightly compressed, internally-recorded raw image, over an uncompressed, externally-recorded one any day - purely on the basis of practicality.
But in terms of raw image quality, we'll have to wait and see. At this present moment, there is literally no physical method with which to record the raw output from the Sony.
I have little doubt that both will (ultimately) yield excellent images. But if the Sony is limited to a 4k signal, that may give the 5.9k from the Canon an edge. Or the 16-bit linear raw from the Sony may give it an edge over the 12-bit logarithmic raw from the Canon. We just don't know at this stage.
As I understand it though, 12-bit logarithmically encoded raw (ala Arriraw) is generally considered equivalent to 16-bit linearly encoded raw.
JPNola
Veteran
Yes. This is my understand as well.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
If someone besides Atomos actually made something that could record 16-bit RAW besides the huge, clunky Neon recorders, maybe. I'm sure someone will come out with something, either Sony, BMD or Atomos but I bet by the time that all happens, you could have been shooting and making money with RAW with the C500 MKII for a year or two?
More bits are obviously better but it irritates me when Sony ships products with just a bunch of vague promises of future FW updates instead of a fully baked camera that you can shoot RAW with today. Canon has done that too with features, but not with adding RAW. I'd buy an FX-9, knowing that someday, maybe, I might be able to actually record
16-bit RAW, but will it cost $3,000.00 to? $7,000.00? Will it add five pounds to my camera? Pass.
If I bought the FX-9 today, I would discount RAW, period, for me and for my needs. It looks like a sweet camera and I am hot to get my hands on the S-Cinetone to see what it does in real life. Sony will sell a boatload of FX-9s, regardless of RAW or not because it's what FS7 and FS7 MKII owners will trade up to and there are a LOT of FS7 owners. It cracked me up, I was on a shoot for a large client yesterday, a live event, all Canon, five cameras, a bunch of C300 MKIs and my C200. The main camera op was shooting one of his C300 MKIs but still had his FS7 there, in the bag. It's like the FS7 even shows up on shoots where it can't shoot! (Clients owns all Canon and only shoots projects on their Canons)
Last edited:
Sorry, I thought you were trolling. Were you trolling?
As others have said we have no idea what the RAW footage from the FX9 will look like or if there will every be a portable recorder that can capture it's signal. Even if a 16-bit recorder is released I have trouble seeing it as a big seller. I switched to a Shogun Inferno from an Odyssey 7Q because I found the data rates for uncompressed 12-bit 4K untenable and the FX9's 16-bit uncompressed RAW data rates would be 1.33 times those of 12-bit RAW. I don't think many FX9 shooters will sign up for that kind of pain.
One potential plus for the FX9 is apparently it's 4K RAW signal is scaled from the 6K sensor. Alistair Chapman talked about in the video below which is queued to portion of the interview where he discusses this. Unfortunately if signal 4K FX9 RAW is uncompressed it will have a higher data rate than the compressed 6K CRL of the C500 MKII.
Of course Sony could fix this buy allowing the FX9 to record to the R7/R5 compressed 16-bit RAW recorders which records lightly compressed RAW footage, but they don't appear to be interested in allowing this. If they did FX9 owners would at least of have the option of renting a recorder when for those rare projects that might require RAW.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
It's simply market segmentation. I shoot a lot of EPK and BTS projects and yes, those clients still prefer (in my case), Prores or XF-AVC and a few prefer the FS7. But I am working on a new reel and in looking back over the past year, what I predicted would happen when I bought the C200 is actually happening. Certain clients are actually requesting RAW now!
I shot two sort of music videos for Sony for release this year, they were scripted and choreographed dance pieces, shot some green screen and shot some long form interviews for a Netflix pilot, ALL client requested RAW. So for me, if I was upgrading, which I don't need to, the FX-9 would be out, I would undoubtedly buy the C500 MKII as internal lightly compressed
RAW is becoming more common in my world and I suspect by next year will become even more popular. You can get 8GB storage drives at Costco for $119.00 on sale. Editing hardware and GPUs are getting better and cheaper. CFast and I am sure CFexpress cards will continue to fall, RAW is coming for common use, I predict in a few more years, a LOT more clients will want and see the benefit of shooting RAW. It makes me happy because I have a few clients who mainly shoot green screen interviews and I would much rather shoot RAW than the hassle of hooking up my Ninja Blade just to shoot 1080 Prores when I could be giving them DCI RAW.
If a person mainly does broadcast/live kind of event shooting, junkets, and high volume shooting, the Sony will dominate. But I am personally trying to move away from day playing as many of those kinds of one day, one and done type shoots are tedious and going for more scripted, conceptual, higher end work where I produce, hire editors, or deliver media to the client
where they want RAW. It's more profitable and day playing at events is getting old. It's not that profitable either unless you are booked 10-15 shooting days per month and I am not.
JPNola
Veteran
Is the bit rate of the raw output of the Fx9's extension unit selectable? That is, can you set the raw output to 12-bit?
Sony literature says "Limited to 10-bit recording during 120fps high frame rate shooting within Super35 image circle." so output bit rates other than 16-bit are possible.
It would be interesting to know how the decision was reached regarding the Fx9's raw. Did Sony make it external only in order to keep the price down and in doing so undercut the C500MkII significantly on price? Was it done to protect the Venice? Was it done to produce sales of the ext unit? Or some reason, maybe a technical reason, having nothing to do with any of the aforementioned?
In a more perfect world the C500mkII would have internal raw as well as electronic ND and dual ISO. Or, conversely, the Fx9 would have internal raw. Neither camera has it all. Each is absent significant features the other possesses. Regardless of which you choose you are sacrificing something.
Sony literature says "Limited to 10-bit recording during 120fps high frame rate shooting within Super35 image circle." so output bit rates other than 16-bit are possible.
It would be interesting to know how the decision was reached regarding the Fx9's raw. Did Sony make it external only in order to keep the price down and in doing so undercut the C500MkII significantly on price? Was it done to protect the Venice? Was it done to produce sales of the ext unit? Or some reason, maybe a technical reason, having nothing to do with any of the aforementioned?
In a more perfect world the C500mkII would have internal raw as well as electronic ND and dual ISO. Or, conversely, the Fx9 would have internal raw. Neither camera has it all. Each is absent significant features the other possesses. Regardless of which you choose you are sacrificing something.
Jaime Valles
Veteran
To me, the electronic ND is neat, but not essential. Regular 2, 4, 6, 8 & 10 stops of built-in ND (like on the C500mkII) are plenty good enough.
Dual ISO is nice in theory, but it still depends on how clean the cameras are. If Shooting C500mkII at ISO 6400 is just as clean as the FX9 at 6400, dual ISO becomes irrelevant. The proof is in the pudding, as they say, and we have to wait to see side-by-side comparisons before we can categorically say one camera is better in low light than the other.
Raw video, on the other hand, is a big deal for many clients. For others, not really. I think that's going to be the big differentiator between people who buy the C500mkII and those who buy the FX9.
JPNola
Veteran
But it's the transitioning that is the big deal. You may have all the stops of ND you want but you cannot switch between them in a manner that is unnoticeable. You also cannot have the ND operate in an automatic mode. That's the thing- it isn't just electronic it can also operate automatically. I'm not saying this means it still is not for you personally. Just pointing out that it does much more than how you characterized. It makes possible shots that are not possible without it. If so desired, it can free the operator from having to touch the iris or engage any ND.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
That is a pretty cool, real world thing to have for certain projects, especially for live shoots or projects where you are running after talent in and out of buildings.
JPNola
Veteran
Also for an interview using natural light. You can adjust the exposure according to the light shifts and always be at the same stop. No change in depth of field behind subject.
Jim Martin
DVXuser Sponsor
When we had C500 MK II here last week (2 of them), I was able to take the ISO to 12,800 and, in Clog 3, it was clean....shockingly....Canon C series have always been the kings of high ISOs....the original C300 was clean at 3200 with their noise just barely showing at 6400, on C300 MK II, 6400 was the new 3200. On the C700, they were up to 8000 on that opening shot in the demo film Canon did. In a way, this Canon is really a 5 ISO (vs dual)...800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12,800. Also, was able to see how well the 5 axis chip stabilizer worked...very well!
I do look forward to seeing more tests when production line prototypes start getting out there...from Canon Burbank personnel and independent shooters here in town.
Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I agree with Jim that Canon's way of achieving high ISO capabilities and their high ISO results are better than any (stupid) dual ISO camera out there. Arri may have the cleanest blacks at 1600 ISO and below, but things get noisy after 1600 when you're dealing with very low light and need higher ISO.
Of note, I always found on the C-series that 12,800 ISO in C-log was about the same exposure as 6,400 ISO in a rec 709 style profile (such as Wide DR), so something to keep in mind when quoting a camera's ISO capabilities. 12,800 ISO on one camera may not be the same exposure level as on another camera.
Will there be an LPL mount for the C500 Mark II?
Last edited:
indiawilds
Veteran
Jim,
Good to hear that ISO 12800 is clean. Is it clean in raw as well?
For me the low light performance of C500 II is very attractive. One can use its low light abilities in many highly creative ways. It is a big benefit.
As far as the 5 step stabilisation is concerned it doesn't work in raw mode. So while shooting from a boat or unstable platforms, won't be able to shoot in raw. That adjustment in shooting needs to be kept in mind. Nevertheless, it would be very helpful.
Canon C500 Mark II Jaguar Commercial
Canon C500 Mark II Jaguar Commercial
Canon Europe Article:
Quest for perfection: filming a car commercial with the Canon EOS C500 Mark II
CANON EOS C500 MARK II 5.9K FULL FRAME CAMERA 3794C007 $15,999
CANON EOS C500 MARK II 5.9K FULL FRAME CAMERA 3794C007 + EXPANSION UNIT 2 $17,598
CANON EOS C500 MARK II RENTAL KIT BUNDLE: EXPANSION UNIT 1 + EXPANSION UNIT 2 + OLED VIEWFINDER + EF CINEMA MOUNT + PL MOUNT KIT $22,594
Canon C500 Mark II Jaguar Commercial
Canon Europe Article:
Quest for perfection: filming a car commercial with the Canon EOS C500 Mark II
CANON EOS C500 MARK II 5.9K FULL FRAME CAMERA 3794C007 $15,999
CANON EOS C500 MARK II 5.9K FULL FRAME CAMERA 3794C007 + EXPANSION UNIT 2 $17,598
CANON EOS C500 MARK II RENTAL KIT BUNDLE: EXPANSION UNIT 1 + EXPANSION UNIT 2 + OLED VIEWFINDER + EF CINEMA MOUNT + PL MOUNT KIT $22,594
Last edited:
Run&Gun
Veteran
I saw the commercial and BTS posted a while ago on NewsShooter and I saw some, what I would deem, unstable shots for a commercial.