C300: Canon C300 and Sony question

S

stupla

Active member
Hi everyone,

Earlier this year I was lucky enough to get a Canon C300. I moved to this from a Sony EX1 and EX3 - which I loved using and loved the images from them. I still use the Sony EX1 on certain events and people still comment on how good the images are from that too.

I found the images from the C300 just incredible though. The camera is a joy to use and I can't fault too much with it. I am in love with the pictures that come from the camera.

I work mainly in documentary and most of my lenses are Canon, so not having to worry about lens adaptors with the C300 is really helpful.

I've been trying to work out whether I should take the jump over to 4K though? Sell the Canon c300 and maybe go for a Sony FS7?

At the moment I don't think I'd use the 4K too much - I don't really need it just now and nobody I work with asks for it, but maybe should try to keep up with technology - for a change? With a potential successor to the Canon C300 coming out this year - should I sell now?

Has anyone moved over to the Sony FS7 from Canon - or any thoughts or advice?

Many thanks.
 
Unless you have time and skill for intensive color grading, you will not get good colour (especially skintone) from Sony cameras. Also FS7 is heavier than C300.
 
marvinhello said:
Unless you have time and skill for intensive color grading, you will not get good colour (especially skintone) from Sony cameras. Also FS7 is heavier than C300.
Click to expand...

If you want the Canon speific skin tones buy a Canon but the FS7 produces a fantastic image and the skintones look just fine and no it doesn't take a master colourist to get a good image. Nothing wrong with the Sony colours just different preferences. Its good I don't only shoot people. Going slog3 & extra post work is the trade off for the 2 extra stops over the C300. Lots of HG options that look pretty good out of the box and still get a good 11-12 stops DR.

This is very much like Android vs Apple. One you get more functions but the trade off is more things to fiddle with and the other is dead simple but restricted in functions. Find what works for your needs and only you know.
 
Why sell it? You love the image and ergonomics, so shoot, make money and hold off new camera nerdness to the time when your clients ASK for something higher or 4K.

I would take a C300 over an FS7 anyday, it's NOT about specs.

Better colour, much more pleasing skin, people look great not sick, it's better for me ergonomics-wise, has no tens of firmware bugs and broken features, and most of all takes Canon lenses without a buggy adapter, and it gets work, more reputable, clients just love it!

There's also many features on the fs7 over the c300, mainly for 4k delivery if your clients want it, and slower slow motion. If you don't NEED these and already own a c300, hold on to it and upgrade in the future when a company makes a much better camera than the c300 in everyway.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
people look great not sick,
Click to expand...

Stop spreading FUD. People don't look sick when shot with an FS7. Such hyperbole. If they do then the operator is doing something wrong. Having used a C300 for the last year and moving to an FS7 I can get images that look every bit the same to my clients and I have access to a ton of features that can help get creative shots I couldn't on the C300.
 
Does it take the same amount of time to get great skin tones on the fs7 as it is on the C300? Since the move how much did your grading time change compared to as it was with the C300?

I am not trying to spread FUD, but from my experience it takes quite a lot more time and experience to get pleasing colour, can it be done? yes, just not as easily at all.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Does it take the same amount of time to get great skin tones on the fs7 as it is on the C300? Since the move how much did your grading time change compared to as it was with the C300?

I am not trying to spread FUD, but from my experience it takes quite a lot more time and experience to get pleasing colour, can it be done? yes, just not as easily at all.
Click to expand...

As I said earlier. I can make fantastic images with the FS7 without breaking sweat. Slog3 requires exactly the same number of steps in post as Clog to deliver a final image, the only difference being the FS7 has way more latitude. The only debate here is whether to hang on and wait for the Canon updates, (which should be great from what I hear) or buy an FS7 now as it is available. Suggesting the C300 is a better camera is plainly wrong. You are writing complete rubbish.
 
I wouldn't say 'significantly more' but Slog3 does take more time as your trying to fit 2 extra stops in there. Using Cine EI and Slog3 combined with the Sony luts I have been very pleased with the image. Lots of other modes that provide the same DR as C300 but don't require deloging and take just a quick grade. Most of the time on the C300 if I was just handing off for little post I wouldn't be shooting Clog either.

I use HG7 or HG8 as Custom doesn't support the Proper SLog3 colour space for the Luts provided by sony and I don't want to waste the time de-loging manually. Getting a good white balance is key. The 5600K pre-set is magenta tinged and I think that is getting people who aren't aware of it. Not a big deal for most users and I prefer to do proper WB anyway.

Sony has a colour pallet there is no doubt & it is a little different than Canon which is why I said earlier that if the Canon Skintone is your holy grail and you would want to grade everything that way (and don't need frame rate options or resolution options) you might as well get a Canon. For me I like having more options and don't always want to go that specific colour pallet. Some prefer Kodak or Fuji or whatever Different strokes for different folks. Saying it makes people look ill is over the top and just plain wrong. If your shooting images where people look sick something is very wrong.
 
If you like the C-series ergos and looks and have the ef glass I would wait until NAB to see what the next C-series brings.

Especially if your clients aren't asking for 4k yet.
 
mcgeedigital said:
If you like the C-series ergos and looks and have the ef glass I would wait until NAB to see what the next C-series brings.

Especially if your clients aren't asking for 4k yet.
Click to expand...

Agreed!
If someone already has a C300 it does make sense to wait a little longer. For me I had no cameras and had been renting so the Fs7 made sense over a used C300 especially as it will have many good working months before anyone could even buy a C300II. If you already own a C300 no need to rush if its making you money. Your in the gravy years unless you just bought it.
 
I was about to say exactly what Matt said above. Wait for NAB unless you have a paying customer who can pay for your move to 4K.
 
Liam Hall said:
You are writing complete rubbish.
Click to expand...

I know that you are very sensitive to this issue as it spreads bad reputation concerning you FS7/Sony cameras' colours compared to Canon, but the Canon cameras produce more pleasing colours than any current sony camera, and gets their easier, by the words of the world's most respected DP's/colourists and most importantly by clients/viewers.

You can make great images with the fs7, but it's not a "better" camera than the C300 in every single way, neither vice versa. There's benefits both ways and each user finds his "better" camera based on what he values most.
 
The point I took most issue was in your original post where you stated that the FS7 produces image where people look 'Sick'. This is an utter lie and the crux of why you are getting the push back. Many like Canons colours better but the FS7 still produces a great image and no one is looking sick if shot correctly as with any camera.

For me its this simple.

I can get an image out of the FS7 that pleases my clients and my own eye. I have been getting pleasing images out of the C300 to my and my clients eye. One might have better skin tone than the other but overall no one has cared and won't if I do my job well. I don't shoot for top ranked DPs or Colourists.

I will never be able to get 4K/UHD 24-60fps, HD 60-180fps, 14 stops DR, 10 bit int codec with the C300. That made my choice and will for many others. Having to use soft 720/60p disappointed myself and my clients a couple of times over the last year. Higher frame rates are a look clients are asking for. Renting an FS7 till the C300II could be in my hands made no sense as I'd be spending closer to the value of the camera over the next 6-8 months.
 
stupla said:
I found the images from the C300 just incredible though. The camera is a joy to use and I can't fault too much with it. I am in love with the pictures that come from the camera.
Click to expand...

So whats the problem? keep it, spend the money on something that is not a camera, or save the money.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
I know that you are very sensitive to this issue as it spreads bad reputation concerning you FS7/Sony cameras' colours compared to Canon, but the Canon cameras produce more pleasing colours than any current sony camera, and gets their easier, by the words of the world's most respected DP's/colourists and most importantly by clients/viewers.

You can make great images with the fs7, but it's not a "better" camera than the C300 in every single way, neither vice versa. There's benefits both ways and each user finds his "better" camera based on what he values most.
Click to expand...

I'm not remotely sensitive. Why would I be? I'm heavily invested in Canon products. I've got two 5D3s, a 7D and a whole bunch of of Canon lenses. Plus, I'm an ex C300 owner and I'll almost certainly buy the C300 Mk2.

You wrote that it takes a lot more "time and experience" to get a pleasing image out of the FS7 and that skin tone looks "sick". Well, I have extensive first hand experience with both cameras. It was two clicks to add a basic look to C-log. It's two clicks to add a basic look to Slog3. The difference is the FS7 is 10 bit, can do 4k and 180fps. None of which can be done on the C300.

You also wrote that the C300 gets you tons of work, so it seems you are the one who is sensitive to this argument since I've never once been hired due to the cameras I own.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Canon cameras produce more pleasing colours than any current sony camera, and gets their easier, by the words of the world's most respected DP's/colourists and most importantly by clients/viewers.
Click to expand...

I missed this bit...

Who are these 'world's best DoPs and colourists'?? I tend to trust my own eyes and opinion, particularly in this internet age where it's often difficult to tell who is giving an independent opinion and who is simply selling snake oil.
 
Liam Hall said:
I missed this bit...

Who are these 'world's best DoPs and colourists'?? I tend to trust my own eyes and opinion, particularly in this internet age where it's often difficult to tell who is giving an independent opinion and who is simply selling snake oil.
Click to expand...

I am curious about this as well. I know enough not to trust everything I read on the internet, but from
what I have seen, there is no Canon monopoly among the 'world's best DoP's and colourists'. Here is
one link I found, which claims to tell the camera that each film was shot with. I don't see any huge
domination by Canon, but rather a good mix of Red, Alexa, Sony, Canon, Panavison, and
others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_shot_on_digital_video_prior_to_2015

If Canon was really the end all be all, I'd think there would be more of a Canon bias?
I dunno, I've shot with a C300, an Epic, a FS700, a F3, and I think they all look good.
I certainly wouldn't complain with the picture any of them gave. Just my opinion.
 
Soon these camera wars will be over. It's been a tumultuous couple of years with so many new releases and rather large improvements from year to year as manufacturers try to leapfrog each other.

I guess the reaction where we focus at lot on tech is only natural. But we are reaching a point now where all of the offerings are at such a high standard that it really isn't the camera at fault. The C100 can be had for what.... $3995? The mkII for a little more than that. If we can't make those work, it's time to hone other skills.

Some users need a specialised feature set like HFR. They will look at cameras that offer that.

The mighty pissing contest is already over—there are happy campers in every camp. Soon the ripples on the ocean of piss will have died down too and we'll all just go about shooting stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top