F3 - C300 - 1D side by side

Once again a great find cowpunk 20,000 ISO is so off the scale from a light point of view, but holds up very well.
Be great to see a normal test as per a sunny day outside at a normal setting.

The Canon C300 has a great form factor compared to the F3 - light - compact - as an all in one package with 422 at 50 mbs
no extra bits needed for broadcast or corporate production got to be a winner for that market.
 
Great find, thanks Cowpunk.

The F3 looked pretty good, but I though they left the 1D very overexposed. I also noticed too much red/magenta on his face on the last C300 close up. But the 20000 ISO looks damn impressive.
 
Maybe I'm confused but how come C300 footage with the 24mm at F1.4 and ISO20.000 is just as bright as the 7D with the same lens and F but at ISO6400? The sensor is about the same size C300/7D.
 
editman said:
Maybe I'm confused but how come C300 footage with the 24mm at F1.4 and ISO20.000 is just as bright as the 7D with the same lens and F but at ISO6400? The sensor is about the same size C300/7D.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is something I'm a bit confused about as well. Maybe ND filter was applied? It was also a pre-pro unit, so that might have something to do with it also. The test was intended to just give him an idea of how far he could push the camera, so not really an accurately done test, as he states.
 
Nuno Dias said:
The F3 looked pretty good, but I though they left the 1D very overexposed. I also noticed too much red/magenta on his face on the last C300 close up. But the 20000 ISO looks damn impressive.
Click to expand...

The F3 does look very good, no doubt it's a nice camera. But one thing I noticed - and someone tell me if I'm the only one that sees this - the black sweater on the F3 has a lot of red in it, whereas in the C300 footage it does look like true black. I know some Sony sensors have had a problem with IR contamination. Could this be the cause? Does anyone else see the differences in color?
 
cowpunk52 said:
The F3 does look very good, no doubt it's a nice camera. But one thing I noticed - and someone tell me if I'm the only one that sees this - the black sweater on the F3 has a lot of red in it, whereas in the C300 footage it does look like true black. I know some Sony sensors have had a problem with IR contamination. Could this be the cause? Does anyone else see the differences in color?
Click to expand...

I think you are right, there is some red in the sweater. Thank you for posting the link to the test!
 
If you scroll down to the comments, the creator of the video says iso20000 on the c300 = iso6400 on the 1D in terms of light sensitivity. It's weird that they don't match up... I wonder what it means for the other isos in the range. Or maybe I am misunderstanding what he posted...
 
I wouldn't take this test for more than a grain of salt. I'm not sure who dialed in each cam, but it looks as if they didn't do much more than turn it on and set the iso. By the way, what was the blond guy so embarrased about? If his face were any more red, I would have thought he had a terrible sunburn.
 
How can they not know what theyre doing? Thats absurd.Id like to have another confirmation from others eho have used itI dont see them making a mistake on 6400-20,000...
 
interesting, but it's pretty rough-and-ready. and are we just talking about vastly different scales here? how were these exposures achieved? surely the c300 doesn't have to be cranked to 20000 iso to achieve the same sensitivity as the dlsr at 6400, or the f3 at 6dB of gain.
 
Seeing as this isn't really a carefully done side-by-side test, I'm reserving judgement until I can experiment with the C300 myself. However, my initial thought is that Canon LOG introduces exposure complexities due to the nature of it's non-linear dynamic range compression.

For this performance question, a proper test would be putting the 1DmarkIV up against the C300 in it's EOS Standard color preset.
 
I just saw another test. The C300 at 20 000 is about 6400 on the 7d. Also the F3 +18db (max) is about iso 3200 on the 7d. Kinda funny actually.
 
i dont think a simple setting of gamma could actually be of error on 20,000 iso-> 6400 iso. thats a lot of f stop to boost

nevertheless, thats still uber clean at 6400iso level of low light
 
I am seeing a lot more detail in the F3 image than the c300, especially on the sweater, the c300 mashes the black on the sweater and you can see no detail.
 
i guess this is why "standardized" tests are valuable. what are you testing, exactly, and what are the parameters?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top