Fs700 vs C300 Questions on internal recordings and documentary

H

Hanad

Member
do you think the sony fs700 would be good for documentary work? I keep hearing philip bloom saying the c300 is great for documentaries, but the only difference I can see between it and the fs700 is the internal bit rate of 50mbs 4:22 (Broadcast minimum) as opposed to 24mbits 4:20. If I use an extranel recorder like the ninja, black magic, Nanoflash etc then would that put the Fs700 on same level with the c300? The other thing to consider is the new powered zoom lense 18-200mm that would be available in november. This will make it soo much easier to film documentary and wedding work, as you would be able to use the rocker. I do love the image of the c300 and was wondering if you could get the same on the sony fs700.

Thanks

Hanad
 
Hi Hanad,

I'm asking myself the exact same question. I just got the FS700 and love it's slow motion, but I'm so impressed with the colors and picture quality coming out of the C300. The only other difference I could mention is how extraordinary the C300 is in low light conditions. Really stunning, and it's what's making me lust after that camera. I personally could only get hold of it if I financed it over 2 years. That's why I'm waiting to see some footage from the C100.
 
Yes, and external recorder on an FS700 can give you an equivalent recording format, or better, than the C300's internal recording. But there are trade-offs to be made for that.

A lot of what makes the C300 exceptional for documentary work, aside from the low-light, dynamic range, and internal codec, is the form factor and ergonomics. This is where, IMO, the FS700 really fails in competition with the C300 and/or C100 for doc style shooting. I've used the FS100 and handled the FS700, and both are extremely cumbersome for even short amounts of off-tripod work. I suppose a well-made shoulder mount system would help with those cameras, but that does add to the weight and complexity of shooting - and I've always felt that for doc work, the more simple you can keep things, the better. Of course, YMMV.
 
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks it would be nicer (ergonomically) to shoot with the C300 or in my case the C100 over the FS100/700.

I love the slow motion capabilities of the FS700 but I love the form factor of the C100 even more.

Man if the C100 had 1080-60p or even 720-60p, it would make my decision so much easier.
 
Aside from the codec and egonomics, the big difference is the "magical" chip in the C300.....super low light & incredible range (light & dark in the same shot and get them both right).

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

ps- one of the best and most important ways to judge a camera is to think about the everyday stuff..parts of the camera that you will use all day long, shoot after shoot....not necessarily what you use on a limited basis.
 
I agree the chip is more magical than the FS700, although a good understanding of the profiles could change this, also there is more data which gets you the very valuable BBC ticket if you need it.

the image is doubtless better.

Im confused by the ergonomics, its got a screen that is not that high res - yet you have to keep it onboard to Get XLR,

So if you want a better screen the thing becomes a right mess

Do canon do an 18-200? I dont think so, and this is the grab all lens for doco

Shame the sony 18-200 is not that good (but the F3 version is probably built a bit better)

That single lens could push you to the F3.

If you are handholding its shameful to say but 60p is an incredible stabilit aid, I can shoot with a non IS 300 with my FS at 60p and that is super useful for doco

The kit lens on the sony will hold focus on moving objects pretty well if they are centre framed bikes cars whatever - does the canon have any AF?

And the FS100 is bunch cheaper so you can get a holiday or a new Mac too or a BMC camera and get 240FPS which iscool even if not a winning feature

If the C300 was priced as the C100 it would be a winner

Oh .. handholding standing interviews - the canon is so tall that the lens is oddly low if you use the rear eye jobee and if you put it on a shoulder rig the lens gets too high and the rig unbalanced

Frankly all of these cameras are an ergonomic dogs breatfast the F3 being least bad becuase you have a passable ENG lens available

IMO

S
 
I agree Sam about the screen and XLRs on the C300 - mind numbingly stupid - but the rest of the buttons are all well thought out. I find shooting on a mono pod works best for run and gun and I bosh it on a steady bag strapped round my neck if I need to be mobile, so no need for a silly shoulder rig. There are plenty of lens option that fit most budgets too, so no worries there.

Those Sony cameras have some nice tricks, but they look like they were designed by their CCTV department.
 
Every one has a shoot style, personally I find monopods horrid for many reasons, if there was a really good one, that could change (ball on the bottom, ball at the top, easy to adjust height, ideally a foot release plate to unlock the bottom ball and height adjuster)

On the image, I agree to some extent, but I think dodgy profiles widely touted on these fora and in other places by 'experts' who have spent one day with the camera, have done huge damage to the rep of the FS100 for one; the FS700 looks even better almost out of the box. Here is my sony used with my own profile in the most challenging of conditions, including a VND, .. (uncut ungraded Broll from a larger project), the some of the shots are from the $700 Nex5n .. https://vimeo.com/49049691 PWD pixel . I use it paired with my FS100, I coud buy two more and still have wonga left from a C300 budget, you will also observe that 50p in this case allowed moving handheld with a 300! (most of the wide shots are the NEX5n apart from the closing shot)

Overall I think all of these cams are a bit crappy and therefore think spending the least money now is the best move.

Hang in for the next gen or a used F3, many options are there depending what you are shooting and when

S
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
Overall I think all of these cams are a bit crappy and therefore think spending the least money now is the best move.
Click to expand...

Highly subjective. If I operated by this mantra, I wouldn't be making a living doing what I do. If you make personal films for Vimeo, then I can understand that you want to spend the least amount possible - but that's going to involve compromises in IQ and usability. The C300 wasn't made for weekend filmmakers, and is priced accordingly.
 
Last edited:
atarijedi said:
Don't forget that the FS700 will, eventually, have a 4k capture and raw recording capabilities.
Click to expand...

Never buy a camera for some future capability it may have at an undisclosed date and price. It really shouldn't even factor into consideration. Get a camera because it fulfills a need you have right now.
 
cowpunk52 said:
They do: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-18-200mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx



Judging by market adoption, at it's current price it already is.
Click to expand...

Lens. Nice focus ring!

Sure. Market adoption is one thing - actually making a profit is another.

It is my guess that rental prices (from a house or just billed by the owner op, either as a line item or a higher dayrate) will crash as acceptable cameras become cheaper and anyone saddled with loans/leases on old tech will find themselves at a competitive disadvantage - that could happen very very fast.

I am speaking from the perspective of someone who leased and paid for at least $50k of stills cameras that could now bettered by cameras available at Best Buy for under $2k

That lease experience had mixed attributes, for example my first lease, moving out of film to (three) nikon D1 the lease was cheaper than my film/processing monthly bills - it worked a clear winner - my second lease, a highend digiback, won me a magazine contract, but the trade/off was far more marginal as the lease costs brought the margin of that new contract down considerably and if I had lost the contract it in the first three years, I didnt, I would have been highly compromised.

Do you know any magazines who pay a digital fee today? That happened when we retooled to digital for about six months in editorial publishing. Mags stopped paying for film and started paying digital fees to help us with our leases, and then stopped paying for digital, the winners were the mags not the owners/operators/agencies.

I wonder what the true financial story of F35 and the like is?

S
 
Last edited:
I saw an interview of Roger Deakins with Arri's MD. Roger Deakins was talking of keeping things simple. He said he doesn't want to use zooms as he doesn't use it for zooming in and out and the zooms are big. He wants to use primes so that the overall configuration is small and simple. I am never comfortable when people are starring at me. Minimalist configuration is what I prefer. These Canon cameras are great at that.
 
The OPs requirement is to do "film documentary and wedding work"

Very different from Mr Deakins.

Even Charles Papert (see the cinematography pages) uses zooms as a time saver.

A huge plus of the C300/Canon lens combo is the ability if you dont use a MB or FF is to swap lenses fast and have the settings carry across (compared to the FS100 which needs offboard ND, or the FS700/nikon lenses)

S
 
Hey guys thank you for all the information, it was helpful. But I can't still decide. I mean the codec and look of the C300 is amazing. But I like the fs700 because I feel like I will be able to be more flexible with the camera...I mean I love the slow motion and because of the short flange distance, I can put any lens I want, compared to the c300 and the slow mo would be great for sports or action sequences. I don't know about the 4k yet, so I am not buying it for that at the moment, but if it proves to work well and be priced well then it would be a worthy investment, it a gamble though...Cowpunk52 you mention that its the form factor is what is letting the camera down, but I think a simple compact rig would solve the issue. and does the dynamic range improve with an external recorder? Last I checked the low light capabilities were quite good for the camera, but not as good as the canon c300. (possibly 10% worse than the c300, but it could be because of the codec.)

I am confused and don't know if I should at £3500 extra on top of the fs700 price for the c300, I think its quite expensive for what it has...There were also rumours saying the fs700 would get a new codec...(could be 50mbt 4:2:2, it could be worse!)so I think its better to wait a bit..
 
cowpunk52 said:
Never buy a camera for some future capability it may have at an undisclosed date and price. It really shouldn't even factor into consideration. Get a camera because it fulfills a need you have right now.
Click to expand...

That's how you sleep at night. Best advice you can get.
 
Hanad said:
I am confused and don't know if I should at £3500 extra on top of the fs700 price for the c300, I think its quite expensive for what it has...There were also rumours saying the fs700 would get a new codec...(could be 50mbt 4:2:2, it could be worse!)so I think its better to wait a bit..
Click to expand...

If in doubt, rent. At the very least get down to a salesroom or an exhibition and have a good play with the cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top