Canon EOS C300 NEW pricing!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Though, if you are referring to what he posted on Vimeo (just did a quick search), than I do not know how accurate that is. He writes:

"it's not $20k...i thought people knew the street price is actually going to be around $13k. The news was everywhere past week or so..." - P Bloom (Vimeo)


Seeing that his information is nothing extremely recent, it is hard to say exactly what info he has vs. what we've been reading elsewhere.
 
You know, at first I was like "whatever" about this camera. You see I am a RED guy. But oh boy have I changed my mind. I will buy one of these as soon as they are available. I shoot these shows for Fox in factories all over and they are often as dark as a sack of black cats. I can't wait to take this little guy along to solve this problem.
 
I didn't realize the xxit project was shot with minimal light for the some of that real time exterior footage. The keying looked flawless on this as well. I'm more impressed than ever.
 
Yeah I'm believing phillip bloom wouldn't be putting this out there unless he felt info was reliable. I to am hoping this is true.
 
He said AROUND $13,000...not "it will be $13,000."

Can't wait till this thing gets into the hands of more people and we can see more examples...great stuff.
 
Yes, I think it is unfair to P Bloom, to be rephrasing his words.
 
Yeah you are correct. I have re edited my post to better represent p bloom's statement in saying at around $13,000 and not $13,000 for the c300, which is still fine with me. Sorry phillip.
 
Paul Hudson said:
You know, at first I was like "whatever" about this camera. You see I am a RED guy. But oh boy have I changed my mind. I will buy one of these as soon as they are available. I shoot these shows for Fox in factories all over and they are often as dark as a sack of black cats. I can't wait to take this little guy along to solve this problem.
Click to expand...

While I will not be able to buy this camera, I have to say, I am very impressed with it, and look forward to seeing some great footage from it. Comments like, "The high ISO footage is nice, BUT... it is not usable for pro work...", drive me crazy. No one would say that the Fisher-Price PXL 2000 PixelVision camera if worthy of pro work, but Richard Linklater shot a sequence on it for his break through film, the cult classic "Slacker". No one would say that the sickly green "Night Vision" footage, that until now, has been used to shoot uber low light scenes, would be worthy of pro work, but look around at how many reality shows and documentaries have used that kind of footage. No one would say that 400 ASA black and white Super 8mm reversal film, pushed one stop, would be worthy of pro work, but I made my bones , and good money, using it to shot commercials and music videos. These modern cameras, with there ability to capture images at very high sensitivities are offering us a new aesthetic, that I do not think that a lot of folks have really wrapped their head around. Of course, most main stream projects will not be shot at the very high ISOs, that is a given. However, now that we have cameras that can shoot at those sensitivities, with an image quality that has heretofore not been available, we don't really know what is possible. I believe that very creative individuals will use these new capabilities to show use things we have never seen before. I for one am very excited about that.
 
Last edited:
David G. Smith said:
While I will not be able to buy this camera, I have to say, I am very impressed with it, and look forward to see some great footage from it. Comments like, "The high ISO footage is nice, BUT... it is not usable for pro work...", drive me crazy. No one would say that the Fisher-Price PXL 2000 PixelVision camera if worthy of pro work, but Richard Linklater shot a sequence on it for his break through film, the cult classic "Slacker". No one would say that the sickly green "Night Vision" footage, that until now, has been used to shoot uber low light scenes, would be worthy of pro work, but look around at how many reality shows and documentaries have used that kind of footage. No one would say that 400 ASA black and white Super 8mm reversal film, pushed one stop, would be worthy of pro work, but I made my bones , and good money, using it to shot commercials and music videos. These modern cameras, with there ability to capture images at very high sensitivities are offering us a new aesthetic, that I do not think that a lot of folks have really wrapped their head around. Of course, most main stream projects will not be shot at the very high ISOs, that is a given. However, now that we have cameras that can shoot at those sensitivities, with an image quality that has heretofore not been available, we don't really know what is possible. I believe that very creative individuals will use these new capabilities to show use things we have never seen before. I for one am very excited about that.
Click to expand...

Great post. I for one hope to really explore night shooting possibilities.
 
Searcher said:
Great post. I for one hope to really explore night shooting possibilities.
Click to expand...

That is great. I look forward to you posting some great images, if that is possible. I really believe, that with these new cameras, we are in the beginning trough of a new wave of moving image aesthetics that is going to blow our minds. The creative possibilities are mind boggling.... WOW!
 
David G. Smith said:
No one would say that the Fisher-Price PXL 2000 PixelVision camera if worthy of pro work, but Richard Linklater shot a sequence on it for his break through film, the cult classic "Slacker". No one would say that the sickly green "Night Vision" footage, that until now, has been used to shoot uber low light scenes, would be worthy of pro work, but look around at how many reality shows and documentaries have used that kind of footage. No one would say that 400 ASA black and white Super 8mm reversal film, pushed one stop, would be worthy of pro work, but I made my bones , and good money, using it to shot commercials and music videos.
Click to expand...

To be fair, most people are looking at the C300 to be their primary "A' camera, not for some short gimmick shot or sequence, so the comparison isn't very helpful.

That said, I think people who don't see the C300 to be a contender for "A" cam status are missing out.
 
I tnink professionally, its important for potential buyers to weigh in the overhead vs profits on this camera (and f3 similar $$$). The 4k scarlet is the same price. Producers have issues seeing past numbers. How will it effect rental rates? And the medium future (2 years). 4k is getting here fast. Standard computers are able to handle it nowadays, nles can handle it, and hell even youtuve is allowing 4k uploads.

If you're going to spend 16k + another 4k on. Sttuff... there's always stuff.... think about it. This isn't a 5k fs100/af100, in tough economic times this is a significant hole to puut your self in. Don't want anyon get in over their heads.
 
Shane Hurlbut today on Twitter: "my review on the C300 is this. I am shooting on my next feature "We Regret to Inform" a psychological thriller in Feb."
 
Timur, your point about the future-proof-ness of the Scarlet is well made. It is a big consideration for me...and most, I would hope. As fast as technology is changing these days, it might be wise to invest in gear that will be relevant further into the future.

TimurCivan said:
The 4k scarlet is the same price.
Click to expand...

Everyone will kit-out their cameras differently, but I would guess that for most the C300 would be a few thousand cheaper...assuming that Canon is dropping to price. Spec'ing out the Scarlet for my use puts it in over $18,000. To get the same functionality (for ME) is gonna be the cost of the body and a couple extra batteries.
 
Obviously this is all our own personal feelings on resolution, and this may come as a shock, but I can say with certainty that I'd be completely happy with Canon's C300 resolution for many years to come. I happen to really feel Canon made the right choice on how to handle the sensor in the C300. (And Arri for that matter with the Alexa). With the Scarlet, it's not the resolution I see as future proofing, it's the bit depth, and the possibility of upgrading sensors in the future. Resolution is actually near last on my list since I am quite happy with the FS100 resolution. But, we all have different requirements.

What I want to see is how the rolling shutter on the C300 compares with the Scarlet-X. If someone gets to a Scarlet-X or C300 before me, PM me and I'll tell you how to generate the test files for me, and I'll do all the calculations. The whip pans on the C300 have been VERY impressive to me.

If I end up getting the C300, I am looking at using it for at least 3 years minimum. The native EOS support, built in ND, rolling shutter, moire/aliasing handling, and sensitivity, they really make me like this camera A LOT. Having used the FS100 now since it came out, I miss the ND filters on my AF100 like you would not believe. EVERY ND I've put on the front I end up battling with reflections on it (although I've not tried the heliopan yet). But, even with the magnetic filter attach system I use, I'm just tired of dealing with them. The fact most of my EOS glass doesn't work on the FS100, it's really frustrating. I've looked at lenses for the FS100 and, to be honest, I don't like them as much as I like my EOS glass. I'm not saying they are bad, it's just, I like the look I get with my lenses and I don't want to use different ones.

I've been working with 8-bit 4:2:0 since i started. While I'd love 10-bit, truth is, even if it had it, it would probably just come out the SDI and not be internal. I don't want an external recorder, so in reality, for me at least, 8-bit 4:2:2 looks fantastic. It means I get closer in camera, like I've always done, and I'm fine with that. Did I ever use the SDI out of the AF100 for VFX work? No. Have I ever used the HDMI with an external recorder on the FS100? No. Truth is, when I *really* look at my use model, I want a camera that is fast to use and doesn't require a lot of support equipment to change in and out.

I say all this because I've been a big critic of the C300 on the technology front. And, still, if it was $20k, there would be no change in those feelings. That said, at between $12k and $13k, I can live with that. I'd make that investment personally because it pretty much handles most of the worst issues I hate dealing with, and has a wonderful picture at that. Sure, I still want to see more tests and explore it some more, but, it really satisfies most of my use model. In fact, the ONLY thing that is still a hard thing for me to decide on is 1080p60 because I do use it, and it's something I want to continue using. I'm not even going to say the C300 won't be sufficient without it, because I just don't know. It's possible 720p60 will be just fine for those scenes really.

I say all this just to share a perspective. We all have different needs/wants. In *ALL* these discussions and opinions, I've really had to think about what it is that is important to me. I, like many other people, can get caught up chasing technology. And I've spent A LOT of time thinking between the Scarlet-X and the C300.
 
TimurCivan said:
I tnink professionally, its important for potential buyers to weigh in the overhead vs profits on this camera (and f3 similar $$$). The 4k scarlet is the same price. Producers have issues seeing past numbers. How will it effect rental rates? And the medium future (2 years). 4k is getting here fast. Standard computers are able to handle it nowadays, nles can handle it, and hell even youtuve is allowing 4k uploads.

If you're going to spend 16k + another 4k on. Sttuff... there's always stuff.... think about it. This isn't a 5k fs100/af100, in tough economic times this is a significant hole to puut your self in. Don't want anyon get in over their heads.
Click to expand...

I think what you are saying here makes a lot of sense.

I think that we will also see a lot of what happened with the REDone happening with the scarlet. A lot of people who weren't necessarily in a place career-wise to buy a 20k camera package are going to spring for it, thinking it is going to take their career to the next level, and unfortunately, it probably wont.

In major markets, the sheer amount of scarlet owner ops desperate to get a job will push down the value of a rental. Part of the problem with 4k (now at least) is that it isn't for everything. It's not really for ENG or quick run of the mill corporate work, which is what a large percentage of work that happens on a day to day basis in cities is. ENG/Reality TV and corporate work is a GREAT way to fund camera packages, and camera packages like the F3 and the c300 are going to be the cameras to own for that sort of work. The beauty is, the f3 and the c300 are able to play in BOTH worlds; Cinema AND TV/ENG. So in the end, unless you are a highly sought-after DP, the f3 or c300 are going to be better money makers.

Now, if you aren't really concerned with making dough, and just want to make films, scarlet might definitely be the way to go.
 
_JD_ said:
Shane Hurlbut today on Twitter: "my review on the C300 is this. I am shooting on my next feature "We Regret to Inform" a psychological thriller in Feb."
Click to expand...

But he also said that the camera seems very plastic to him (the image not the camera itself) and that he needs to get his hands on one to really see what it can do. He's going to shoot with it not doubt, but it seems he thinks (according to another tweet) that the 5D has a special sauce the C300 doesn't. I guess we'll find out.

After I shoot a feature on my AF100 rig in January, we'll see how anxious I am to get the C300...if at all. It'll be my first real opportunity to put this camera through its paces in a REAL shooting environment where I need to move quickly. I'm also editing and coloring this film so it's the perfect start to finish way for me to evaluate whether or not I would keep the camera with all that's coming down the pike.

Exciting times! :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top