C200: If you see any killer lightly used C200 deals...

ahalpert said:
You may want to wait until April. Apparently the c200mk2 is coming, which should cause c200 prices to hit rock bottom https://www.canonrumors.com/the-can...campaign=Feed:+canonrumors/rss+(Canon+Rumors)
Click to expand...

I cannot imagine that there is a large enough subset of canon C200 users that would instantly jump ship to the canon C200Mkii to where used prices will drop much more than they already have. Having had two of them myself I will fully admit that the original was an odd camera in a weird middle of no man’s land and I would guess that users will stick with their current camera or move over to a mirrorless, C70, or like myself already upgraded to the c300mkiii/c500mkii.

If as that post predicts that the only thing coming to the C200mk2 is marginal IQ increase and maybe a better codec I don’t think that’s going to move the needle for many people, especially when you can get “cooler” new features that come in the newer cameras mentioned above. If anything this camera sounds like the perfect camera for people to ditch their C300mkii’s that they’ve been holding onto.
 
Last edited:
They'll most likely keep it EF, add 10-bit as noted on CR, and with RAW and one other little surprise and some people will buy it over the C70.

Good opportunity to finally get 12-bit 4K/60p CRL to further mix everything up. Maybe ProRes RAW.

Improve the AF.

Incremental updates...2020, 2021, 2022...masters.
 
Barry1908 said:
I’ve used the Sony 18-110 with the fs7and found it to
be sloppy to in the zoom and focus and also found the image pretty uninspiring too.
Click to expand...

My version is perfect in zoom and focus - and even works a treat with AF on my A7sIII. As for "uninspiring"... I don't necessarily disagree with you. I certainly didn't "lust" after or really pine for that lens at all. And it didn't change my life and doesn't give beautiful bokeh. But funny thing, after resisting purchasing it for almost a year, for most of my work, that range and not having to switch lenses in fast paced shoot environments, it does inspire confidence and repeat clients.

chris f said:
Keep in mind f/4 = T4.4 on the canon lens, so despite the lower number on the Sony lens you’re not actually gaining any increase in exposure.
Click to expand...

True. But I find it semi-interesting that with today's cameras & dual ISO, that f/4 is so looked down upon - especially with full frame and frankly, even s35. If Sony didn't have that 18 -110 f/4, I would have certainly bought the Canon 18-80 and used with adapter.
 
chris f said:
I cannot imagine that there is a large enough subset of canon C200 users that would instantly jump ship to the canon C200Mkii to where used prices will drop much more than they already have. Having had two of them myself I will fully admit that the original was an odd camera in a weird middle of no man’s land and I would guess that users will stick with their current camera or move over to a mirrorless, C70, or like myself already upgraded to the c300mkiii/c500mkii.

If as that post predicts that the only thing coming to the C200mk2 is marginal IQ increase and maybe a better codec I don’t think that’s going to move the needle for many people, especially when you can get “cooler” new features that come in the newer cameras mentioned above. If anything this camera sounds like the perfect camera for people to ditch their C300mkii’s that they’ve been holding onto.
Click to expand...

it doesn't have to be a large subset to move the needle

a 20% temporary uptick in used camera sales matched with slightly diminished interest due to the follow-up, and Dan might be able to score one south of $3k. but I've found that prices can stabilize again after the initial wave of upgraders

at any rate, the release certainly won't do anything to increase prices on the used c200
 
ahalpert said:
it doesn't have to be a large subset to move the needle

a 20% temporary uptick in used camera sales matched with slightly diminished interest due to the follow-up, and Dan might be able to score one south of $3k. but I've found that prices can stabilize again after the initial wave of upgraders

at any rate, the release certainly won't do anything to increase prices on the used c200
Click to expand...

I'm not in a hurry and based upon specs, I dont see anything in the rumored MKII specs that would make me hot for one. Same problem as the C70, the DGO sensor likely wouldn't color and noise match to my existing C200.
If I can score clean used C200s when this thing is announced for under $3k, I'll get two or three of them. If you approach the C200 MKI as a RAW camera that also shoots a high quality XF-AVC that's good enough to 90% of shoots and
requirements, then the idea of the incremental upgrade MKII is lame. Owning 13 EF mount leses, RF mount is a negative if it has it because then I have to buy a damn adapter and I don't like using adapted lenses over native. 10-bit 4:2:2, meh. Wouldn't mind it
but it's not something that would make me buy a new camera. Seems like the waiting game now. Just like I had to wait like two years to find a deal on used CN E 18-80mm, I'm pretty patient.
 
Dan, for what it's worth... EF to RF using a Canon adapter is seamless. You really can't tell the difference between native RF and EF on the R5. If I bought a C70 (maybe someday) I'd probably get the adapter that bolts on and makes it look full frame and just leave it connected. I have the native RF 24-105L and 35mm macro for photographic purposes on my RF... and they're nice to keep it compact... but it works just as well with my EF glass (70-200/2.8L IS II, 85/1.8, 50/1.8 STM, Sigma 120-300/2.8 w/ and w/o teleconverters, Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC).

The Canon EF to RF adapter sure isn't anything like a buggy Metabones (or worse).
 
Barry1908 said:
I’ve used the Sony 18-110 with the fs7and found it to
be sloppy to in the zoom and focus and also found the image pretty uninspiring too.
Click to expand...

I’ve used them both as well and I found the Sony to
easily be on par with the Canon. I actually liked it better
(and it has an extra 30mm reach to boot.) But that all
misses my point which was simply that no, the Canon
is not the ‘only one that makes a lens that comes close
to’ an 18-80 F4.
 
jbregar said:
Dan, for what it's worth... EF to RF using a Canon adapter is seamless. You really can't tell the difference between native RF and EF on the R5. If I bought a C70 (maybe someday) I'd probably get the adapter that bolts on and makes it look full frame and just leave it connected. I have the native RF 24-105L and 35mm macro for photographic purposes on my RF... and they're nice to keep it compact... but it works just as well with my EF glass (70-200/2.8L IS II, 85/1.8, 50/1.8 STM, Sigma 120-300/2.8 w/ and w/o teleconverters, Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC).

The Canon EF to RF adapter sure isn't anything like a buggy Metabones (or worse).
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's true, I read that the EF 24-105mm IS II with the .71x Canon adaptor is going to be the hot tip. That is intriguing but I edited some outdoor interviews the other day that I shot on the C200 a couple of years ago in RAW. Not even lit,
just available light in the shade with harsh sunlight behind talent and the image is still so good, really looked the same as RED or Arri in that particular case. C70 has better image, but for my needs, the C200, shooting Cinema RAW Light
and my CN E 18-80mm t/4.4 is plenty good for what I shoot. I'm still in love with that image. The new sensor is better but not a lot better, a little better to my eye. If I didn't own a camera, I'd probably get the C70 or the C300 MKIII
but the C200 still looks very good to my eye and it's paid for! I think that the camera is somewhat underrated simply becaus it was missing a 10-bit XF-AVC codec. I have a C300 MKII for that ;-)
 
puredrifting said:
Yeah, that's true, I read that the EF 24-105mm IS II with the .71x Canon adaptor is going to be the hot tip. That is intriguing but I edited some outdoor interviews the other day that I shot on the C200 a couple of years ago in RAW. Not even lit,
just available light in the shade with harsh sunlight behind talent and the image is still so good, really looked the same as RED or Arri in that particular case. C70 has better image, but for my needs, the C200, shooting Cinema RAW Light
and my CN E 18-80mm t/4.4 is plenty good for what I shoot. I'm still in love with that image. The new sensor is better but not a lot better, a little better to my eye. If I didn't own a camera, I'd probably get the C70 or the C300 MKIII
but the C200 still looks very good to my eye and it's paid for! I think that the camera is somewhat underrated simply becaus it was missing a 10-bit XF-AVC codec. I have a C300 MKII for that ;-)
Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing wrong with the C200. I just had an opportunity to get the upgrade to the C300 Mark III, so I jumped. It's not really even an image thing... the images from both look fantastic to me... it's handling. I'm winding up in situations where multiple, different SDI outputs is VERY handy and I'm using timecode a lot. Also, I'm doing enough shoulder shooting that the C200 whispering sweet (hot) nothings in my ear over a longer shoot was getting tiring.

I also consolidated way too many specialized cameras into a C300-3 and the R5. Prior to that I had a C200 (most everything), Z-Cam (b-cam and for HFR stuff), a 5D Mark IV (stills and some gimbal and for when I want the "full frame" look) and a GH5 (mostly lived on my gimbal). With the C300-3 and R5, I pretty much have all of those bases covered in two cameras that both use the same media cards and have a similar look... and both have that yummy Canon DPAF.

I think my next camera purchase will honestly be an XF400/405 or XF705. I just had a 405 here for a demo and I'm kind of floored by how good it is. I wish the body was more "pro" but the image and AF are great. The 705 fixes those issues, but that price is just off-the-charts insane for what it is in 2020.
 
jbregar said:
I also consolidated way too many specialized cameras into a C300-3 and the R5.
Click to expand...

That combo has to be one of the most awesome camera combos to ever exist. There are a lot of good cameras, but that price to quality and usability is kind of off the charts good. Never wold've imagined it in 2018, or even 2019, for that matter.
 
James0b57 said:
That combo has to be one of the most awesome camera combos to ever exist. There are a lot of good cameras, but that price to quality and usability is kind of off the charts good. Never wold've imagined it in 2018, or even 2019, for that matter.
Click to expand...

I'd agree. I've spent about a month and a half with this duo and I'm finding the combo to be not only formidable image-wise, but seamless to move between. They both just feel so comfortable to shoot with.

One of my doc projects looks like it's going to be fully-funded too... so they'll get a workout soon.

Also, the R5 is a stupid stupid good stills camera. I shot some headshots for my buddy's band and I couldn't believe the stills I was getting out of it.
 
Yeah the R5 has really had a flawless launch and been universally praised and accepted....sorry, couldn't resist

But yeah, good looking camera. I definitely would have bought one if it could do 4k60p FF without overheating

Meanwhile for those who can stomach Sony and want better reliability, there's the FX6/A7SIII, the sony version of the c300mk3/r5. Or maybe the FX6 is supposed to compete with the C70. But it feels more like C300mk3 capabilities I feel like
 
ahalpert said:
Yeah the R5 has really had a flawless launch and been universally praised and accepted....sorry, couldn't resist

But yeah, good looking camera. I definitely would have bought one if it could do 4k60p FF without overheating

Meanwhile for those who can stomach Sony and want better reliability, there's the FX6/A7SIII, the sony version of the c300mk3/r5. Or maybe the FX6 is supposed to compete with the C70. But it feels more like C300mk3 capabilities I feel like
Click to expand...


The FX6 "competes" (kinda does, kinda doesn't) against the C300mk3 but at a C70 price!
 
I’m invested enough in Canon glass and dislike third party hacky lens adapters enough that the FX6 and A7SIII were never really going to be my thing.

The A7S3 also isn’t half the stills camera the R5 is... which is really important for me (I still make a lot of money shooting stills).

I’ve had the R5 for a while now. Hasn’t overheated yet.
 
jbregar said:
I’ve had the R5 for a while now. Hasn’t overheated yet.
Click to expand...

What modes/framerates are you using?

I dunno...just the thought of worrying about it on a shoot is giving me a knot in my stomach.

I have a lot of EF glass as well, although mostly manual. I sank about $4200 into E-mount glass and I feel pretty darn well-rounded now. I also hear some grousing that native RF glass does better AF than EF glass. Dunno. I wanted to get the R5. Still feels like the one that got away
 
The R5 isn’t a long-rolling camera... at least for me. It’s short b-roll stuff. I have the C300 MkIII for long rolling.

I have a couple of native RF lenses... 24-105L and the 35mm macro. If the AF is better than EF, it’s awfully close.

I’m honestly kinda done owning two lens mounts. Nothing’s more funding wasteful IMO than buying the same lens 2-3 times. I also kind of hate that most e-mount glass has “fly by wire” focusing. I was all Sony at one point... trying to MF some of that e-mount glass drove me nuts. Maybe the fly by wire focusing has gotten better, I haven’t used a Sony camera since I sent the FS5M2 back.
 
Yeah, wouldn't work for me. I need to roll long. You dont use yours for 2nd angle interview shots?

Owning multiple lens mounts sucks. I think I'm just going e mount from here on. I've considered selling my ef lenses, but... I can't mount e mount on my m43 cameras, which I still use. fs7 + speedbooster + ef is useful. They stay, for now

I focus manually infrequently on the A7S3, but the times I've had to do it have worked for me. Fly by wire not ideal but I can work with it. I also have all my ef lenses, manual focus lenses etc, if for some reason I want to go all-manual. I don't mind using an adapter, so I see little downside in adapting lenses if you're not using autofocus

Sony for me was a bow to client demand and embracing a lower price point. Fs7 has been so popular that I figure people aren't as attuned to color science as gearheads are. Even then, I like the A7S3 color. Sony cameras are cheaper than the canon equivalents. Lots of high-quality, cheap lenses for E mount now. But I dont shoot a lot of stills, which would change the equation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top