Canon EOS C100

I understand you, it is ok. But many people write "800pct" and don't know, what this number mean in a real life. I hope that C100 will be a very good camera and I will buy one .-) . I work with Avid MC, so I need DNxHD codec option for recording, it is no problem now. We need wait for test footages then I make my decision.
 
It has no advantage .-) . How did you get that idea?

DNxHD codec is the native AvidMediaComposer codec, so it's better for me. If you work in FCP then the native Apple ProRes codec is better for you.
 
No, there is nothing special, 185Mbps/422 is the first bitrate for serious color grading. The second level is uncompressed HD. Doesn't matter if this is DNxHD or ProRes, it is only personal preference.
 
Pave1 said:
The C300 records only 19 levels from 100 to 108pct (235-254 in the 8-bit code values), which represent 255pct (546-801pct) of the dynamic range.

The C500 outputs 304 levels from 100 to 108pct (3760-4064 in the 12-bit code values), which represent 255pct (546-801pct) of the dynamic range.

19 levels (8bit C300) vs 304 levels (12bit C500) for 255pct of the dynamic range (from 546pct to 801pct) is a big difference. The C100 with the internal 8bit 420 AVCHD record is for me about 400-500pct of the dynamic range. The rest is marketing.
Click to expand...

Very interesting plot. Haven't seen it before - this explains a lot. Thanks for posting it.
Anyway, while I agree the difference is big, it only matters if you need to stretch that topmost highlight range in post. Note that it's not the absolute distance (801-546=255) that really matters. Humans perceive brightness logarithmically. That 801 is only half f-stop away from 546. So, it's 19 levels per half f-stop - not so bad unless you really missed the exposure of the shot and need to heavily adjust it in post. So, you definitely need to expose carefully with C100/C300, while C500 is going to be much more forgiving.
 
C100 is ok, but C300 with the 8bit DSP is a very bad byznys. I want to see the 10bit DSP with output for an external recording.

from PDF (page 8):
To expedite a timely entry to the marketplace the high-performance DIGIC DV III image processor
and attendant 50 Mbps 4:2:2 MPEG-2 Codec (initially developed for the high definition small-format XF camcorder series)
was deployed. Accordingly, the in-camera recording is constrained to the 8-bit depth specified by that MPEG-2 standard.
 
Pave1 said:
C100 is ok, but C300 with the 8bit DSP is a very bad byznys. I want to see the 10bit DSP with output for an external recording.

from PDF (page 8):
To expedite a timely entry to the marketplace the high-performance DIGIC DV III image processor
and attendant 50 Mbps 4:2:2 MPEG-2 Codec (initially developed for the high definition small-format XF camcorder series)
was deployed. Accordingly, the in-camera recording is constrained to the 8-bit depth specified by that MPEG-2 standard.
Click to expand...

You mix up things. DSP wordlength is definitely greater than 8 bit. If this had been the case the camera would have been totally unusable.
It's the codec that's 8 bit, so the data ultimately gets truncated to 8 bits, at the end of the processing, just before it gets encoded.
I agree that 8 bits are often too tight to hold wide DR, no matter what gamma is applied. However, unless you stretch the footage severly in post (due to exposure/lighting problems while shooting) you can hardly (if at all) tell the difference between 8 and 10 bits.
 
You don't even need to go into all that number-juggling... If you're recording 12 stops of latitude with an 8-bit codec, you have, on average, 21 brightness values per stop of light.
 
The C300 hasn't output for 10bit, for me it's a very bad byznys. I like the small size and a very good lowlight of this camera, but 16k USD and no 10bit output for some external record isn't ok.

A standard camera for documentary work is ok with 8bit, but cine camera isn't. I don't know a person, who makes a film without a color grading.

I hope that Canon will upgrade the C300 and return the good EVF to C100 .-) .
 
Pave1 said:
The C300 hasn't output for 10bit, for me it's a very bad byznys. I like the small size and a very good lowlight of this camera, but 16k USD and no 10bit output for some external record isn't ok.

A standard camera for documentary work is ok with 8bit, but cine camera isn't. I don't know a person, who makes a film without a color grading.

I hope that Canon will upgrade the C300 and return the good EVF to C100 .-) .
Click to expand...
You realize that Star Wars episode II was filmed on 8 bit cameras, right?
 
If you have few millions dollars in your pocket, well you could control almost all the lighting situation with a long days of shooting ... and yeah in this case why not afterall.
But the highlight rollout of the c300 for me is a No.

dustylense said:
You realize that Star Wars episode II was filmed on 8 bit cameras, right?
Click to expand...
 
You don't like cameras with a good EVF? I like them .-) . I hope that BMC and GH3 will be a good start point of changes in Canon's strategy.
 
Or there will be just a simple firmware upgrade? Have a look at what they state on EOSHD, namely that the 1DC and 1DX are identical hardware wise. Canon has already a track record with that politics with the 5D which became a fully operational video camera by firmware upgrade. Now the processors of the actual cameras are much more powerful - so a firmware upgrade would make even more sense. The only reason I can see to inhibit that they would do so are hardware limitations. But I'm quite sure the original processor read out is higher than 8 bit. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Those cameras have a better DIGIC 5 chip, not the III in the C300/100. Canon has stated that upgrade of the older. Chip to 10bits is impossible,
 
Pave1 said:
The C300 hasn't output for 10bit, for me it's a very bad byznys. I like the small size and a very good lowlight of this camera, but 16k USD and no 10bit output for some external record isn't ok.

A standard camera for documentary work is ok with 8bit, but cine camera isn't. I don't know a person, who makes a film without a color grading.

I hope that Canon will upgrade the C300 and return the good EVF to C100 .-) .
Click to expand...

Again, this same pointless argument keep getting brought up and has been answered way too many times.....Everything you know about 8 bit problems do not apply to the C300...there are no 8 bit issues so stop bringing it up. Were you there at Paramount for the launch last November? Were you there at Paramount during Cinegear? Did you see any of the 4 short films with the 4K projection on the second biggest screen west of the Mississippi (The Chinese Theater in Hollywood is the biggest)? All those films used Canon Log and were color graded. You might try to not to base your assumptions on spec sheets and internet footage. The camera is out performing the spec sheet...and to follow up with Dusty, the C300 is better than what they used to shoot the last StarWars (Sony 950 modified)... and it shoots on the same level of codec that the movie "Hugo" was shot on (1080) which won a small award this year (Oscar for Cinematography). Ron Howard is using 4 C300s to go along with the Alexa in shooting his current project "Rush" just to name a few. The first 4 cameras we sold went straight to medium budget features as the "A" cameras. So for you to make a statement that the camera is not good enough to be a cinema camera is not correct... period.
To everyone, sorry for ranting but I'm tired of old arguments (proven wrong) that keep getting brought up in these blogs, often to try push people to whatever camera a poster is pushing. All of the cameras out there are great compared to what was available 5 years ago, let alone 10 years ago. Right tool for the right job. Pave1 is new to DVX, but his kind of post is showing up way too often from frequent posters and I'm just a bit tired of it. Recently, I've run into a few long time posters (guys who work a lot) whom have told me they don't bother posting anymore because of this exact concern. This and other blogs are for sharing information..and opinions...but not for declaring that "Mine is bigger or better and yours is not".

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
 
Last edited:
Jim I think a camera that is appropriate for controlled movie lighting is not the same as one used more off the cuff, Ive seen a ton of dodgy C300 footy, where the skies were lost etc.

Bring on the HMI truck and a bunch of grip to control the DR and that wont happen.

Do you rent or sell HMI, and grip by any chance, could this influence your standpoint in any way?

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