C300: Camera upgrade

S

stupla

Active member
Hi,

I tend to make documentary and corporate films. I'm currently using a Canon C300 (mark 1), a Canon 1DC and Fuji XT3. I like the images that come out them all - even though the Canon's are quite old now.

I'm needing to upgrade my Canon C300. I love the specs of the Canon C300 mark iii but simply can't afford it. I quite tempted by the Canon C70. Seems like almost everything I need in a camera and, with the sensor seemingly the same as the Mark iii, the image looks very similar to it?

I shoot a lot in lowlight so that's important to me and also being a one man band, autofocus would be a huge advantage. I use it a lot of the XT3, as a B cam (and sometime as an A cam on some shoots) and it does make things so much easier.

I do love the look of my XT3 too, and was contemplating going further into Fuji by getting the XT4 (or the new Sony A7S iii for lowlight and autofocus) as it would downscale my camera bag, maybe. I do take some photos too so having that option is quite good.

But a camera that I can just pick up, with ND filters and XLRa (albeit miniXLRs) is appealing for my "run and gun" kind of work.

I wonder if anyone has any experience or thoughts on the Canon C70. I know it's not out yet and I've searched here for opinions about it but couldn't find any. Sorry if I've totally missed along streams and posts about it.

I always find this forum hugely helpful and thanks in advance for any comments/advice.
 
for r&g you would probably want a viewfinder. Have in mind that the C70 doesn't have a viewfinder and only one HDMI port. The C70 can't neither shoot still. Have you considered the R5? Works great handheld run and gun.
 
Like all of Canon's cameras the C70 will be a tremendous seller.

On paper, it looks like a complete system which many have been waiting for 4-5 years, but we'll only find out later what and if any limitations exist.

You seem like an ideal candidate for an upgrade as you can benefit from multiple features including a bump in IQ (mostly DR as the X-T3 produces some really nice high resolution motion pictures).
 
What about a C300 mkII?

Also if you're not wedded to the Canon ecosystem you might wait to see what the Sony FX6 has to offer.

I'm also often working as a solo shooter and XLR inputs + internal NDs are invaluable. I will say that I wasn't crazy about mini-XLR when I (briefly) owned a BMPCC4K. The lack of SDI is also not great.
 
IMO, the C300 Mark II is one of the most mediocre cameras in history for its price.

It has nothing worth paying $7500 for in 2020. But $2K, maybe...if you don't need the best AF or 4K/60p and could use great HD (the 4K has a very low IQ).
 
I agree with the others. Mini XLRs aren't as good as full sized, HDMI isn't as good or useful as SDI. I would consider the C200 for your needs. Some killer deals out there
if you are patient and the XF-AVC is good enough for most corporate work and the RAW looks really, really good for when you need it. New imager in the C70/C300 MKIII is better but exactly how much better? If you don't know how to light or expose correctly, the new sensor is much better but if you do know how to light and expose, the new sensor's look is slightly, not dramatically better.

C70 will be a great, albeit limited for some camera. No SDI is a big one, and no EVF wouldn't work for me at least most shoots. Mini XLRs I've used, they're acceptable to me but I like full sized XLRs better.
 
NorBro said:
IMO, the C300 Mark II is one of the most mediocre cameras in history for its price.

It has nothing worth paying $7500 for in 2020. But $2K, maybe...if you don't need the best AF or 4K/60p and could use great HD (the 4K has a very low IQ).
Click to expand...

Ha! I love that take, and it's the first I've heard it. I've never personally used a C300mII, although I see them requested a fair amount and know they get used on doc/corporate shoots, although not as much as the FS7. Also people tend to fawn over the C300II, so I appreciate the contrarian viewpoint.

I don't want to hijack this thread (too much), but I'd be curious to know why you think it's so mediocre for the price. Also I'd be curious to know what you think is the most *undervalued* camera of recent times, for its price (or "least" mediocre, for its price).
 
First time? You're probably not on forums much (which is a good thing).

IMO, the camera's 4K is very mediocre and its DR is barely 12 stops and it has no 4K/60p.

I've never been one to hold back opinions on cameras and immediately - around 2015-2016 - mentioned it's #1 on my list as far as the biggest rip-offs I've ever seen. And years later I saw threads pop-up about how the camera's 4K isn't super-sampled and soft (a true travesty for the price). [The 2K 444 is awesome.]

Also, DPAF barely worked on Canon's cinema cameras back then (this you have to know as it's very common knowledge).

___

So then what exactly were you paying $16,000 for? And $7500 today? XLR inputs? ND filters? Canon's colors? 10-bit? (I hope not.)

The C200 albeit its infamous lack of 10-bit destroys it in every single other category. (4000 bucks for the B.)

Cameras like the a7SII and RED EPIC (original) are still being requested so it doesn't really mean anything. There are different markets, different minds in charge whom may or may not follow cameras or have certain options they are comfortable with.

___

As far as undervalued...it really depends on the year because my opinion of worth changes based on features and technology. But JVC's LS300 was very undervalued because they took a long time to improve it and no one cared anymore by the time it was really much better a year or two later.

Today, I think a few options from Fuji or Panasonic are undervalued because they don't have good AF...but everything else about them is so good.
 
As a C300 MKII owner, I agree with NorBro on the camera, it's just okay for what it is, but the lack of 4K 60p can be a drag if you care about shooting slow motion (I don't, I am not a slow mo fan, it's been abused into the ground!) I also agree that overall, the C200 is a better camera than the C300 MKII other than the lack of the 10-bit 410 Mbps XF-AVC but honestly, you cannot see the difference between the 160Mbps XF-AVC and the 410 Mbps unless you are shooting gradient things or green screen and your clients won't care. I just switch to RAW when I need to shoot green screen or skies, etc. The C200 RAW, when well lit and exposed with good glass is often compared to the Arris, which are the gold standard as far as image quality. The handling, layout, screen, XLR placement on the C200 are far superior to the C300 MKII.

As far as I am concerned, the Fujifilm X-T3 is massively undervalued, it's such a great looking and capable little mirrorless and I scored two open box new ones on Amazon earlier this year for $890.00 each. Everytime I light something nicely and shoot with the X-T3, I find it hard to believe that it's a sub $1k body, it's amazing for the money although I don't like it as well for an A camera but for a B camera or second angle, it cuts pretty well with the Canons, it doesn't look radically different.

After shooting with the FX9, the FS7 is not a very good looking camera but I cannot deny that clients love it and request it so they can be a great investment. I've shot the EVA 1 and it just left me feeling meh, not terrible, not great, it's ok and a competent tool but so many little things about it are wrong.
 
Last edited:
In terms of the auto focus, there are new external LiDAR based systems that are coming out or have already come out. Off early reviews, they have their limitations but they avail a whole new system - i.e., anything from BMD to EZ Cams to major brands regarding cameras - and any manual lenses ever made.
 
Thanks NorBro and puredrifting. Very interesting to hear these perspectives.

I'm only just now learning that the C300m2 can't do 4k60—which seems insane! Slow-mo is absolutely abused but if you're selling a proper 10bit 4K cinema camera it seems like a huge oversight to not have 60p.

The X-T3 was always an interesting camera that looked amazing on paper and produced beautiful images—BUT the recording limit was the killer for me.

And years ago I remember being very intrigued by the LS300, when I was looking for a decent interchangeable lens camcorder with XLR inputs. I ended up going with the FS5 (which I've been very happy with) but the LS300 probably would have worked out nearly as well.
 
As a run n' gun solo shooter like you the FS7 was the solution for me. Great form factor, built in ND, good DR and relatively cheap media. The EVF/loupe is great for shooting outdoors and not having to rig it on your shoulder is great. Some people don't like the FS7's image but it's fine IMO. No AF but I like to manually pull anyway... FS7s can be had for around $4K now, and yes they're getting a little long in the tooth, but they can still compete with any cinema camera out there today and IMO offer great value...
 
Thanks for these responses - A big help to me.

I was thinking about a second hand C300 mark ii or C200. Given that the autofocus is better on the C200, I reckon that would be a better bet for me. I hear that although 8bit, 4.2.0 the files are really good looking on the C200. I like the idea of shooting RAW but don't think I'd ever get round to using it though maybe if I had the option of it, I would give it a go.

I'm not stuck on Canon though I do have quite a bit of Canon glass. I bought some Fuji lens for my XT3, and really love their small form factor. And yes, the image that comes from the XT3 is quite something for a camera that size and price. I love it. If it had unlimited recording times and an ND filter, I would probably go for another few of them, or an XT4. I was looking at the Sony A7Siii but again without NDs and XLR, it creates another set of things to worry about.

The Canon C70 does seem to have it all for me, in the small form factor, ND filters, auto-focus - I suppose I should try to wait to see if any cripple issues with it on release. And I see that above 25p, it only records in LongGOP - I wonder how that will affect the image?
Also, I wonder if it's overpriced for the specs? But as a one man band, the better the autofocus for me, the easier it could make my job, I reckon so it might be worth it?

Thanks for taking the time to respond folks. Much appreciated.
 
stupla said:
Thanks for these responses - A big help to me.

I was thinking about a second hand C300 mark ii or C200. Given that the autofocus is better on the C200, I reckon that would be a better bet for me. I hear that although 8bit, 4.2.0 the files are really good looking on the C200. I like the idea of shooting RAW but don't think I'd ever get round to using it though maybe if I had the option of it, I would give it a go.

I'm not stuck on Canon though I do have quite a bit of Canon glass. I bought some Fuji lens for my XT3, and really love their small form factor. And yes, the image that comes from the XT3 is quite something for a camera that size and price. I love it. If it had unlimited recording times and an ND filter, I would probably go for another few of them, or an XT4. I was looking at the Sony A7Siii but again without NDs and XLR, it creates another set of things to worry about.

The Canon C70 does seem to have it all for me, in the small form factor, ND filters, auto-focus - I suppose I should try to wait to see if any cripple issues with it on release. And I see that above 25p, it only records in LongGOP - I wonder how that will affect the image?
Also, I wonder if it's overpriced for the specs? But as a one man band, the better the autofocus for me, the easier it could make my job, I reckon so it might be worth it?

Thanks for taking the time to respond folks. Much appreciated.
Click to expand...

Good luck. I think you might be pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to shoot and edit Cinema RAW Light from the C200. Basically, anything where I am not going to be shooting hours and hours of footage that I am
going to be editing, I shoot RAW because it's so nice. For clients, other than a couple who like me to shoot RAW, largely for green screen, I shoot the 8-bit XF AVC and they are generally thrilled with it, it really does look
85% as good as the RAW. I've shot this "subpar" 8-bit 160Mbps for theatrical films, broadcast and tons of high end corporate and it's great. Remember, the last generation of still great cameras like the C300 MKI and the C100
that I shot two feature documentaries with that are on HBO and the film festival circuit, I shot much lower quality 8-bit at 50Mbps on the C300 MKI and 25Mbps on the C100 MKI. It's not that 10-bit isn't better, it is,
but in the real world, lighting, lens choice and composition are so much more important than 8-bit versus 10-bit.

C70, the form factor is a bit weird. Do you ever shoot handheld or shoulder mounted? The C70 wouldn't be very good for either and I will admit, my C200 and 300 MKII are fully rigged out with the Zacuto EVF, baseplate, grip extension,
rods, etc. and even with all of the accessories, neither are a very good shoulder mount camera, whereas the FS7 is better for that out of the box. Only having HDMI out too would be a nightmare for me, SDI is so much better to work with
in a pro setting although if you mainly one man band, maybe that doesn't matter?

Just for kicks, I rigged up one of my X-T3s with all of the Zacuto stuff from the Canons to see IF I could make it work as a small, shoulder mount camera rig. Not even close, it was ridiculous, everything was in the wrong place to shoot
shoulder mounted. I have a cage for one of them with the battery grip, side and top handles, monitor mount for my Shinobi and even with about 6lbs of gak, the X-T3 sucks as a handheld video camera. I use it more on the gimbal and it's
okay there but I don't like gimbals but they can be handy for an occasional shot or sequence.
 
stupla said:
Also, I wonder if it's overpriced for the specs? But as a one man band, the better the autofocus for me, the easier it could make my job, I reckon so it might be worth it?
Click to expand...

The C70 is a little overpriced in 2020. $3999 would have been better but the pesky C200B is still out there.

It's best to wait on the AF if it's important to you...it's supposedly like the C200's (which isn't the best like the R5's or other mirrorless').
 
NorBro said:
The C70 is a little overpriced in 2020.
Click to expand...
Many cameras are overpriced for you in 2020. :P

"C300 Mark II is overpriced." - Paraphrase of NorBro

Meanwhile, Eric prints money with "overpriced" cameras.

A camera (that is aimed at professionals) is only overpriced if someone cannot make a good ROI on it in relation to its price.

I charge $600 for my C300 Mark II, probably rent it about 70 times per year for the past five years I've had it, so that's about $200k of rentals off of a $20k investment. Not overpriced from my point of view. In the world of business, money speaks louder than camera specs (No 4K 60p? Doesn't matter if clients still want the camera).
 
Last edited:
Eric Coughlin said:
Many cameras are overpriced for you in 2020. :P

"C300 Mark II is overpriced." - Paraphrase of NorBro

Meanwhile, Eric prints money with "overpriced" cameras.

A camera (that is aimed at professionals) is only overpriced if someone cannot make a good ROI on it in relation to its price.

I charge $600 for my C300 Mark II, probably rent it about 70 times per year for the past five years I've had it, so that's about $200k of rentals off of a $20k investment. Not overpriced from my point of view. In the world of business, money speaks louder than camera specs (No 4K 60p? Doesn't matter if clients still want the camera).
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't believe you...but if you can make $200K off of rentals as pretty much a nobody (a single entity) then you've already won.

But as far as the overpricing, I think that's definitely one way to look at it. I mean...if you can make a profit with anything then who's to say it's overpriced?

Or who cares, right?

But strictly speaking in terms of technology and its competition, the C70's price is pushing it. And even though it may seem like an opinion (and it is), it's also just as much an observation based on what they sell the C200B and R5 for.

Each year cameras keep decreasing in cost...besides the obvious reason why it's also because they are too expensive.
 
Well, overpriced is a bit of a subjective term. The 4K Phantom Flex is overpriced for me in that I don't have a business model that can support it, but clearly others do. But I'm not sure that I would ever declare that it is overpriced for the market it is aimed at. I guess at the end of the day, speaking more broadly than one's personal situation in regards to a camera, overall sales of a camera are the best indication of how well priced it was. I see the C300 Mark II used a lot, and perhaps the FS7 sold more, but I'm doubtful that the C300 Mark II was a failure from a sales point of view considering how many of them I see in use among my co-workers, clients, while filming large events, on DVXuser, etc. I imagine the C70 will sell well as well. Could Canon have made more of a profit if they priced these cameras lower? That's a matter of opinion and speculation, but clearly Canon didn't think so.


And just to clarify what I meant by "rentals," since I don't do dry hire rentals I meant that as in when I'm DPing, and I'm bringing my kit, and the $600 per job is what I charge for the C300 Mark II portion of my overall rate (so say I'm charging $2500 all-in, and $600 is for the C300 Mark II).
 
Last edited:
The C300 Mark II was the successor to one of the most used cameras on the planet. IMO, any and all of its success was because of the first version.

Plus, you have to keep in mind that it was a different time. Not only were there limited options but people weren't as "camera smart" and savvy as they are today.

As far as business and profits...Canon would have charged $100K for the camera if they could. It's a no-brainer to milk anything for as long as you can.

But the days of cameras being over $10,000 for anything but the 1% are over. (And soon $5,000.)
 
NorBro said:
But the days of cameras being over $10,000 for anything but the 1% are over.
Click to expand...
I'm just not seeing that. Everyone I know are still buying cameras like the C300 Mark III, FX-9, Arri, Red, etc., which are often over $10K. Maybe I live in a different world, but in this world things haven't really changed. The C300 Mark III is $11k on release which is cheaper than the previous two which were $16k on release, so that has gone down in price some. Still over $10k.

And yeah, maybe the world of $10k+ camera owners is the 1% if you include consumers, amateur's, hobbyists, wedding filmmakers, etc., in your stats. But what I'm saying is among those who owned and used $10k+ cameras in the last say 5-10 years, most of them are still using cameras at that price level. I'm not seeing a common stepping down in the purchase price that my co-workers are spending. If anything they often buy more expensive cameras as their career and business grows.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top