F3 vs C300

L

Lenilenapi

Carbonite Member
I got a chance to finally check out the C300 yesterday at the Snader trade show in San Francisco. I didn't compare imagery at all just the handling and layout and confess to be looking for flaws in the C300 as I own an F3.
I wasn't disappointed though. From what i could see I still preferred the F3. I was interested mainly in its possible advantages for fast moving documentary and handheld work.

C300 Pro's:
- Much Lighter for handheld - big plus
- I believe it retains image stabilization with Canon lenses - another big plus for me
- probably a better EVF though I didn't compare them head next to each other ( doesn't take much to surpass the F3 EVF.
- Menu controls looked pretty good and complete.
- Gain menu went higher to 24dB - might be faster even than an F3 ?
- internal recording to 50Mb is good.

C300 Negatives
- If you use Canon lenses then the iris was in a weird place on the right side handle grip and it moved in steps. That was a deal killer for me. With the F3 I can use Nikon lenses and especially with the Prolock adapter get iris changes that are smooth as a any de-cliocked lens.
Of course if they make a Nikon adapter for the Canon that solves that problem, but it gets rid of image stabilization the major plus for the camera. Same for PL lenses.
- The zebra settings won't go below 70%. I have been setting mine for 60 or at the most 65% ever since switching to HD. 70% is almost useless for my shooting style and many other people I know. Easy to fix in a software upgrade but for now an absolute deal killer for me.
- Of course - 8 bit out - what the hell were they thinking on $16K camera? - another deal killer.
- Only one SDI out ( I think) and I find the second SDI out quite useful esp for sLog. Don't know how Canon log works - Do you get anything like a WYSIWYG image for monitoring
- Basic configuration looked kind of weird and not convenient for adding things like a TVlogc , EVF or other add-ons but I didn't check that out carefully and maybe its fine.

Any other opinions out there?
 
Last edited:
I would add to your list the fact that the F3 retains considerable flexibility, whereas the C300 has you locked into:
1. EF or PL lenses, depending upon which version you purchase. F3 allows you to pick whichever is most appropriate for your shooting needs. No special camera version required.
2. Canon is 8 bit only, despite its internal 50mbs 422 recording. F3, while 8 bit internally, is 10 bit 422 or 444 out SDI.
3. The C300 may be lighter in its most basic form, but add the LCD, handle and XLR cluster and you're up to 6 lbs ... not much less than a similarly configured F3.
4. not sure if the Canon offers 3D ability but F3 does—as an option. But remember, we're considering flexibility.
5. And then there's the ergonomic issue. In this regard both cams have their caveats. As for the C300, I've already begun to see posts where users are considering converting the camera to a shoulder mount affair ... doesn't this defeat the purpose of the small form factor?
6. BTW, stick a big zoom on the front of the C300 and you end up with a exceptionally front heavy system.
Anyway, the a foregoing is simply my personal opinion. I'll stick with my F3. As for its abysmal EVF, both cameras' EVFs are in the wrong place for my needs, and I have no issue with my current Zacuto EVF mounted forward, or perhaps the soon to be released Alphatron.
 
While realizing this is the F3 forum, I would like to give a separate opinion regarding flexibility options and pros for the C300:

1. EF lenses retain powered IS, have remote focus & aperture capabilities via wifi, and vignette illumination correction options. Also, EF lens iris can be adjusted in 1/8 stop increments.
2. On-board codec is universally approved for 100% HD broadcast acquisition, shooting to cheap and readily available CF cards. No need to mount or power an external recorder.
3. Low power consumption allowing for 3 hours or more of record time on one standard battery that fits inside the camera.
4. Ability to be stripped down to a very small and extremely light form factor when LCD, top handle, side handle, and XLR cluster are not needed.
5. With the stripped down form factor, the camera is ideally suited for 3D applications.
6. Handheld ergonomics are very comfortable with no extra support and, with the EVF, can be used just like a DSLR taking still photos. With a prime lens or IS zoom and the three points of contact (hand on handle, hand on lens, EVF at eye), long steady takes are possible with no additional support elements.

To address some of your Cons, Lenilenapi:
- Nikon lenses can easily be adapted to EF mount. Likely a prolock version will be released, if something similar is not available already (I don't shoot with Nikon lenses)
- yes, 8-bit out, but that didn't seem to be a problem for anyone who's shot with it yet, most notably the color and effects heavy film 'XXit.' A lot has been said on this topic, and everyone who has used the camera on set and in post has said it's a non-issue.
- yes, only one SDI out. A LUT for C-Log can be applied to the on-cam LCD, but not through SDI. This is to prevent a production from accidentally recording a LUT image rather than log when using an external recorder with the SDI out.
- Canon has stated that they will release cable contact information for the EXT contacts that lead to the on-cam LCD and XLR modules for third party development, so additional SDI ports may be available through future hardware options.
- Add ons are as simple as any other camera, especially when you start taking away the detachable hardware products (side handle, top handle, etc) and increasing your mounting points.

That being said, I don't expect people that currently own and are happy with an F3 to be terribly tempted by the C300, unless you need a more compact shooting rig. Those evaluating both cameras should take into consideration shooting styles and personal needs before making a decision. Both are excellent cams that offer unique and powerful features.

Also, full disclosure: I do have a C300 on pre-order, so I'm especially interested in it's positive attributes. I did weigh the F3 before I made my decision, but decided that the Canon is more in tune with my shooting needs & subject matters.
 
Last edited:
So far from what I picked up on the net, I can say that if I would be buying a camera these days I would really have some sleepless nights over which one to pick between F3 and C300... But, as being a user/owner of F3 since April, I have no desire to switch to C300 at this point. Having completed my F3 set up with all that I need (plate, dp4 EVF, matte box, ProLock, back up Nikon adapter, pending Contax adapter, and all Nikon/Tokina/Contax-Zeiss lenses, and pix240 to top it off...) it is unreasonable and (business wise) crazy to dump a camera not even year old for another one "hot off the line"...
 
I posted these differences back in November in another thread so some facts may be different now. Comments are definitely welcome, especially biased ones towards the F3. :D

- F3 has a built-in electronic auto exposure tool called TLCS that will allow a user specific amount of gain or shutter speed to be introduced to automatically maintain exposure. This has a lot of uses from ENG, time lapse, etc... Not sure the C300 has anything close to this.

- F3 can be upgraded (maybe free soon?) to 444 RGB. Yes it needs to be recorded off-board but still its an option.

- F3 with SLOG nearly 14.5 stops of dymanic range. C300 ~ 12? Tests anyone?

- F3 does 1080P 60p over dual link.

- 10-bit 422 is a possibility through SDI if needed. The C300 no option.

- Lens mounts: F3 has E-mount for variety of lens mount options supporting Cooke/i and ARRIS LDS protocol. With C300 you decide which lens mount version to buy but are locked to which protocols it might support (ie.EF vs cooke/arri LDS) and thats even if the PL version of the C300 does support cooke/arri LDS.

- Size: well yes at times I use the F3 I wonder why it is so damn big, on the other hand I've used it in public and people think I'm taking photos. Still a light camera weighing in at around 5lbs without battery, etc..


Also, as an F3 owner the C300 does not "piss me off" in the sense of that feeling you get right after you buy something and the next day something "better" comes out. If I had go through the same choice for a ~$20k camera today it would be the F3 again. The F3 offers way more flexibility at the end of the day and to me is more of a "cinema" camera like RED or Alexa. SLOG and 10-bit shooting aside there is some real impressive work out there being done with it right "out of the box".
 
Last edited:
Good points cowpunk52. Especially IS and "On-board codec is universally approved for 100% HD broadcast acquisition"
Another point I don't like about EF zooms though compared to Nikons is that they aren't parfocal.
I wonder how Moire issue compares.
 
judging by the presentation given at Abel ny recently, the method of dealing with moire is one of the most impressive features of the c300. the signal acquisition and processing look more powerful than what mpeg2 can contain. which may not be saying much in itself, but the sub-sampling and moire filtering are really this camera's strong points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top