C200: I'm Sold On the C200...

DLD said:
But look at the timeline. Then project technology forward. 8-bit 4:2:0 was good enough yesterday. 10-bit 4:2:2 is good enough today. Compressed Raw might/should become the standard tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Tomorrow as in years from now. Red has had compressed RAW for awhile, with even lower data rates than the C200's RAW lite. I don't see broadcast (or a lot of mid range projects) using RAW hardly ever.

Buy a camera for today, I say, not for tomorrow, because tomorrow you'll want/need a new camera anyway.


Consider the Samsung NX-1. At first people were like, "H.265, cool. Extra efficient codec. Nice. Oh, wait, nothing can edit this. I need to convert it to a less efficient code. Now I'm back to square one, but needing to do more work in post. What was Samsung thinking? Why did they release a camera with only a future codec?" They released a camera for tomorrow, in today's world, and that didn't go so well. If the Samsung NX-1 also had an H.264 codec, then even though that's an inferior codec, the camera would have sold better on release since more people could currently use that codec, just like the C200 would sell better if it also had the AVC codec, which it will eventually get, in 8 bit.
 
Last edited:
Eric Coughlin said:
Tomorrow as in years from now. Red has had compressed RAW for awhile, with even lower data rates than the C200's RAW lite. I don't see broadcast (or a lot of mid range projects) using RAW hardly ever...
Click to expand...
Ya but, if they shoot ProRes 444 on Alexa, it's just about the same thing.
 
Depends on your software. If you're cutting CinemaDNG in Resolve or REDCODE RAW in FCPX, it's like working with ProRes.

RAW is definitely the future...just not there yet.
 
As far as I'm aware ProRes works smoothly with most computers and software with no need for transcoding, while the same can't be said for RAW. If you're handing off footage to a wide variety of clients with a wide variety of computers and software programs, ProRes is generally preferred, hence the popularity of that codec.

I'm sure there are computers and editing setups that handle RAW fine, but you can't assume all of your clients will have that setup unless you always edit the footage you shoot.
 
Eric, image specs aside, how do you rate the c200's physical attributes?

Would you use an easyrig for handheld or go with a shoulder mount?
 
klk said:
what's the point of the direction of this thread?
Click to expand...

Lol I was just trying to give people my impressions on the C200's physical features vs what's everyone has been taking about, but then it went somewhere else entirely.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
As far as I'm aware ProRes works smoothly with most computers and software with no need for transcoding, while the same can't be said for RAW. If you're handing off footage to a wide variety of clients with a wide variety of computers and software programs, ProRes is generally preferred, hence the popularity of that codec.

I'm sure there are computers and editing setups that handle RAW fine, but you can't assume all of your clients will have that setup unless you always edit the footage you shoot.
Click to expand...

I hear you...but you're talking about the present time and I'm talking about the future.

People were once concerned with editing 4K and now many entry level computers can handle it. All NLEs have grown to adapt and support.

Per usual, technology will continue to get better and it will make no sense to shoot anything else but RAW motion pictures.

I'm not saying this will happen next year and I don't see ProRes going away anytime soon, but there will be a time when there isn't any hesitation to shoot and edit RAW, and it will easily be accepted and supported by everyone just how ProRes is now.
 
rob norton said:
Eric, image specs aside, how do you rate the c200's physical attributes?

Would you use an easyrig for handheld or go with a shoulder mount?
Click to expand...
I think the ergonomics are quite nice. The built in XLRs make me wish my C300s had that, though how they stick out of the back of the camera may be a bit awkward, as noted elsewhere. But that smaller and lighter weight LCD setup (since it's not tethered to XLRs) is quite nice. One of my beefs with the C300 is how cumbersome it is to continually move around the LCD depending on the shot, and this should help alleviate that issue. Though, I feel like I'd need a hands-on to see just how adjustable that LCD setup is.

If the LCD setup is made compatible with the C300 Mark II I'd likely get it, which I'd then also need the C300 Mark II audio control module, and would need to figure out where each would go, which could be a pain. One of my C300 monitors is also loosening up which is annoying.

One thing I was hoping for was a B-camera for my C300s that shot 4K, but was smaller and lighter so I could use it with my Glidecam handheld; the 1DX Mark II has been one option, but with no built in ND filters that makes it a tough option. The C300 Mark II is a bit too heavy to use handheld with the Glidecam, so I have to break out my Steadicam Zephyr which takes considerably longer to setup and doesn't really work for run n gun shooting. So, I was disappointed that the C200 is a fair bit heavier than a C100 Mark II, which was also heavier than the C100 Mark I. It is still lighter than a C300 Mark II, so perhaps it'd be light enough to use on a Glidecam, but certainly on the heavy side. But perhaps the C100 Mark III is really what I was waiting for.

I'd imagine the C200 LCD is a good amount lighter than the C300 Mark II LCD/Audio piece, so if I could use that C200 monitor on the C300 Mark II that may make it light enough for Glidecam use as well. I've thought of getting a SmallHD 502 for that purpose but haven't done so, as I find needing to use separate batteries, cables, lack of integration, etc., for external monitors is a pain.


Depends on how heavy you rig it out to be. Once you get past 20-25 lbs an Easy Rig certainly helps you from killing yourself on a long shoot. To me it's more about look, though. Easy Rig has a different look than shoulder mounted, with shoulder being a courser and more documentary look, and Easy Rig being a more floating type of look, so it depends on the look you want. I will say as others have said, Easy Rig is generally not the right tool for walking shots, as you get pendulum effect; if you want course walking shots, shoulder mount it, if you want smooth walking shots, Steadicam (or gimbal, maybe).

If I'm just doing event, ENG, doc, run n gun, etc., I'd probably skip the Easy Rig and either handhold it in front of me putting the viewfinder to my eye like I often do with the C100 Mark II (but not with the C300 Mark II much because it's a bit heavy for that), in a pinch put it on my shoulder without a shoulder rig since the LCD can placed in a viewable area (unlike a C100), and if I'm going to be doing a lot of shoulder work (as opposed to quick b-roll shots), rig it up with a shoulder rig. Easy Rig I use more for commercial and narrative work.
 
NorBro said:
I hear you...but you're talking about the present time and I'm talking about the future.

People were once concerned with editing 4K and now many entry level computers can handle it. All NLEs have grown to adapt and support.

Per usual, technology will continue to get better and it will make no sense to shoot anything else but RAW motion pictures.

I'm not saying this will happen next year and I don't see ProRes going away anytime soon, but there will be a time when there isn't any hesitation to shoot and edit RAW, and it will easily be accepted and supported by everyone just how ProRes is now.
Click to expand...
Right, I agree with RAW being the norm in the future. But it is not this day.

I'm talking about the present time because the C200 came out now, and that's what people are considering buying now. If it takes five more years say for RAW to become the norm for delivery and editing even on low end and mid range shoots, and people buy the C200 now, expecting their clients to accept RAW delivery, which their clients don't end up accepting until five years from now...and then in five years you've still got this supposedly future proof C200 camera, which has RAW, and now clients are accepting RAW, but they don't want that outdated C200 which can't shoot f/16 at night due to it's poor low light, doesn't have auto high speed five minute wireless data transferring capabilities, has poor highlight rolloff, no 16 bit raw, limited frame rates, etc., compared to the $10k camera setups available in 2022.

Perhaps some people who primarily do commercial and narrative work already have a client base ready and willing to accept RAW, but I'd imagine the average person upgrading from a C100, that their client base is mostly people who still don't want RAW.


 
Also, for Steadicam work, and just general shooting, I love the location of the LCD on the C100 Mark II. Low back of the camera, not up front and high like on a C300. I often yearn to get the C300 monitor in that position. Great LCD location for tripod, slider, Glidecam, and monopod work, which is the majority of what I do for run n gun.

When I rig my C300 out for Steadicam, I often put the LCD on the back on the camera. Works fine for that setup, but it's too long for run n gun shooting.

14053930_901325019974095_4898266702147235587_o.jpg



So with that C200 monitor, either on a C200 or C300, I could get something like the Kessler long plate...

kesmg1004.jpg



Have the plate protrude out the back of the camera some, and then screw in a cold shoe mount into the 3/8" or 1/8 inch holes, and mount the LCD in my favorite location. Since the LCD doesn't have the audio setup attached to it, it should still keep the camera configuration nice and lean without adding a lot of length to the camera, unlike the C300 LCD.
 
Tim Nitsch said:
Lol I was just trying to give people my impressions on the C200's physical features vs what's everyone has been taking about, but then it went somewhere else entirely.
Click to expand...

Yeah- I was referring to DSLR, 5D and "House."
Personally/professionally I think the C200 will do well with corporate, marketing/branding, events, live productions, narrative work, many things outside of broadcast where they may have a very specific technical requirement. The C200 is a nice evolution from the C100 and perhaps points where the C300M3 may be heading, though with the C700 in play C300M3 may have a hard slot to fill.
 
klk said:
The C200 is a nice evolution from the C100 and perhaps points where the C300M3 may be heading, though with the C700 in play C300M3 may have a hard slot to fill.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine a similar situation to the C500. C500 came out a $30,000 MSRP, didn't sell well, and was eventually replaced by the C300 Mark II, which is better in most ways than the C500.

C700 comes out at 28,000, I don't think it will or has sold well, and eventually the C300 Mark II will come out with better specs, features, etc., then the C700. The difference in this case is the the C700 will still be a shoulder mount configured rectangular camera, while the C300 Mark III will likely keep a similar form factor to the C200 and C300 Mark II.
 
Don't write off the C700. The game has just started.

The C200 will be a hot seller. Don't underestimate the ingenuity of people. When 5D had came out, people felt liberated and used it in interesting ways. Same thing will happen now.
 
indiawilds said:
Don't write off the C700. The game has just started.

The C200 will be a hot seller. Don't underestimate the ingenuity of people. When 5D had came out, people felt liberated and used it in interesting ways. Same thing will happen now.
Click to expand...

Only thing with the C700 is that it's in a very crowded market place right now. largely a rental camera. Amira, Alexa Mini, Varicam, Varicam LT Varicam Pure, F55, Red whatever- so crowded.

Agree, the C200 ought to do exceedingly well. Competitive price, practical features. Canon clientele. If it looks good vast majority won't care about the codec specs. I wouldn't care as long as I can get a good WYSIWYG image.
 
Pascal_Parvex said:
This sounds terrible. Such an expensive camera at that low rate? He ruins the rental market for everyone else.
Click to expand...


The Red Scarlet-W falls into a strange bracket, very much hovering slightly above FS7/C300 II owner operators, in some ways, I can understand the low rates as anybody that wants to hire a Red generally wants the Dragon or Weapon and anybody that wants a Raven or Scarlet-W will naturally want it cheaper pushing down to FS7/C300 rates, in some cases I've heard of Red Raven owners not being able to give it away as far as rental is concerned, whereas Epic Dragons/Weapons are always pretty busy. Im based in the UAE and UK and the FS7 seems to be the no.1 rental workhorse but I have seen a rise in C300 MKII enquiries and I've also noticed C300 MKII's getting popular in the UK.
It's been a slow start but I think Canon are slowly clawing back the market as image seems to be king and Canon definitely have an edge over Sony with a more pleasing image. I think the C200 will be pretty desirable when it drops.
 
Last edited:
Call me crazy, but I preferred it when a camera cost $40K+. Rates were high and they stayed there until the wash of "low-priced" cameras started flooding the market during the last ~3-5 years. Unless you were a bottom feeder, there were no "Can you do this for $500?" jobs or "I can get a camera for $200", because you couldn't!.

$150 for a $20K camera? Yeah, that's not happening on my watch. I still rent my original C300 out for $600.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top