C300: External Recorder for C300mkii

S

siliconlife

New member
Trying to decide on an external monitor/recorder for the C300mkii, and looking at the Atomos Shogun Inferno and the Odyssey 7q+. I've watched some videos on these, but wanted to get thoughts from you guys. Im guessing that the Odyssey is better as it supports 444 internally and the C300 can shoot it, plus better build quality, no fan noise, etc. However, the Shogun also has the AtomHDR feature, and seems to have a much better user interface and a higher resolution display (1920x1080 vs 1280x800 OLED on the 7Q+).

Seems like neither is perfect, what are your guys thoughts? Most of my shooting is on Cinema cams so Ill have SDI interfaces.
 
The 7Q+ has the support for the 2K modes (10/12-bit, 444) - which the Inferno doesn't - but not sure how much improvement you'll see over the C300's internal recording of those.

Both provide 4K to ProRes if that's important.

I personally use the Atomos' for their screen brightness and general interface...very simple and intuitive IMO. I like the LUT management as well.
 
I own the 7Q+ and much prefer the simple menu system to the somewhat comic book looking user-interface of the Atomos. The 7Q also has dual SSD slots which is a huge plus.
 
I'm definitely an image quality/color fanatic, and a big part of my use case is having a much larger display regardless of my location and being able to see the display outdoors, look at LUTs on set when shooting CLog2/3, etc. But it seems like both screens will do this. It seems like the Odyssey is more commercial, but Im seeing alot of the Infernos out there. I know Philip Bloom uses one.
 
Atomos is crushing it right now...I see them everywhere.

If you've never used one, you should rent one and try it out.

I guarantee you'll fall in love with the screen - everyone does - especially if being able to see the display/picture easily outdoors is a priority.
 
I am considering an Inferno or Odyssey simply to get a 4K image out of the C300II for punch in and monitoring while recording. Can both monitors do a 1:1 pixel mapping punch in on the display while recording or just monitoring the RAW feed?

Also, how is it that the Shogun Inferno can't handle 2K modes? That seems bizarre.
 
I'm sure it can handle it, but they probably just don't care to support it...especially now in 2017 on an aging (but great) C300 Mark II that already shoots internal 12-bit 2K.

FS5 is the one to take full advantage of that thing.
 
I have both Shogun Inferno and Odyssey 7q+ and i must say that I prefer much more the Odyssey 7q+.For me it have better image quality, not to talk about the build quality! and plus I have the FS5 so more advantages with the 7Q+ vs Shogun. I bought the nanoflash from CD many years ago and it still serving me now so I do appreciate the work and service CD have vs Atomos.
I had to return back my Shogun 2 times before getting the proper product, I've received two Shoguns with problems and to return them back and it wasn't the first product from Atomos i had problems with!
For me investing in a 7Q+ and CD products is wiser! the bright monitor is a big plus for the Shogun though.
 
I use the O7Q with the raw->4k prores for commercial work. I think it's the best image the camera produces. You do need the raw license for the O7Q, but it's a rock solid piece of kit.

Downside is that it isn't the brightest monitor for outdoor shoots.
 
jm.gardiner said:
I use the O7Q with the raw->4k prores for commercial work. I think it's the best image the camera produces. You do need the raw license for the O7Q, but it's a rock solid piece of kit.

Downside is that it isn't the brightest monitor for outdoor shoots.
Click to expand...

When using the Odyssey to capture 4k prores from the raw signal, do you see a lot of very noticeable noise in the image? In the highlights, the blacks, all over...

I'm asking because a while back we shot a few days of a commercial on an Atomos to get the 4k prores and the image was unusable due to noise. Like, it would freak out the agency unusable. I ended up having an extended back and forth with Atomos customer service that was ultimately unsatisfactory. Fortunately, B&H took the unit on return. Perhaps the noisy image is due to Canon's internal noise reduction being bypassed? Have you run into such issues? Thanks John.
 
No huge boost in the amount of noise in the O7Q files. There is certainly more clarity in the files, so you could definitly see noise if it's there.

I can't speak for the Atomos device, but I would remind that when you set the camera to RAW OUT, the data is always LOG2. You can simultaneously record to any gamma/CP setting internally. So if you're exposing for a different gamma your raw log2 will suffer.

I've also set the rec out to 2k and recorded some 12bit/2k/4444 prores to the o7q. It's nice if you need prores, but not an enormous stepup in quality.
 
jm.gardiner said:
I can't speak for the Atomos device, but I would remind that when you set the camera to RAW OUT, the data is always LOG2. You can simultaneously record to any gamma/CP setting internally. So if you're exposing for a different gamma your raw log2 will suffer.
Click to expand...

Ah man, this was it. This must have been the cause. Should've known better as I now remember reading that the raw out is always log2. The Atomos has a clog3 viewing lut and I spaced that the the raw out is different. Neither my first nor my last mistake. Sincerely appreciate the reminder.
 
Last edited:
Kohl said:
Ah man, this was it. This must have been the cause. Should've known better as I now remember reading that the raw out is always log2. The Atomos has a clog3 viewing lut and I spaced that the the raw out is different. Neither my first nor my last mistake. Sincerely appreciate the reminder.
Click to expand...

You can set 4K RAW out to Clog3 or Clog2 on C300mk2. I do it all the time with my C300mk2 & Odyssey7Q.

The Atomos had some quality issues with their ProRes, but I thought they would have fixed that by now? If not, that's a bad sign.

I have owned C300mk2 for two years and O7Q for 3 1/2 years. A few notes:
I have needed the 2048x1080 support in the O7Q a lot more than I imagined when I bought the C300mk2. I have also needed support for 12bit 444 a lot.
O7Q P to/from PsF conversion is a life saver! (F.ex. C300mk2 is P only, no PsF what so ever. While C300mk1 is PsF only in 1080.)
Having a 422 1080/24/25/30P out of the O7Q regardless of input (4K, UHD, 2K, HD, 60P, 50P) is also a life saver.

I have friends who have received very specific promises from Atomos that 2K and 12bit 444 modes will be added to the Inferno (and then they bought the inferno).
But you should treat those as just that: Promises. I have owned a few Atomos products over the years and they don't always deliver on promises.
Convergent Design has also made some promises they couldn't keep, but that doesn't matter much for C300mk2 owners as the O7Q now supports all it's outputs and modes.

Basically, the O7Q works here and now.
Inferno still needs to deliver on some promises.
 
Last edited:
Parrot said:
You can set 4K RAW out to Clog3 or Clog2 on C300mk2. I do it all the time with my C300mk2 & Odyssey7Q.

The Atomos had some quality issues with their ProRes, but I thought they would have fixed that by now? If not, that's a bad sign.

I have owned C300mk2 for two years and O7Q for 3 1/2 years. A few notes:
I have needed the 2048x1080 support in the O7Q a lot more than I imagined when I bought the C300mk2. I have also needed support for 12bit 444 a lot.
O7Q P to/from PsF conversion is a life saver! (F.ex. C300mk2 is P only, no PsF what so ever. While C300mk1 is PsF only in 1080.)
Having a 422 1080/24/25/30P out of the O7Q regardless of input (4K, UHD, 2K, HD, 60P, 50P) is also a life saver.

I have friends who have received very specific promises from Atomos that 2K and 12bit 444 modes will be added to the Inferno (and then they bought the inferno).
But you should treat those as just that: Promises. I have owned a few Atomos products over the years and they don't always deliver on promises.
Convergent Design has also made some promises they couldn't keep, but that doesn't matter much for C300mk2 owners as the O7Q now supports all it's outputs and modes.

Basically, the O7Q works here and now.
Inferno still needs to deliver on some promises.
Click to expand...

This is all very useful, thanks much for sharing it.

It's also quite possible that the ubiquitous noise was a result of improper Prores encoding as opposed to exposing for the wrong log. I wasn't recording Canon Raw. Atomos customer service looked at the files, told me to wait a few months and that everything would be fixed with the next firmware update, but I'd moved on by that point. This was while ago.

Anyway, all good information. Live and learn.
 
Based on my experience with the C100, Canon does not apply noise reduction to it's monitor outputs. CLog always looked more noisy when recorded externally. I do not know if this applies to the C300 II.
 
cpreston said:
Based on my experience with the C100, Canon does not apply noise reduction to it's monitor outputs. CLog always looked more noisy when recorded externally. I do not know if this applies to the C300 II.
Click to expand...

For sure this could be it as well. Thank you for sharing the experience.

The thing I'd really need to do is just pick up both an Atomos and an O7Q+ and test. Currently disinclined to do so as the internal codec on the C300 mkII has been more than enough for my needs.
 
Kohl said:
When using the Odyssey to capture 4k prores from the raw signal, do you see a lot of very noticeable noise in the image? In the highlights, the blacks, all over...

I'm asking because a while back we shot a few days of a commercial on an Atomos to get the 4k prores and the image was unusable due to noise. Like, it would freak out the agency unusable. I ended up having an extended back and forth with Atomos customer service that was ultimately unsatisfactory. Fortunately, B&H took the unit on return. Perhaps the noisy image is due to Canon's internal noise reduction being bypassed? Have you run into such issues? Thanks John.
Click to expand...

Same here. I recorded with a shogun off my c300m2 and the footage was SO noisy, everyone freaked out. As much as I love the monitor aspect of the shogun and ninja blade ( back then), the recording feature has always been a backup function for me, like if I lose the internal footage somehow, like worst case ever ( never happened). It 's just a piece of mind, but yeah, that c300m2 recording with the atomos was bad. And I am not saying not as good, but real bad unusable type.
 
The Atomos recorders don't normally record noisy images...extremely clean in all of my experiences.

I've never used it with a C300 Mark II, but the above thought about noise reduction being bypassed could be a possibility?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top