Canon c50 announcement Sept 9

They do have a look though, you just don't like it, lol.

Sometimes that's a little nostalgia talking, too...
 
scorsesefan said:
I get that manufacturers generally consider sensors data gathering devices, but I still believe that sensors should have a look or feel to them when coupled with a certain company’s processing aesthetic. I feel like subjectively Red, Blackmagic and Arri in particular have embraced this. Of course this is extremely subjective as many would argue for the Sony, Nikon or LUMIX look.
Click to expand...
I think this really depends on how you're working with your footage, and in what capacity?

If you're an owner/op who needs to turn footage quickly then it probably helps to have multiple cameras in the same brand/family that already have a "look", so you can easily match for multi-cam interviews, b-roll, etc.

If you're a pro colorist or someone who needs to work with many different camera brands then it probably doesn't matter quite as much if they have a certain feel/look. Your goal is to normalize the look across ALL brands so you can put together a cohesive looking edit for perhaps a feature film, TV show or long-form documentary. In that case they function more as light/data gathering devices.
 
It's fine, like so much of everything else, but it's getting away from 'Canon color' (whether through grading and/or camera settings).

All those yesteryear cameras had unique colors, like the beautifully subtle pastel palette from the C300 Mark II or the punchy saturation from the C300 and C500, or 5D Mark II with its famous greens and reds.

The video I posted on the last page shows some of that saturated potential (biased for that though).
 
NorBro said:
It's fine, like so much of everything else, but it's getting away from 'Canon color' (whether through grading and/or camera settings).

All those yesteryear cameras had unique colors, like the beautifully subtle pastel palette from the C300 Mark II or the punchy saturation from the C300 and C500, or 5D Mark II with its famous greens and reds.

The video I posted on the last page shows some of that saturated potential (biased for that though).
Click to expand...
I’m a curmudgeon, Norbro. I’m holding onto the Canon’s old color science even though half of the industry is going in the Canon/Sony “immediate “ look direction over the film-like aesthetic.
 
@NorBro, this is a longer post, I doubt you'll read the whole thing. I've been getting back into reading books lately and trust me, we can wind back the clock of our brains damaged by doom scrolling!

NorBro said:
It's fine, like so much of everything else, but it's getting away from 'Canon color' (whether through grading and/or camera settings).

All those yesteryear cameras had unique colors, like the beautifully subtle pastel palette from the C300 Mark II or the punchy saturation from the C300 and C500, or 5D Mark II with its famous greens and reds.

The video I posted on the last page shows some of that saturated potential (biased for that though).
Click to expand...

Should we download files and see how far we can step towards cinematic magic? I'll reach out to a friend (pro colorist) and see if they'll have a go too.

I feel like BM (12k LF) gives you a starting point that has vast potential, where as people historically have said Arri looks excellent quite easily, and I guess that's the huge deal to a lot of people.

Do you think the c50 is in in a similar category where the files have potential, but possibly more work is involved than c70 for example, or do you think the c50 isn't capable of a compelling grade despite talented people working on the clips?

scorsesefan said:
It’s some of the better shot footage I’ve seen out of this camera, but there’s something about it that I don’t like and can’t put my finger on exactly. What do you think of this footage in comparison?
Click to expand...
If someone did the same shoot with a BM camera, this looks like a prosumer version of the BM shoot. Better than c50? I'm not so sure. I think a lot of the c70 hill dying comes from the fact that a lot of YTers don't have real jobs and can't afford the next upgrade, so they're clutching at straws pretending like the c70 is a magical hard line in the sand and worth holding onto (not directed at you). I think it's a real shame electronics are part of this extremely short life cycle and while there's nothing wrong with holding onto tools you're happy with, I think a lot of people online act like they have a choice but don't (can't afford it). The whole 'this is why I switched' category sucks IMO. Originally people made YT videos for the audience, and now it's like all of these sideways topics that nobody asked about. Of course there's huge merit found within a small handful of YT videos but it's mentally exhausting ignoring all of the crap - signal to noise ratio!

At the surface re c50 IQ, you could respond with, who cares!? But that's a cop out. What used to be cost-prohibitive - Arri and Red cameras, that could make anything look quite good quite easily, BM with the Pyxis line and I assume moving forward, is providing its own type of gorgeous looks (with far fewer workarounds of previous gen cameras (reliability, rigging, brand recognition)). Ideally, we'd all have access to all of the tools, but in reality we're choosing. For me and corporate work, I'm wrestling with whether the c50 providing a larger range of camera moves (by being smaller) is worth it over a less dynamic, but more magical image the BM provides. These days in the high end corporate world, it's pretty much a scaled down but similar format to commercials. This is why I want to be able to put a gimbal on speed rail and move through people/spaces, the same way a big budget TVC would move through people on a crowded subway train to get to its hero character giving a look. Or putting a wireless mic on someone and doing a fairly decent walk and talk, all out of a backpack. But if it's all handheld, BM pyxis with focus pro and some cheap cine lenses is currently the best value proposition at the moment. I'm only mentioning these two brands because that's what I'm thinking about personally. Everyone knows in the broadcast world, SONY is the only choice. Owning a SONY camera gets you hired, but there's no point pretending it gets you Arri/RED/BM images.

If you get to choose your own tools, Canon was known for at least providing a pleasing image, even if it didn't have the full mojo. And this is why the c50 might feel like a curve ball. "If the c50 has deviated to a more neutral look, why buy one?" Early days of the Alexa 35, I remember a lot of people were saying it was quite sterile and uninteresting, but now we don't hear too many complaints. I think there was an element of Mini LF owners vehemently defending their purchase (a rich person's c70 equivalent?). I'm not saying the c50 is the Alexa 35, and it definitely won't be handled by as many industry leading Colorists, but I wonder if Canon's brief when sending out pre production cameras also came with a requirement to not go in any direction too heavily with the grade, along with generally speaking, more limited grading abilities. Also, we'll see our film convert updates soon enough, along with a handful of decent LUTs out of the millions being sold, maybe that'll change things?

In your documentary space there's also a larger ethical question of how much are you allowed to hide behind nice looking images. Is it your duty to provide a window or a filter?
 
Last edited:
One of the reasons I bought an Alexa years ago is because I was very interested in shooting REC709 after seeing some videos of people doing it with the Amira (they looked really good). And it was the same for the Alexa; not 100% ready-to-go, but add a little saturation and contrast and you have really nice pictures, so I would agree with that and the newer cams are probably even better (internal REC709).

ARRI has the color thing down. Critically-thinking about it...look how movies end up looking, just so good, so many of them. Yeah, professional colorists but the cameras are doing a lot of the work.

Good call on the C50 footage, I'm downloading now!
 
All of the ~7K footage is too much for my 2020 M1 MBP.

I think it could have handled it at one point - at least for a little bit - but it’s kind of shot at this point and struggling to bring an image up in FCP (it's creating rainbow patterns, random artifacts in it).

Might help to download the latest plugins from Canon for FCP but I just don’t care enough because what I saw when paused looked underwhelming.

The 4K footage played fine - but, again...just the same stuff I've seen for 5, 8 years from the C200 (lower-quality settings), C70, etc.

Towards the end of my full-time filming career it's the kind of camera I would have avoided because I just didn't want to constantly fight with the image...and it goes back to the point I mentioned early about it definitely being able to produce pretty clips but a lot of times under very ideal circumstances (which we know are not always there).

Also, it's ~$4K and Canon are the masters at controlling their quality for the price based on their future plans so...yeah.
 
That's the, "The 4K footage played fine..." I'm talking up above....the lower-quality settings.
 
rob norton said:
@NorBro, this is a longer post, I doubt you'll read the whole thing. I've been getting back into reading books lately and trust me, we can wind back the clock of our brains damaged by doom scrolling!



Should we download files and see how far we can step towards cinematic magic? I'll reach out to a friend (pro colorist) and see if they'll have a go too.

I feel like BM (12k LF) gives you a starting point that has vast potential, where as people historically have said Arri looks excellent quite easily, and I guess that's the huge deal to a lot of people.

Do you think the c50 is in in a similar category where the files have potential, but possibly more work is involved than c70 for example, or do you think the c50 isn't capable of a compelling grade despite talented people working on the clips?


If someone did the same shoot with a BM camera, this looks like a prosumer version of the BM shoot. Better than c50? I'm not so sure. I think a lot of the c70 hill dying comes from the fact that a lot of YTers don't have real jobs and can't afford the next upgrade, so they're clutching at straws pretending like the c70 is a magical hard line in the sand and worth holding onto (not directed at you). I think it's a real shame electronics are part of this extremely short life cycle and while there's nothing wrong with holding onto tools you're happy with, I think a lot of people online act like they have a choice but don't (can't afford it). The whole 'this is why I switched' category sucks IMO. Originally people made YT videos for the audience, and now it's like all of these sideways topics that nobody asked about. Of course there's huge merit found within a small handful of YT videos but it's mentally exhausting ignoring all of the crap - signal to noise ratio!

At the surface re c50 IQ, you could respond with, who cares!? But that's a cop out. What used to be cost-prohibitive - Arri and Red cameras, that could make anything look quite good quite easily, BM with the Pyxis line and I assume moving forward, is providing its own type of gorgeous looks (with far fewer workarounds of previous gen cameras (reliability, rigging, brand recognition)). Ideally, we'd all have access to all of the tools, but in reality we're choosing. For me and corporate work, I'm wrestling with whether the c50 providing a larger range of camera moves (by being smaller) is worth it over a less dynamic, but more magical image the BM provides. These days in the high end corporate world, it's pretty much a scaled down but similar format to commercials. This is why I want to be able to put a gimbal on speed rail and move through people/spaces, the same way a big budget TVC would move through people on a crowded subway train to get to its hero character giving a look. Or putting a wireless mic on someone and doing a fairly decent walk and talk, all out of a backpack. But if it's all handheld, BM pyxis with focus pro and some cheap cine lenses is currently the best value proposition at the moment. I'm only mentioning these two brands because that's what I'm thinking about personally. Everyone knows in the broadcast world, SONY is the only choice. Owning a SONY camera gets you hired, but there's no point pretending it gets you Arri/RED/BM images.

If you get to choose your own tools, Canon was known for at least providing a pleasing image, even if it didn't have the full mojo. And this is why the c50 might feel like a curve ball. "If the c50 has deviated to a more neutral look, why buy one?" Early days of the Alexa 35, I remember a lot of people were saying it was quite sterile and uninteresting, but now we don't hear too many complaints. I think there was an element of Mini LF owners vehemently defending their purchase (a rich person's c70 equivalent?). I'm not saying the c50 is the Alexa 35, and it definitely won't be handled by as many industry leading Colorists, but I wonder if Canon's brief when sending out pre production cameras also came with a requirement to not go in any direction too heavily with the grade, along with generally speaking, more limited grading abilities. Also, we'll see our film convert updates soon enough, along with a handful of decent LUTs out of the millions being sold, maybe that'll change things?

In your documentary space there's also a larger ethical question of how much are you allowed to hide behind nice looking images. Is it your duty to provide a window or a filter?
Click to expand...
I think it’s down to you’re not going to find the perfect camera. There’s always a balance between usability and image quality. I always strive for the latter but accept the former. Hence the fx cameras have been my go-to tools for years. A breathtaking image doesn’t exist if you don’t have the tool to obtain it. In my case I’m more interested in recording people’s actions and emotions than a magical sunrise… As for the ethical question I think it’s more of one about style over anything. What style fits the subject matter. I’m a big fan of pointing out the artifice of documentary and breaking down the fourth wall, etc. so stylization doesn’t bother me at all.
 
I haven't gone down a @scorsesefan style rabit hole for a long time but have been doing it with the c50! You look at what you think is great footage, then come to hate it, step outside for a few hours, then when you watch it for the second time think it looks great again. In a perfect world, it'd be a c80/c50 combo for very fast and sensible shooting, some type of cine rig pyxis 12k for when the image is most important (within a somewhat achievable affordability realm).
 
DustinSchmidt said:
Yep, I'm in the same boat pretty much.

Your point regarding the mechanical shutter is very valid for those of us who shoot both video and stills. My understanding is that since it lacks the mechanical shutter there's essentially no option to sync with flash.

So unlike the R5C, which has been a very capable hybrid camera for me and I have used for both stills jobs and video jobs, this may not be the answer I was looking for.

It's unfortunate. I need to decide now if this is workable as a very capable video body, but on the photo side a camera that is only good for jobs that don't require syncing with flash.
Click to expand...
Looks like I need to eat my words here. I actually just picked up a C50 and got it in today.

Excited to run some tests alongside some of my other cameras, but for a first hands-on I absolutely love the form factor way more than I thought I would.
 
Nice one Dustin, just don't show any footage to @scorsesefan!

I can potentially see a c50 in my future, but also a BM pyxis 12k. The c50 for small footprint/extreme speed, while also looking great, the BM for entering mojo territory, with all traditional production camera considerations we all know about.

I saw your comment on newsshooter about the wooden camera cage. I think it looks fantastic. IMO mid49 c50 solutions, while functional, have gone the complete wrong direction for me this time, they look way too clunky.
 
rob norton said:
Nice one Dustin, just don't show any footage to @scorsesefan!

I can potentially see a c50 in my future, but also a BM pyxis 12k. The c50 for small footprint/extreme speed, while also looking great, the BM for entering mojo territory, with all traditional production camera considerations we all know about.

I saw your comment on newsshooter about the wooden camera cage. I think it looks fantastic. IMO mid49 c50 solutions, while functional, have gone the complete wrong direction for me this time, they look way too clunky.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm excited to get it out on a quick run and gun job this weekend already. It's exactly the kind of situation I picked it up for.

The wooden camera stuff is really interesting to me. They obviously priced the C50 stuff really low to compete with the other options on the market. From looking at some of their instagram posts talking about it, they do say that their intent is to move a lot more of the C50 accessories, and so they're content to make up for the lower pricing in overall units sold. Totally fine by me. ;)

And yes, the Mid49 solution is a bit odd to me as well. It's a throwback to the first dslr cages that Wooden Camera made years ago when they were under Ryan Schorman's original ownership. A bit surprised he went back to that layout/design for this.
 
DustinSchmidt said:
Yeah, I'm excited to get it out on a quick run and gun job this weekend already. It's exactly the kind of situation I picked it up for.

The wooden camera stuff is really interesting to me. They obviously priced the C50 stuff really low to compete with the other options on the market. From looking at some of their instagram posts talking about it, they do say that their intent is to move a lot more of the C50 accessories, and so they're content to make up for the lower pricing in overall units sold. Totally fine by me. ;)

And yes, the Mid49 solution is a bit odd to me as well. It's a throwback to the first dslr cages that Wooden Camera made years ago when they were under Ryan Schorman's original ownership. A bit surprised he went back to that layout/design for this.
Click to expand...
Here's a good example of what I'm talking about with the Mid49 cage. If you still own one of the older dslr cages from Wooden Camera then you kind of have a similar setup.

IMG_4310.jpg

Of course the Mid49 C50 cage is more purpose built and allows for using the C50's top handle in one of its configurations. But if you're not going to use the audio top handle at times, then this kind of gives you the same utility.

Just a thought if anyone still has these old cages lying around! Everything old is new again!
 
DustinSchmidt said:
Here's a good example of what I'm talking about with the Mid49 cage. If you still own one of the older dslr cages from Wooden Camera then you kind of have a similar setup.

Just a thought if anyone still has these old cages lying around! Everything old is new again!
Click to expand...
IDK if we need to revisit DSLR era designs, it's a bit different to yearning for a cat on the shoulder set up.

What lenses will you use with the c50? If I get one, I think it'll just be an RF 24-70 f/2.8, maybe RF 70-200 f/4 then call it a day.

RF lenses like the 1.4 series, 24-105 and 70-200 2.8 would be nice, but not cheap.
 
Last edited:
rob norton said:
IDK if we need to revisit DSLR era designs, it's a bit different to yearning for a cat on the shoulder set up.

What lenses will you use with the c50? If I get one, I think it'll just be an RF 24-70 f/2.8, maybe RF 70-200 f/4 then call it a day.

RF lenses like the 1.4 series, 24-105 and 70-200 2.8 would be nice, but not cheap.
Click to expand...
I picked up the C50 from a local camera store in Oklahoma City, Bedford Camera and Video. They had to transfer the only one they had in stock from their Tulsa store over to OKC so I got pretty lucky since it seems to be backordered everywhere. Main point of this story being that I physically went in and picked it up in person and a Canon rep happened to be in store at the time showing off all of the new stuff. Bodies, lenses, etc.

I barely own any RF lenses (just the 24-240 and the 50 1.8) but getting to see all of the new VCM lenses in person, the 24-105 2.8, new 45 1.2, etc. was pretty great and definitely made me appreciate how much the tech has advanced since my older EF mount Canon glass.

Eventually I may go down that road, but at the moment I have too many EF mount cameras and lenses to make the switch.

Some lenses that really seem to sing on the C50, with limited testing so far, are the Atlas Mercury's. Here's a quick frame with the 42mm on the C50, shot in the open gate 3:2, and then exported in a 16x9 framing.

small.jpg

My big takeaway is just how well the character of the Mercury's can still be seen with the combo of the 3:2 on the C50, the 1.5 anamorphic and the final output. And the 7k resolution really shows up as well. Comparing it to my C500 II, that extra 1K is noticeable.

Anyway, exciting times for new cameras. But I'm already pretty pleased with the C50. I took it out on a little run and gun event coverage a couple of days ago and the form factor, audio handle and 6400 high iso were all things I utilized and they worked great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top