C300: Canon C300 Mark II Announced & Pre-Order List at Texas Media Systems

The autofocus is ridiculously good on the 7DMarkII...I can only imagine how good it is on this camera.

If it had HFRs in 4K, I would definitely ponder it every single day, but it's just not happening. Need HFRs.
 
So it looks like the autofocus can do touch screen tracking of any object, not just faces (with the WiFi+App)?
Seems like an awesome feature, even if it might not get used often.

BTW I think this is an awesome well featured camera, the one thing lacking for me is 4K HFR.
But ~AUD$23,000 ?? aaargh. Looks like I'll be stuck with a C100MKIII or C200 (please!)
 
hojomo said:
+1
Click to expand...

Thank goodness he didn't grade it like an Alexa or everyone would have fallen in love with it. Personally, I don't base my decision to buy or not to buy off of a grade that Mr. Bloom decides to do in a test video.

Seems like a pretty solid camera. HFR is not great...but then again I think its grossly overused these days anyway. If I need HFR I'll just use a Dragon or Phantom. For an everyday cam...it does check a lot of boxes and has a nice feature set.

I'm sure I'll get heat for this....but these days, when I see music videos...or anything else, and they shoot the video 90% slow motion...I think its a creative short coming. Its a tool that I think many use as a crutch. For me, its a flavor to be used tactfully.

Kinda like a guitar player thats great at tapping. Its a cool skill, but if I have to listen to more than 30 seconds of it, I get a little sick and realize that they don't have a ton to actually say.

There are exceptions...but in general, the over use of slow motion as a video trend feels like "auto-tune" in modern pop songs. Seems like these days you can't hear a dance tune with out it. Its like looking back at your high school clothes and wondering what the heck you were thinking.

Its a spice in the meal...not the full entree. As for storytelling, I think the C300II gives you "just enough" HFR options to make useable. The other features definitely help offset any shortcomings on that front.
 
Last edited:
It's absolutely necessary for sports...it's almost more of a requirement for your camera than regular motion, ha.

I just think it's frustrating the price of this camera can't even get you 4K/60. I think many people would really enjoy this very small addition.
 
NorBro said:
It's absolutely necessary for sports...it's almost more of a requirement for your camera than regular motion, ha.

I just think it's frustrating the price of this camera can't even get you 4K/60. I think many people would really enjoy this very small addition.
Click to expand...

I can definitely see the benefits of that is sports events. Thats definitely more of a functionary need than a creative need. I would definitely welcome it...yet am also aware that Canon is just plain silly with the HFR restrictions. That said, for me and the work I do, which is not sports, this camera is definitely in my strike zone...even much more so that RED.
 
Can anyone explain how to get Bloom's footage to work in FCPX please? I've installed Apples Pro Video thingy and Canon's MXF plugin for FCPX, but I'm still just getting nonsense in the import window... :(
 
Terry Nixon said:
here's a new Canon C300 Mark II video from Brett Danton for Canon Australia.

Brett says

"Only available light was used and the autofocus face detection in conjunction with EF lenses for a majority of shots."

Click to expand...

It's perfectly evident from this early footage that the C300 Mk II is a digital cinema camera entirely fit for the purpose of filming a woman's legs. There are cheaper cameras out there capable of including a woman's legs in the frame, but I think a lot of filmmakers will be prepared to pay a premium for "Canon legs".
 
Looks really lovely. Just like a C300... but with 4K! :-) And the dual pixel AF tools (including the infront / behind depth indicators) really look like they're going to be an incredible asset to documentary and news shooters.

HOWEVER, I just can't get past the price... Most manufacturers 4K camera "upgrades" are coming down in price. The C300 mark 2 is twice what I managed to sell my C300 for. That's a sizeable chunk of profits in a year for a one-man shooter to pay for. I guess price-wise this is really aimed at the rental houses.
 
AlexLeith said:
HOWEVER, I just can't get past the price... Most manufacturers 4K camera "upgrades" are coming down in price.
Click to expand...

Canon don't need to sell TV's.

For Sony (& Panasonic & Samsung) it's in their interest to have 4K adopted on a large scale by filmmakers. No doubt that was the major reasoning behind the low price of the FS7. Blackmagic's M.O. is amazing spec at low cost. Canon clearly have Hollywood and Academy glory firmly in their sights, so pricing the C300 MkII any cheaper would have (unfortunately) diluted their brand. Next to RED and Arri it's is cheap anyway.

And besides it's Canon. They always charge too much.
 
There's very little competition in this sector (and it was worse during the Panavision days). The volumes are small, the R&D costs are high and thus prices have to cover the R&D. The positive side here is that, once out of the analog world, the speed of the technological advancement makes the price-to-performance ratio rise faster and faster. Theoretically speaking, a $3,200 A7RII has a superior performance - under certain conditions - than an $80,000 ARRI Alexa. (I discount the A7RII overheating issues, which may or may not be teething problems) Within a year or two, the situation with the high end/pro cameras will be similar to what took place in the music industry some 60 years ago, when a Strat and a 20-50 watt Fender amp became affordable to pretty everybody and were used by everybody from a garage band to a top group of the day on the American Bandstand. And then the conversation turned to tweaking the equipment because that was the only way to stand out of the crowd, which is how it has been ever since.
 
DLD said:
There's very little competition in this sector (and it was worse during the Panavision days). The volumes are small, the R&D costs are high and thus prices have to cover the R&D. The positive side here is that, once out of the analog world, the speed of the technological advancement makes the price-to-performance ratio rise faster and faster. Theoretically speaking, a $3,200 A7RII has a superior performance - under certain conditions - than an $80,000 ARRI Alexa. (I discount the A7RII overheating issues, which may or may not be teething problems) Within a year or two, the situation with the high end/pro cameras will be similar to what took place in the music industry some 60 years ago, when a Strat and a 20-50 watt Fender amp became affordable to pretty everybody and were used by everybody from a garage band to a top group of the day on the American Bandstand. And then the conversation turned to tweaking the equipment because that was the only way to stand out of the crowd, which is how it has been ever since.
Click to expand...

The Sony might have better "performance," but it has a dramatically worse looking image.

That said, since the GH4/C100/5D Mark III raw and even sort of the A7S... we've been at "good enough" for a long time.
 
DLD said:
There's very little competition in this sector (and it was worse during the Panavision days). The volumes are small, the R&D costs are high and thus prices have to cover the R&D. The positive side here is that, once out of the analog world, the speed of the technological advancement makes the price-to-performance ratio rise faster and faster. Theoretically speaking, a $3,200 A7RII has a superior performance - under certain conditions - than an $80,000 ARRI Alexa. (I discount the A7RII overheating issues, which may or may not be teething problems) Within a year or two, the situation with the high end/pro cameras will be similar to what took place in the music industry some 60 years ago, when a Strat and a 20-50 watt Fender amp became affordable to pretty everybody and were used by everybody from a garage band to a top group of the day on the American Bandstand. And then the conversation turned to tweaking the equipment because that was the only way to stand out of the crowd, which is how it has been ever since.
Click to expand...

I think this is the crux of the issue. The C300II is potentially a genuine threat to the whole Arri line and dominance. Certainly it'll be interesting to see where the Alexa Mini gets chosen over the Canon. It really depends on how the image is received I guess. I like Canons 'look' a lot but sometimes find it can be a bit slick and commercial. Great for some TV and adverts but for some narrative possibly a bit 'glossy.' I don't know. The C300II appears to have a very flexible image and some great stuff has been shot on the original C300.

My point was to agree that at some point in the near future the price gap between the Arri's, Canons, Blackmagics and A7/GH's will have to narrow dramatically. How Canon's stills line will fit into this will be interesting to see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top