C200: I'm Sold On the C200...

Tim Nitsch

Tim Nitsch

Well-known member
I was very surprised to see two C200's at the InfoComm expo here in Orlando today.

I got to play with them a little bit and looking at the pictures and videos is one thing, but actually getting to physically hold it, I'm totally sold on it.

The C200 is so solid, it feels like what you would expect a $7,500 digital cinema camera to feel like, not that my C100 feels like a pos, but this is on a totally different level.

The LCD is gorgeous, touch AF was very impressive (even in the dimly lit Canon booth), and the EVF seemed really nice as well.

They also had a C700 with the EVF-V70 on it, and myyyyyy goodness, that EVF (and the C700) is a thing of beauty.

I could definitely see myself picking the V70 up at a later date, it's that good.

Can't wait till August!
 
Last edited:
Nice to hear your views Tim! That touchscreen AF will only become better and better in the next few years.

The days are gone when someone needed a RED Rocket to add to the workstation to edit RAW. Looks like in couple of years, the external recorders will be redundant due to internal raw. Someday the WiFi will be so great that your shots can be directly downloaded to your computer as it gets shot. :)
 
The C200 in paper looks amazing but Historically Canon always protect The most expensive Cameras (in this case C300II and C700) So I will take the specification with a grain of salt until the camera is release and Learn What is What and where they cut the corners. I would love to believe in Canon this time but is a bit hard to forgive and believed a company that let you down in the past.
 
You should always take specs and features with a grain of salt until the camera is released and in professional users hands. Too many people buy into the "latest and greatest" and then are disappointed when all the features don't appear exactly as they thought. This is why some manufacturers have been playing the marketing so cagey. Some are worse than others. I find Canon rather straight forward in what they promise as features. Either they tell you or they say they don't know yet. As far as being disappointed in Canon, there have been some compromises in their very good cameras that people have put up with because of the quality of the image and ease of use in most cases. I have been disappointed in the length of time it took them to bring out the C300 II and C200 but they have brought improvements to both cameras. You always have the choice to move to other companies, many have. As far as being let down by Canon, the cameras I own and have rented have been rock solid.

I am planning on buying the C200, but I will wait until they determine and release the spec s for the XFAVC codec, so that I know what if any extra value the camera will offer. I need at least 422 and can live with 8 bit (would love 10 bit). That is what the original C300 recorded with and it still is a very viable option for many of my projects, docs, local commercials, etc. The fact that the C200 includes 4K raw lite (wait and see on this fuction) could possible make it somewhat future proof, for my needs. People get too caught up in projecting the "perfect camera" and can't see the tools that are offered and make an informed decision. Everyone protects cameras, they just go about it differently depending on their position in the market.
 
Greenheron,

I'm in the same boat as you and agree with most of what you said. However, I don't think Canon is being straightforward in regards to the XFAVC codec. They know it won't be 10 bit but don't want to hurt preorder sales so it's all TBA for the moment. I think the best we can hope for is 8 bit 4:2:2. Still looks to be an amazing camera either way!
 
Alexander.M said:
Greenheron,

I'm in the same boat as you and agree with most of what you said. However, I don't think Canon is being straightforward in regards to the XFAVC codec. They know it won't be 10 bit but don't want to hurt preorder sales so it's all TBA for the moment. I think the best we can hope for is 8 bit 4:2:2. Still looks to be an amazing camera either way!
Click to expand...

Its weird that Sony don't seem to give damn about hurting their sales, the A7s MKI being preceded by the A7S II about 1 year later and both FS7 and FS5 taking the thunder out of F5 and F55 sales for sure.

Maybe Canon are starting to change and will just push forward with raw light in all their future C-line, I mean Apple releases a new iPhone every year so pretty much cameras will be no different...
 
Alex,

I hope you are wrong...but suspect you are exactly right. Not buying another camera that's not 10- bit 4.2.2 internally (at least in HD and hopefully 25/30p 4K in some kind of usable workhorse codec). Otherwise, C200 looks promising. Let's see what the Eva-1 brings to the table...
 
andykwilkinson said:
Alex,

I hope you are wrong...but suspect you are exactly right. Not buying another camera that's not 10 bit 4.2.2 (at least in HD and hopefully 25/30p 4K in some kind of usable workhorse codec). Otherwise, C200 looks promising. Let's see what the Eva-1 brings to the table...
Click to expand...

I just don't have much faith in the EVA1, I could be wrong but Panasonic always seem to fall short and lack that "X factor"

The Varicam LT also looked amazing on paper and yet hasn't made that much of impact I feel, so I think the C200 may actually slowly gain popularity but if Canon continue to update the C300 MKII then I see both cameras owned together for different needs.

I still love the the look of the old Red Epic Mx which is probably not far off the price of the C200 but with the added dual pixel af and low light, Canon practicality, the C200 is going to be interesting
 
Last edited:
The LT is a fine camera; it's just too expensive for most people in 2016/2017.

I know inferior cameras were 10x more back in the day, but today there are too many options for less than $10K - and even $5K - that can get the job done well.
 
NorBro said:
The LT is a fine camera; it's just too expensive for most people in 2016/2017.

I know inferior cameras were 10x more back in the day, but today there are too many options for less than $10K - let alone $5K - that can get the job done well.
Click to expand...

Yep, you can pick up an Red Epic MX package for less than $10,000 which has 5K 100fps+ but data is still high and practicality for anything run n gun is not ideal but thats where we are, I think the C200 is probably going surprise quite a few as internal raw is pretty hard to beat added with all the Canon practicality of media, power and low light.
 
Last edited:
cane141 said:
Those high end shows are mostly shot on the Varicam 35 which is no way in the same league, kind of like comparing an FS7 to an F65...
Click to expand...

The Varicam LT has the identical sensor as the Varicam 35, and from what I understand the LT produces a very similar if not identical image to the 35. ( the LT does not have the same high frame rate features as the 35 )
 
TheDingo said:
The Varicam LT has the identical sensor as the Varicam 35, and from what I understand the LT produces a very similar if not identical image to the 35. ( the LT does not have the same high frame rate features as the 35 )
Click to expand...

This is my understanding as well. The Varicam LT is an amazing camera, I've seen many features and episodic shot on the Varicam 35, not as many on the LT as it is more geared toward OMB/Documentary/Event. If I had the $$, I would buy it over the C200 in a heartbeat.
 
You could probably sell all of your cameras and other equipment - and downgrade a bit (overall in other areas) - and buy one now, ha.
 
Nah, I want a third C300 Mark II as well. :)

I do lots of three cam interview shoots. Also, with multiple camera bodies of different levels, I can double book jobs with clients of different budgets while managing crews using my gear which I then charge the clients for.

The C200 looks like a good alternative to Black Magic, as in, 4K RAW for a reasonable price, but like Black Magic, it seems to lack catering to actual well paid shoots.

So, the low budget indies will like the camera, but they don't pay squat. In the high end where 4K RAW is viable, they'll want a better camera than the C200. In the mid range, they want at least 4:2:2, perhaps at 10 bit, but not RAW, so the C200 looses the C300's client base, leaving the C200 with no good paying client base.

In the lower end corporate where 4:2:0 is good enough, the C200 can get clients, but they may not have the budget to pay for the rental rate of the C200 which is 2-4 times the cost of a C100, which is good enough for most of those shoots. So, some may buy the C200 for that client base, hoping to up charge for it, but not being able to, so then they eat the costs, and can still use RAW on their occasional unpaid/low paid indie shoots.

So from a profit standpoint, I'm having trouble justifying a C200 purchase, particularly as a freelancer.
 
Last edited:
Eric Coughlin said:
I'm having trouble justifying a C200 purchase, particularly as a freelancer.
Click to expand...

My clients tend to fit one of two categories.

They either want very high quality, for things like music videos, commercials or narrative projects.

And for me, C-RAW Light is going to fit that perfectly.

Or they don't necessarily care about 8bit vs 10bit vs 12bit, or 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2.

They just want the wedding, or discussion panel, or sporting event filmed.

They still want it to look good obviously, but 8bit 4:2:0 is going to work just fine, or if I need a little bit more (sometimes sports can benefit with a little more data as fine grass detail can be hard on low bit rate codes), the XF-AVC option will fill that gap.


For me, the C200 is a clear winner, even over a C300 mk2.

In my eyes the C200 combines what I love about my C100 and what I wanted from a RED Raven/Scarlet.

I get the efficient long format recording capability, XLRs, built in NDs, and the user friendliness of a C100 with the raw flexibility, higher frame rates, and overall higher image quality of a RED (with much nicer color though ;D), in one camera.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top