Graham King
Well-known member
Tomorrow is C300 Mark II day!! I am ready!!
C300: Canon C300 Mark II Announced & Pre-Order List at Texas Media Systems
- Thread starter delete
- Start date
AGREED! Also, as I predicted in my original post:
Not even close to 120 proper 2K resolution frames
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Yes! If you are looking for 4K, low light, great color science, really nice DR and up to 120P in 4K...sub $10K....the C500 is looking like the best bang for the buck.
I'm sure the RED Raven will be amazing...but if you need S35 "and" low light capability...I think the C500 is a camera that is not looked at enough.
Been pondering picking one up now that the prices are manageable.
Graham King
Well-known member
The wedding I'm shooting the day after tomorrow just paid for the 4K upgrade! Wow very first project with C300II is going to be 4K. And I just ordered $2000 more memory cards with overnight shipping.
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Would love to see some footage when you can. Really interested to hear about some real world experience.
cobz01
Active member
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
That was the slowest Lotus I have ever seen.
AndreeOnline
Veteran
You old mind reader, you! =)
Where is the C500 is sub $10k?
remsyatassi
Well-known member
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
All over ebay.
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
Yep...literally. You can pretty much get a C500 and and Odyssey 7Q for about $10K.
Its really an underestimated rig right now. Not sure why more people are not jumping on it.
Canon C300 Mark II Auto Focus Face Detection Test Music Video
Canon C300 Mark II Auto Focus Face Detection Test Music Video
Found a new C300 Mark II video below on the Newshooter Youtube feed:
Rough edit of Level42's Mike Lindup singing his new song 'On the One'. Shot in a few hours on an overcast London day the footage was shot to test the face detect autofocus of the Canon C300mkII (pre-production model). Every shot in the video was done using the face detect autofocus system and Steadicam Pilot. The Steadicam operator was Ilana Garrard.
The camera was recording 4K XF-AVC internally and the colour profile was set to Production (ARRI Alexa match) and C-Log 2 gamma.
The footage should not be evaluated for image quality as it has not been properly graded. All that has been applied is a ARRI Alexa Log-C LUT from Premiere. This is designed for ARRI Log-C and not C-Log 2.
All that is being tested here is autofocus.
Canon C300 Mark II Auto Focus Face Detection Test Music Video
Found a new C300 Mark II video below on the Newshooter Youtube feed:
Rough edit of Level42's Mike Lindup singing his new song 'On the One'. Shot in a few hours on an overcast London day the footage was shot to test the face detect autofocus of the Canon C300mkII (pre-production model). Every shot in the video was done using the face detect autofocus system and Steadicam Pilot. The Steadicam operator was Ilana Garrard.
The camera was recording 4K XF-AVC internally and the colour profile was set to Production (ARRI Alexa match) and C-Log 2 gamma.
The footage should not be evaluated for image quality as it has not been properly graded. All that has been applied is a ARRI Alexa Log-C LUT from Premiere. This is designed for ARRI Log-C and not C-Log 2.
All that is being tested here is autofocus.
Hate to say this, but much of the footage so far from the C300 II just look Meh...... Images just feel kind of thin, almost like everything is slightly over-exposed or something. Maybe people haven't figured out the new C-Log yet, which is a true log from what I understand.
I definitely feel like I'm getting a more cinematic look from the FS7.
Also, put my deposit on the Red Raven for the higher end work and keep my FS7 for lower end, bill paying jobs. For a few thousand more dollars than the C300 II, I will have two really good cameras that fit different niches. The price of the C300 II makes no sense to me, especially since the C300 lives in the lower end, bill paying spectrum of work (same with the FS7) - reality, docs, events, etc...
I do like the autofocus, but the ergonomics and the videos so far are a bit underwhelming for $16K. And no 4K 60fps? That's just cheap. A huge majority of majority of my clients want 4K as much as possible in any frame rate. They might finish in HD, but the re-framing of 4K is so useful.
I definitely feel like I'm getting a more cinematic look from the FS7.
Also, put my deposit on the Red Raven for the higher end work and keep my FS7 for lower end, bill paying jobs. For a few thousand more dollars than the C300 II, I will have two really good cameras that fit different niches. The price of the C300 II makes no sense to me, especially since the C300 lives in the lower end, bill paying spectrum of work (same with the FS7) - reality, docs, events, etc...
I do like the autofocus, but the ergonomics and the videos so far are a bit underwhelming for $16K. And no 4K 60fps? That's just cheap. A huge majority of majority of my clients want 4K as much as possible in any frame rate. They might finish in HD, but the re-framing of 4K is so useful.
Last edited:
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
Ironic that you say the low end (cheaper work) pays the bills while implying the high end (more expensive) work doesn't, or at least doesn't as well.
I find with most new cameras the first footage tends to not look good as videos slowly creep onto the Internet. FS7's original footage didn't look that great. A lot of the C100 demo video looked like it could have been shot on a GoPro. Lots of great looking original C300 footage out there now. C300 Mark II is surely an improvement over the original C300, so it's just a matter of learning how to properly use it and getting it in the hands of talented people, as talented people who know a camera well can make smart phone cameras look good (while putting up with a bunch of limitations that make them more often use professional cameras). As such, I tend to heavily (though not entirely) disregard the quality of footage in early videos, assume the image quality will be good based on the specs and sensor, and then look toward feature set and ergonomics as the deciding factor on purchases.
I find with most new cameras the first footage tends to not look good as videos slowly creep onto the Internet. FS7's original footage didn't look that great. A lot of the C100 demo video looked like it could have been shot on a GoPro. Lots of great looking original C300 footage out there now. C300 Mark II is surely an improvement over the original C300, so it's just a matter of learning how to properly use it and getting it in the hands of talented people, as talented people who know a camera well can make smart phone cameras look good (while putting up with a bunch of limitations that make them more often use professional cameras). As such, I tend to heavily (though not entirely) disregard the quality of footage in early videos, assume the image quality will be good based on the specs and sensor, and then look toward feature set and ergonomics as the deciding factor on purchases.
AndreeOnline
Veteran
I think the C300 mkII wants to hit $12k as fast as possible. That's were the original C300 landed, right?
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
Generally the more expensive the camera the more you can charge for it as a rental, and if you're renting it out (either to other people or as part of your day rate on your own shoots) often enough, then you're essentially making more money since the camera rents for more.
I'd figure the day rates of original C300 operators has gone down in general since the camera now costs just $7000 instead of $16,000, and if you're doing 100-200 shoots a year and can charge an extra say $200-$300 per day for the $16k camera, then you're making an extra $15,000-$40,000 per year, which quickly offsets that $9,000 price difference. For that reason I kind of like that the C300 Mark II costs more money.
And if you're not doing enough shoots to off-set the price difference, then you probably shouldn't be buying a $16k camera in the first place.
It's also much more impressive to tell clients who know nothing about cameras that your camera costs $20k (after batteries and media) than say, $5k or so. If you tell them your HMI light costs $6k, they probably won't be as impressed because lights aren't as cool from a marketing perspective for cameramen as cameras are.
I'd figure the day rates of original C300 operators has gone down in general since the camera now costs just $7000 instead of $16,000, and if you're doing 100-200 shoots a year and can charge an extra say $200-$300 per day for the $16k camera, then you're making an extra $15,000-$40,000 per year, which quickly offsets that $9,000 price difference. For that reason I kind of like that the C300 Mark II costs more money.
And if you're not doing enough shoots to off-set the price difference, then you probably shouldn't be buying a $16k camera in the first place.
It's also much more impressive to tell clients who know nothing about cameras that your camera costs $20k (after batteries and media) than say, $5k or so. If you tell them your HMI light costs $6k, they probably won't be as impressed because lights aren't as cool from a marketing perspective for cameramen as cameras are.