C200: I have the C200 and C300 MKII - My quick thoughts

C

cane141

Well-known member
I have had both the C200 and the C300 MKII for the past week and while I'm not a "Camera tests" guy I will give my quick very basic thoughts on both cameras together.

The C300 MKII has been a workhorse for me for around a year and I actually really like the Canon ergonomics compared to my previous Sony FS7, for me, I just love the image, the color tones and what I can pull from C-LOG2 especially.

Now the C200 has been released I realized it would be a great 2nd / b-cam or gimbal cam for when those situations arise, but most of all, I figured the RAW would give me something extra on more special shoots where I can manage the post and up the ante on the image quality.

Playing with the C200 raw image, reminds me of the Red one and has similar tones, it also has me falling back in love with what raw can offer you in grading. I used to love being handed Red MX rushes back when I was an editor and where I could push it to in grading. R3D is well established today and is much easier and efficient with NLE's than it used to be.

I don't do broadcast jobs that much, and if I have, occasionally for news channels, I have shot on cameras in the past like the C100/A7S2 without any bit rate issues, so I don't feel like I need the safe 10bit internal codec personally, it's just nice to have for when I do but I still shoot in 4K 10bit or 2K 12bit internally to get the best possible image I can at this level.

With the C200, I wanted the extra frame rates as nearly most of my work is corporate and brand activations and if I shoot carefully, I can get away with shooting raw and get the extra punch with the higher frame rate on the C200.

Most shooters probably wouldn't entertain shooting raw for most jobs, but then if you are that guy, then really, the C300 MKII 2K 60fps is still awesome, I feel the 10bit image is much stronger internally over the C200 8bit after looking at clips on a timeline but I know most wouldn't care so much.

The bottom line is, if you shoot long corporate interviews and intend on servicing the broadcast industry or long form documentaries, then hands down, the C300 MKII is the clear winner but it also excels in efficiency with the internal 10bit saving time on transcoding etc.

If you do more creative jobs/promos,fashion or similar that you can deliver as full turnkey, and handle the post production exclusively, then the C200 is pretty much one step below a RED Raven or SW and it's not far behind at all. This camera is in its element when shooting raw and it would be a big waste to buy it for the 8bit 4K 60fps, I would argue the C300 MKII shooting 2K 10bit at 60fps is a better image after playing with both 4K 8bit 60fps vs 2K 10bit 60fps on the timeline.

For me, my take away is, I still intend on selling my C300 MKII because I don't do much broadcast and I would like to either get another C200 to match or possibly another raw camera such as the Red SW to take advantage of the image in post in the same way. I like gimbal shots and the C200 shooting raw with DAF is a no brainer on a light gimbal to run alongside something like a RED as A-Cam

Both cameras CAN match with C-Log 3 but they are still slightly different beasts in image, either way, you'll be shooting a C200 raw image vs a C300 II 10bit internal image or 8bit vs 10bit. For pixel peepers and purists, this makes it slightly annoying shooting both Canon cameras side by side but then I've had a variety of cameras on shoots in the past and haven't had many issues matching the image when shooting log.

Overall both cameras are very good at what they do but they are different animals and do service different needs.
 

Attachments

  • C200 5.jpg
    C200 5.jpg
    14.3 KB · Views: 0
  • C200 4.jpg
    C200 4.jpg
    11.7 KB · Views: 0
  • c200 3.jpg
    c200 3.jpg
    11.9 KB · Views: 0
  • C200 1.jpg
    C200 1.jpg
    10.1 KB · Views: 0
  • c200 2.jpg
    c200 2.jpg
    9 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
dave12781 said:
Great write up, but this camera is definitely a step above the Red Raven.
Click to expand...

Well, it's a conversation to be had for sure.

R3d is actually pretty stable and efficient today and Canon raw light needs time yet to ease in, it'll get better, but a Raven or the Scarlet-W I think yields a stronger cinematic image in experienced hands.
 
I landed a red Raven and would also agree the c200 footage looks better. Maybe in a studio settting the raven would do better? The red Raven had much more noise, harder to use with no ND filters, and something about the footage just didn't do it for me.

Is there anyway you can post screenshots comparing both cameras or maybe a short video showing clips side by side?
 
Crevice said:
I landed a red Raven and would also agree the c200 footage looks better. Maybe in a studio settting the raven would do better? The red Raven had much more noise, harder to use with no ND filters, and something about the footage just didn't do it for me.

Is there anyway you can post screenshots comparing both cameras or maybe a short video showing clips side by side?
Click to expand...

There's already clips out there that compare both : https://vimeo.com/220746514
and that explain the comparison better.

On my next shoot if i get use both, I'll see then but for now, I think Cloakroom media already nailed it.
 
Thanks so much for the comparison.
Two questions:
Do the colors and white balance match when set to the same color matrix, for example "production camera"?
If you plug the C200 monitor into the C300 II, does the image pass through?
 
Size. Battery life. Lens options. Auto-focus. Low Light. XLR audio. And that is only some of the talking points that put this camera in a category (or 6 actually) above Red's Raven.

Red has only one distinct advantage - it's name, which is a step below Arri.
 
The RAVEN has more than one advantage:

Let's start with 4.5K resolution at 120 frames per second. 18:1 compression isn't the best for 120p, but still very nice compared to any high-speed option from any Canon camera ever made.

16.5 stops (arguable) - 2K ProRes up to 60p - 300fps @2K - locking EF mount - superior focus and exposure tools - stills capabilities - HDRX - prerecording - speed ramp mode - burst mode...tons of other complicated features that I can't even explain. And the various modules all work so beautifully together.

---

It's not a popularity contest, but ARRI and RED have dominated the industry forever. The only reason the C200 is being compared to the Raven is because people see RAW in the marketing info.

Where were/are the comparisons between the C300 Mark II, which is still a superior camera!!
 
Whats the raw 12bit and 10bit bit rate? curipus if netflix will add this tp there list but bitrate must be over like 225mbs
 
It's close to 1000mbps for the bit rate for Cinema Raw Light in the C200.

If the Red One camera hadn't been a raw shooting camera when it was originally released no one would have paid attention to it either. At the time, Sony, Ikgami and Panasonic were the kings - selling for ridiculous prices and barely competing with the current c200 specs.
 
I agree. Based on the cloakroom media video, the C200 raw has more details then the C300 II. One needs to buy these cameras based on their own needs.
 
I don't mean to derail this thread, but seeing as how most of you have experience with the C200 now, how does it compare, image quality and workflow wise, with something like a RED Scarlet-W?

I am in the market for a cinematic production type camera -- and I am aware that the C200 has better auto focus, built in NDs and probably better low light? Is it a total winner over the 2 year old RED Scarlet-W?

My understanding is the RED Scarlet-W has the beefier 5K image quality under well lit conditions and faster high speed framerates. I read that the RED Scarlet-W also has competent auto focus, or you can setup focus marks and control the lens with your iPhone.

And any comparisons on dynamic range?

Thank you.
 
Budgieboots said:
I don't mean to derail this thread, but seeing as how most of you have experience with the C200 now, how does it compare, image quality and workflow wise, with something like a RED Scarlet-W?

I am in the market for a cinematic production type camera -- and I am aware that the C200 has better auto focus, built in NDs and probably better low light? Is it a total winner over the 2 year old RED Scarlet-W?

My understanding is the RED Scarlet-W has the beefier 5K image quality under well lit conditions and faster high speed framerates. I read that the RED Scarlet-W also has competent auto focus, or you can setup focus marks and control the lens with your iPhone.

And any comparisons on dynamic range?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

It seems to really boil down to what you want to shoot and how you want to shoot it. Both cameras can make pretty images but the Canon is much better suited to run & gun documentary type of work, perhaps with some corporate, short film, music video work thrown in while the Scarlet W is more geared toward true cinematic work with ACs, focus pulling, crews, grip and lighting. The C200 romps all over the Scarlet in low light. Your overall investment in RED will cost a lot more, even factoring in CFast cards for the C200. Different cameras for different uses. Many have said that under cinema type shooting conditions with nice lighting, the Scarlet images look more "cinematic", not that you cannot make cinematic imagery with the C200.

I would make a choice based upon what you will mostly shoot. My producing partner has a Scarlet (not a W) and he barely ever uses it these days because it is a big hassle to set it up and use it and we have been shooting a lot of run & gun type documentary footage on my C200. REDs generally, are not good run & gun cameras, external NDs, expensive media, sub-par audio, they are designed for crewed cinema production more than run & gun or event.
 
So dan, you have been pretty silent in the panasonic board lately... what did you think of the 3 short films that were shown? The iceland shoot had 2 different grades...

are you still keeping your pre-order on the EVA1? i believe sometime next year someone will do a shootout between the EVA's raw output and the C200's internal raw, do you find C200's color resembles more with C300 ii or C700? i personally would like to see how much difference the C700's codex raw vs C200's 12bit internal raw will be when it comes to color grading, vfx etc...
 
Does the Zacuto C300 Z-Finder Pro fit onto the c200 lcd? want to use it with my recoil shoulder rig. not sure if there is a cheaper alternative to attach onto my monitor to make it a evf.
 
peter917 said:
Does the Zacuto C300 Z-Finder Pro fit onto the c200 lcd? want to use it with my recoil shoulder rig. not sure if there is a cheaper alternative to attach onto my monitor to make it a evf.
Click to expand...

Thats a Zacuto question, call 'em and ask them, they're very helpful and real people answer the phone.
 
Amira-user said:
So dan, you have been pretty silent in the panasonic board lately... what did you think of the 3 short films that were shown? The iceland shoot had 2 different grades...

are you still keeping your pre-order on the EVA1? i believe sometime next year someone will do a shootout between the EVA's raw output and the C200's internal raw, do you find C200's color resembles more with C300 ii or C700? i personally would like to see how much difference the C700's codex raw vs C200's 12bit internal raw will be when it comes to color grading, vfx etc...
Click to expand...

I thought the films looked very good seeing them on a large screen projected, overall, I think it's a pretty cool camera. FWIW, I plan on getting my hands on a shipping model for a review for HD Video Pro, I need some hands on time with it and I need to compare it side by side with my C200 to make a decision. I wasn't impressed with the EVA 1 LCD arm at the Hollywood event, it seemed broken, we tightened it down as much as we could and tried mounting the Zacuto loupe and the arm wouldn't hold up the LCD and the Zacuto, it was all floppy. But that was a roadshow camera and dumb people probably manhandled the arm and broke it so I would wait to see what it is like on a shipping model. And FWIW, I really dislike the touch screen arm on my C200 and I am already working with other solutions for mounting it besides the stock arm.

I've never shot with the C700 beyond some tests at Canon with the Codex back but I did a shoot last week in Atlanta with my C200 and a rented C300 MKII and the cameras weren't identical but relatively close when I compared them side by side on a Small HD 17" monitor. Shot C-Log 3 on both so they should match relatively well in post and CC. I am not handling post so I can't really make a side by side comparison but when the pieces come out on YouTube, I will definitely link to them and you can draw your own conclusions.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top