C300: Canon C300 and Sony question

AndreeOnline said:
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.
Click to expand...

No kidding I forgot about the C100. One of my friends just bought one and it
is pretty nice as well. There is even the GH4 at a cheaper price point if you don't mind
giving up built in ND and using a smaller chip. Tons of great options out there.
 
AndreeOnline said:
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.
Click to expand...

Naaaah!

If the pissing contest gets over, how will we survive! We have become addicted to discussing in minute details the camera techs, to the point of forgetting to shoot with the cameras....Our reason for existence will be over if these pissing contests are over. :)

Though we all want to use cutting edge technology, there is always a cost element to it. At the end of the day this is also a business and livelihood for us. So we have to decide when there is a definite need to upgrade. Personally, I will be shooting with the C300 till clients are happy. When there is demand for 4K, I will buy the next 4K camera and the C300 will then be used as B camera.

I would rather spend money on buying lenses which will depreciate less, than in buying cameras.
 
Miklos Nemeth said:
Hmm, how can you use a non-4K B camera in a 4K project? Do you mix in HD footage into 4K contents?
Click to expand...

I should have elaborated. I am not talking about mixing HD footage if it is 4K delivery. I primarily plan to use C300 for BTS when the main project delivery is in 4K, assuming that BTS won't be 4K.

At least for the next 2-3 years, there will be projects finished in HD even if demand starts for 4K delivery. Apart from broadcast clients I do corporates and the odd feature films. I just refused a lower budget feature film but interesting story and cast, because it was clashing with my other commitments. In my market I don't see 4K finish for the low budget stuff in the near future. So C300 will continue to get lot of work for the next couple of years. If client doesn't have budget for a higher end camera, then no point in thrusting such a camera and lowering the rate. I see lot of people doing that.

If the client demands and pays adequately, I am ready to use whatever camera is demanded.
 
4K might be coming quicker around here than I had expected.
First gig this year is shot, edited and delivered in 4K. Didn't have 1 of those last year, and I've already provided 3 quotes with 4K acquisition being specific requirement from the client (not sure if those are to be delivered in 4K though)
 
chappelldigital said:
4K might be coming quicker around here than I had expected.
First gig this year is shot, edited and delivered in 4K. Didn't have 1 of those last year, and I've already provided 3 quotes with 4K acquisition being specific requirement from the client (not sure if those are to be delivered in 4K though)
Click to expand...

Its become a household term that a lot of clients use...many don't even know what it means yet. I remember when HD first came out. For years I hear that phrase...this is great! Its HD. When asked....do you know what exactly HD is..I often heard...no...but it looks great. I think a lot of clients are in the same boat again. They have heard the phrase and think...yea...I want 4K...because 4K is great!

Just a funny observation. I've been shooting in 4K for years...its funny now how its being requested more...though I have not changed much in my workflow...and its more desirable throughout the client base.

4K is becoming the catch phrase for "I want my project to be really good" to some clients.
 
ReelWorksMedia said:
Its become a household term that a lot of clients use...many don't even know what it means yet. I remember when HD first came out. For years I hear that phrase...this is great! Its HD. When asked....do you know what exactly HD is..I often heard...no...but it looks great. I think a lot of clients are in the same boat again. They have heard the phrase and think...yea...I want 4K...because 4K is great!

Just a funny observation. I've been shooting in 4K for years...its funny now how its being requested more...though I have not changed much in my workflow...and its more desirable throughout the client base.

4K is becoming the catch phrase for "I want my project to be really good" to some clients.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. Heck, many have bought HD tv's thinking that everything going through it would become HD. Many don't realize that every link in the chain has to be HD. Not to mention that many sale person don't know what they are selling.
 
Liam Hall said:
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.
Click to expand...

There are different brushes to work with. Can we see some of your extensive work on the FS7. All you do is argue, let's see some new footage you shot.
 
samtheman said:
There are different brushes to work with. Can we see some of your extensive work on the FS7. All you do is argue, let's see some new footage you shot.
Click to expand...

I think your comment here is out of order. Clearly motivated by a comment I made in your thread a few weeks ago.

But hey, I don't care, so here are some frame grabs I posted a while ago from a job that will be finished later this year:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...ge-etc&p=1986504414&viewfull=1#post1986504414
 
In defense of Ebrahim, I too find the colors of Sony products less than desirable compared to Canon. I don't think this is something that has never been said before. I don't know how much screwing around in post can fix it, because I've never owned a Sony product before. I just wanted to throw this out there so those of us who think this way aren't as crazy as we think.
 
Michael Thames said:
In defense of Ebrahim, I too find the colors of Sony products less than desirable compared to Canon. I don't think this is something that has never been said before. I don't know how much screwing around in post can fix it, because I've never owned a Sony product before. I just wanted to throw this out there so those of us who think this way aren't as crazy as we think.
Click to expand...

I've owned a pile of sony product and shot on C100/300

I would say that Sony baked looks are total t_urd but 10bitSlog is really 'psuedo raw' so the look is purely down to the competence of the op/post journey - IMO the FS7 is a 'game changer' at the pricepoint.

S
 
morgan_moore said:
I've owned a pile of sony product and shot on C100/300

I would say that Sony baked looks are total t_urd but 10bitSlog is really 'psuedo raw' so the look is purely down to the competence of the op/post journey - IMO the FS7 is a 'game changer' at the pricepoint.

S
Click to expand...

The last 3 cameras i had were Sony's, i also have ordered a PXW-X200 for some doc work. There is no denying that the "sony look" is prevalent in all the lineup of cameras and that includes the F55. Even though i have owned several Sony brands, I do not defend them by any means.

Remember the DVX100, the HVX200, they had a cinematic mojo to them without the need for raw, we're talking about the out of the box look. The first major super 35 DSLR was the 5D, it had and still does have its own mojo.

To each his own, but talking about the FS7 as if it is the only game in town does not help anyone.
 
Liam Hall said:
I think your comment here is out of order. Clearly motivated by a comment I made in your thread a few weeks ago.

But hey, I don't care, so here are some frame grabs I posted a while ago from a job that will be finished later this year:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...ge-etc&p=1986504414&viewfull=1#post1986504414
Click to expand...

Great still frames, how about some low light looks in SLOG3 without noise or post processing. How about them Red's and Magenta's. Some actual footage. You're defending the FS7 across every thread, so I'm simply suggesting for you to post footage to back it up. Talk is cheap like they say.
 
samtheman said:
To each his own, but talking about the FS7 as if it is the only game in town does not help anyone.
Click to expand...

Well that depends which town you are in.

The Sub $10k, XLR ND S35 no external recorder town?

The FS7 is the only one to offer 4k and 10bit - so sorry it is the only game in that town.

Im sure canon will bite back in 3 months but IMO today the FS7 is king of the hill.

Not fanboy just simple maths; 1000+ colour levels vs 250 colour levels is no competition.

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Well that depends which town you are in.

The Sub $10k, XLR ND S35 town no external recorder town?

The FS7 is the only one to offer 4k and 10bit - so sorry it is the only game in that town.

Im sure canon will bite back in 3 months but IMO today it is king of the hill.

S
Click to expand...

Marketing hype. Take this scenario:
We do not want to shoot internal XAVC in order to maximize quality and rid off the "sony look", magenta tones and harsh reds under certain settings.

Now let's assume we will be shooting RAW in 12bit of course since the F5/F55 can only do 14bit. We attach the FS7's accessories and an odyssey 7Q with its own required accessories and cards, some v-mounts, a speed booster and some good glass of course. This becomes about a $15,000 -$17,000 package. This puts the FS7 in the C500/Scarlet category.

We are all aware how the C500 smokes it in low light. And well, the Scarlet records RAW internally on cards without the R5 mounted on the back of the FS7 (if it even mounts)

So if we're talking internally compressed 4k/10bit, the FS7 does have an advantage (for now). The questions is, if you do not need 4k yet for your unique market that you're shooting for, who's to say that you absolutely have to shoot in 4k.

I was thinking of using the FS7 for an upcoming doc with its new power zoom lens, what killed it was the crop factor thus i decided to shoot it with the X200, because that's my target.

People use what they want for what they need. Period.
 
None of the set ups you mention are onboard, sub$10k which is what 'town' the FS7 and c300 are (the thread is about the C300!)

Completely correct - Scarley/Epic, 700/7q - C500 all great image makers.. probably better than the FS7 in pure IQ

S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top