Interview with Canon's Larry Thorpe on C300 - Explains a lot

[yoclay]

Can you give specifics? What were you disappointed about regarding camera design and the footage? It's always good to hear differing opinions.

I saw problems in the transitions going from the mids into the dark areas and I know this probably happened in the grading stage and it is typical for me when you are working with images shot in 8 bit. What people were complaining about as noisy images during the presentation in Hollywood, is probably not ISO noise but rather the limits of the available color information. In other words it probably looks good as shot with a very nice DR, but it won't hold up when serious grading or FX start to happen.

A 10bit mpeg2 image would only take 25% more bandwidth (62.5Mb/s). They could have done this in a heartbeat if they had wanted to and those transitions would have had what they needed.

Just as in photography, sometimes it's what you chose not to include which tells the real story.

 

[Stephen Mick]

I've said it before, and I'll say it once more… Let's keep emotion in check and this discussion productive and on-topic. If you're unimpressed by the camera, feel free to move along.

 

[cowpunk52]

What people were complaining about as noisy images during the presentation in Hollywood, is probably not ISO noise but rather the limits of the available color information.

You don't think it had anything to do with shooting in the dark at ISO 20,000 and blowing it up onto a 60ft screen with 4K projection? I would probably have to disagree with you on that one.

 

[combatentropy]

from what I've heard the debayer algorithm is new

The old is new again. From Adam Wilt's review:

"The 2x2 readout is an old trick used in single-sensor SD interlaced cameras at least as far back as the mid-‘90s"

 

[Stephen Mick]

See my post above. Negative posts directed at other DVXUsers will not be tolerated. Read the forum rules and conduct yourselves accordingly.

 

[Piolet]

I saw problems in the transitions going from the mids into the dark areas and I know this probably happened in the grading stage and it is typical for me when you are working with images shot in 8 bit. What people were complaining about as noisy images during the presentation in Hollywood, is probably not ISO noise but rather the limits of the available color information. In other words it probably looks good as shot with a very nice DR, but it won't hold up when serious grading or FX start to happen.

I didn't see the things you're seeing, but I can respect your opinion. How about the camera itself? What did you think of the design?

A 10bit mpeg2 image would only take 25% more bandwidth (62.5Mb/s). They could have done this in a heartbeat if they had wanted to and those transitions would have had what they needed.

It actually isn't that simple. For one thing, the codec is limited to 8-bits because that's what the MPEG-2 422@HighLevel profile stipulates. As for why the HD-SDI output isn't 10 bit...only Canon truly knows why, but Adam Wilt, an engineer himself, postulates that:

"If your ADCs, DSP processing, and overall pipeline are optimized for 8-bit workflows (like the JPEG pipeline in DSLRs and the MPEG pipeline in the XF-series camcorders, you can carry over the same infrastructure to a new camera very easily. But re-architecting everything to support a 10-bit output (which requires a higher bit depth / wider processing channels upstream in the DIGIC processors) is a substantial bit of engineering with an equally substantial up-front cost in chip fabrication."

 

[Jadotch]

Show me a S35 camera where I can get a razor-sharp 1080p picture on a broadcast approved in-camera codec, with no aliasing or moire, in a body only about twice the size of a DSLR, that weighs just 3.2lbs, and includes standard features of LOG gamma, removable handles, removable monitor & XLR module and uses just 12W of power for under $20k and I'd be inclined to agree.

This is not a fair argument. I can say the samething about any camera, by listing things that make it unique. Lets take my JVC Evario GZ-hd7. Where else are you going to get a 3 ccd camera that shoots HD with manual controls for under a grand? The C300 is only a single chip, it cannot even do it.

See how unfair that argument is?

Anyways I see the C300 as a great camera. It fits some peoples needs better than others. There is no perfect camera.... yet. The C300 has its advatages as you stated. So I think the community is still waiting for a sub $10K camera that will democratize film making. We are getting closer and closer, but the C300 is not it. I think thats what people are dissappointed in, they thought this was going to be it. We are so close,but that final gap needs to be filled.

 

[Lee Saxon]

until 3 years from now, when they sell us the camera they could have sold today without breaking a sweat.

nail hit on head

 

[Piolet]

until 3 years from now, when they sell us the camera they could have sold today without breaking a sweat.

nail hit on head

This myth really needs to die. People who say these things have no knowledge of these companies internal proprietary information and yet they make conclusions about them.

 

[cowpunk52]

This is not a fair argument. I can say the samething about any camera, by listing things that make it unique. Lets take my JVC Evario GZ-hd7. Where else are you going to get a 3 ccd camera that shoots HD with manual controls for under a grand? The C300 is only a single chip, it cannot even do it. See how unfair that argument is?

That's exactly the point - the JVC hd7 has a place because of what it offers at the price point it's offered at, just like the C300 will. It's just as unfair and ridiculous to think that any camera is worthless when it offers a unique set of features that can be valuable to any particular production - but people love to jump on the bashing bandwagon just because it's not the camera THEY want at the price THEY want to pay. Everything is subjective, so blanket statements dismissing a camera's worth for everyone based on your own particular needs/wants are hardly fair either.

 

[Erich Ocean]

Good thing they have someone at the ready to apologize for them.

The only internal proprietary information we need is : things are intentionally created in a way to sell a new model 6 months from now.

Canon apologism is freakin' funny.

Too bad they suck at that 6 month revolving door: it's been three years since the 5D, and we still don't have a replacement.

 

[cowpunk52]

I think the community is still waiting for a sub $10K camera that will democratize film making. We are getting closer and closer, but the C300 is not it. I think thats what people are dissappointed in, they thought this was going to be it. We are so close,but that final gap needs to be filled.

I think that camera does exist. It's the AF100, FS100, GH2, 7d, 5dII, ex1, hvx200, XL1, DVX100, etc, etc. Any of these cameras can be and has been used to make beautiful, powerful, & moving stories. People just want more, and they want it for less - that will never change, even when an Alexa is selling for $2500 on Craigslsit. Now is not the time to wait for a camera, it's the time to shoot.

 

[Doctor Wu]

It's inevitable that the current $5000 cameras will evolve. Panasonic will probably release an "AF200" mid next year maybe at NAB. Sony will respond to that the following year, etc.

 

[Piolet]

The only internal proprietary information we need is : things are intentionally created in a way to sell a new model 6 months from now.

This statement sounds familiar. Maybe it came from here?

Canon is a great company and I'm quite sure that whatever they offer will be a terrific buy. And as soon as you buy, they will offer another one in 6 months that you will want to buy again... and again.

Jim

Unfortunately, what he says does not match up with the facts.

Canon XL1 Dec 1997
Canon XL1s Jul 2001
Canon XL2 Jul 2004

Canon XL-H1 Sep 2005
Canon XL-H1A/H1S 2008

XH-A1/G1 Jul 2006
XH-A1S/G1S Nov 2008

XF300/305 Apr 2010

XF100/105 Aug 2010

And DSLRs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Canon_DSLR_cameras

 

[dcloud]

"the cameras isnt 16k! no one has said it yet!"
later, 20k was announced.

"Those specs are inaccurate! its not yet confirmed or released!"
turns out it was spot on.

"20k or lower! Price TBA later!"
:cheesy: it better be.

 

[yoclay]

The Canon rep I spoke to felt it was going to come in at 16K USD, 12K Euros. He also seemed more prepared to deal with arguments surrounding the F3. So clearly he was prepped for that market. I think RED caught them by surprise and I think somewhere around 14-16K is where all these cameras should settle into eventually.

Most of the oohing and ahhing was from DSLR users wanting to move up, not really the pros I spoke to.

The C300 is the most user friendly of the 3 choices. It could be a "decent" crossover rental camera for non-intensive post production options.
(I don't think Canon realistically has the b-cam market to the Alexa unless they up the specs to Scarlet level).
I think the F3 will be for professionals used to a more traditional broadcast environment.
The Scarlet is for the Indie filmmaking crowd, decently budgeted commercials and b-cam.

However if Canon at least wants to participate in this holy triumverate, they need to bring the price down.
20K is not realistic for personal ownership and most pro's I know wouldnt go for it as rental on a well budgeted job, given the other choices available.
On this forum alone there is a 9 to 1 preference for the Scarlet given all the variables. 10 bit 4K 4.4.4 is just too convincing apparently:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/poll.php?pollid=654&do=showresults

Barry Green also said this and I think he is right on:

Canon totally underwhelmed, and Red overdelivered. Canon gave us an F3 with no capability to autofocus or autoiris and with no path to dual-link or 4:4:4, for $4000 more than the F3. Red gave us a Red One MX for 1/3 the price, in an Epic body.
​

I think that pretty clearly describes the situation.

My concern as a moderator on another forum expressly for Canon cameras is that with the lack of breath in the new C300 specs at an announced 20k it leaves little room for decent trickle down to less expensive camera bodies. Once again it not only spells NO 10bit for anyone, but leaves me wondering how we will ever get 4.2.2 in any DSLR replacement. This strikes me as really stretching too far the marketing rollout in this day and age given what is rapidly becoming available. The implications are not good in the near term coming from Canon.

What I mean by this is that we will probably continue to see 8 bit 4.2.0 in the next generation of DSLR's with the various artifacts like moire, rollling shutter and aliasing greatly reduced, and yet probably not completely eliminated. I mean why would they give anything more at 1/10th the price of their flagship model? Considering it is the 5DMII user that even made them think about coming to Hollywood, 3 years on and with no solid replacement even in sight, that strike me as pretty lame. With this new release, they seem to be signaling in a pretty loud manner that they will give only the bare minimum in terms of advances for the next generation of what is now a core DSLR user, and probably not until the end of next year. I don't have a crystal ball, no one does, but based on this current release and their track record of making as Barry Green says "a great camera based on specs from 3 years ago" a certain logic dictates that this is what we can expect from Canon.

Here's hoping they prove me wrong and if that happens I will be the first in line. But I am not holding my breath on this.

 

[Nuno Dias]

The C300 is the most user friendly of the 3 choices. It could be a "decent" crossover rental camera for non-intensive post production options.

You keep going on about the 8bit not being good enough for post production. But as someone has explained earlier, this is not the same 8bit you get on a 5D. Its captured at 10 or 12 then compressed into a much powerful codec than the H264. And did you happen to see Xxit? That seemed like very intensive post-production, with 3D elements, chroma keying, etc... so its not really fair when you make it sound like this 8bit is completely useless. And if you need to bend the curves that much in grading then you shouldn't be making films anyway...

This camera is not a 'toy' you buy to play with. It goes through my head why would anybody would want this camera as a commodity. This is a rental camera or a camera a someone can use regularly to make money. Not to shoot cheap music videos and cats! And I don't think Scarlet has anything on this camera. I love the MX sensor but I also love this new sensor from Canon. Somewhere else I saw a 100% crop on a frame and the image on that crop was extremely sharp, http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2011/11/09/canon-c300-organic-noise/ , so no need for a 4K file then...

And as much as I might be wrong on this, the highlight shoulder on the MX still disappoints. And I didn't see this 'videoish' highlights on the harsh desert sunlight short Mobius. It was just as film like as one would like it to be. There are shots with the sun right in the foreground, and not only did the C300 sensor held up the sun so film like, but was also capable of still getting information in the shadows! That's something I've only seen the Alexa doing.

 

[Jadotch]

All I saw was the web version of the movies.

But I think a good point has been brought up. The C300 does have a beautiful sensor! I want to see what it can do with better hardware backing it up.

 

[combatentropy]

this is not the same 8bit you get on a 5D. Its captured at 10 or 12 then compressed

8 bit presents the same risk of banding in post no matter how it got there. On the other hand, I'm not sure 8 bit is a problem, from any camera, if the post software can dither it into 10 or 12 or something higher while working with it

then compressed into a much powerful codec than the H264

I wouldn't call 50 Mbps MPEG-2 "much more powerful" than 24 Mbps H.264. I would call them the same, as far as compression artifacts. The Canon does have 4:2:2 color subsampling, but that is not technically the codec, it's the color subsampling, and still even if you lumped that in, I wouldn't call it "much more powerful."

 

[jw2700]

The C300 is the most user friendly of the 3 choices. It could be a "decent" crossover rental camera for non-intensive post production options.
(I don't think Canon realistically has the b-cam market to the Alexa unless they up the specs to Scarlet level).

The C300 is the more likely b-cam to Alexa - Scarlet and Alexa workflow don't play well together. Scarlet as b-cam to Epic makes more sense.