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

[TimurCivan]

Simple physical facts are as follows.

When you grade, in a professional capacity, 10bit is better than 8bits.

This is important information to know when choosing a camera system.

 

[Nuno Dias]

At the moment there isn't any camera that can 'infiltrate' the film business under 20k, there's the Scarlet and the C300. That's it. And they both cost the same, give or take. If there were more, (and there will be) then manufacturers will bring prices down. Obviously.

I don't think anyone is holding back technology for the sake of holding back. The C300 is lacking on some basic tech features because they decided that at the moment, this camera offers film makers the quality and technology they need to make a good looking film. At this time, increasing specs, would increase price.

Check out for how much Alexa is costing. Specs? Not hugely impressive. Image quality? A absolute winner. Again, its about the image. How the sensor reacts to the light. Not just specs. Good specs can go up in at the cost of image quality, ergonomics and price. Someone has got to design this beast and it will never, ever please everyone. And this time they settled for the film crowd. Mainly Film schools and production companies. Not individual users.

If you can't afford an Alexa, or an Epic, the C300 is the next best option. As we've seen on the 3rd, it can resolve heavy post production, grading and all kinds of lighting scenarios. And it looks as good as anything much, much more expensive.

Don't forget they've made a Canon Centre in Hollywood for feedback and future upgrades on this camera.

 

[cowpunk52]

Simple physical facts are as follows.

When you grade, in a professional capacity, 10bit is better than 8bits.

This is important information to know when choosing a camera system.

I haven't seen anyone arguing otherwise, and I think that's been well established by this point. While yes, Timur, you're right, it is important when evaluating a camera system, it is not the only factor to consider when choosing a camera.

It seems like this debate falls into 3 categories:

• Those that don't believe 8-bit acquisition has a place in anything beyond consumer video.
• Those that can accept 8-bit acquisition as having professional applications as long as you don't grade in post
• Those that can accept 8-bit acquisition as having professional applications with potential for grading and effects within the boundaries of the codec it's recorded in, and it's robustness depends on other factors like bitrate, color sampling and DSP.

It seems like a lot of forum users here are falling into the one of the first two categories - which is totally understandable. Internet camera forums are notorious for endless praising of spec sheets and numbers, but rarely for ingenuity in craft and creative possibilities.

Those most interested in using the C300 likely fall into the latter category posted above, and where it seems much of the professional industry falls as well given the support 8-bit acquisition is given and the impressive results that it has created in productions ranging from network television all the way to theatrical motion picture releases (albeit typically not in A-Cam situations).

If 8-bit is out of the question for you, I don't understand why you're even reading C300 threads. Can we stop running around in circles now?

 

[Stephen Mick]

Indeed, let's. There's nothing more to say on 8-bit vs. 10-bit that hasn't been said to this point. Let's move the discussion along, folks.

I haven't seen anyone arguing otherwise, and I think that's been well established by this point. While yes, Timur, you're right, it is important when evaluating a camera system, it is not the only factor to consider when choosing a camera.

It seems like this debate falls into 3 categories:

• Those that don't believe 8-bit acquisition has a place in anything beyond consumer video.
• Those that can accept 8-bit acquisition as having professional applications as long as you don't grade in post
• Those that can accept 8-bit acquisition as having professional applications with potential for grading and effects within the boundaries of the codec it's recorded in, and it's robustness depends on other factors like bitrate, color sampling and DSP.

It seems like a lot of forum users here are falling into the one of the first two categories - which is totally understandable. Internet camera forums are notorious for endless praising of spec sheets and numbers, but rarely for ingenuity in craft and creative possibilities.

Those most interested in using the C300 likely fall into the latter category posted above, and where it seems much of the professional industry falls as well given the support 8-bit acquisition is given and the impressive results that it has created in productions ranging from network television all the way to theatrical motion picture releases (albeit typically not in A-Cam situations).

If 8-bit is out of the question for you, I don't understand why you're even reading C300 threads. Can we stop running around in circles now?

 

[Max Smith]

At the moment there isn't any camera that can 'infiltrate' the film business under 20k, there's the Scarlet and the C300. That's it. And they both cost the same, give or take. If there were more, (and there will be) then manufacturers will bring prices down. Obviously.

I don't think anyone is holding back technology for the sake of holding back. The C300 is lacking on some basic tech features because they decided that at the moment, this camera offers film makers the quality and technology they need to make a good looking film. At this time, increasing specs, would increase price.

Check out for how much Alexa is costing. Specs? Not hugely impressive. Image quality? A absolute winner. Again, its about the image. How the sensor reacts to the light. Not just specs. Good specs can go up in at the cost of image quality, ergonomics and price. Someone has got to design this beast and it will never, ever please everyone. And this time they settled for the film crowd. Mainly Film schools and production companies. Not individual users.

If you can't afford an Alexa, or an Epic, the C300 is the next best option. As we've seen on the 3rd, it can resolve heavy post production, grading and all kinds of lighting scenarios. And it looks as good as anything much, much more expensive.

Don't forget they've made a Canon Centre in Hollywood for feedback and future upgrades on this camera.

I would argue that if you can't afford an Epic or Alexa then an F3 is the next best option.

 

[Barry_Green]

But I really don't know how that has anything to do with camera manufactures "holding back technology vs. justified pricing." ???

And I really don't know how this has anything to do with anything.

Here's what happens: the manufacturer makes a product using whatever technology they choose to use. And they price it at whatever they decide to price it at. They don't have to "justify" those decisions (technology or pricing) to anyone.

And you, the buyer, then make the decision whether to buy that product or not. If it does what you need done, at a price you can afford, then you buy it. And if it doesn't, you don't.

Done. End of story.

Ferrari does not have to "justify" their pricing just because a Mustang might be as fast for 1/10th the price. Ferrari will sell three thousand cars in a year, Ford will sell 250,000 Mustangs in a year, and both manufacturers are profitable and happy with that.

So why isn't that okay?

The Canon C300 is not for the guerilla filmmaker, and never was intended to be for them. If your name doesn't have the suffix of "ASC", you aren't in the target market for the C300. So ignore it and move on already. Let the people who are interested in it, have a productive discussion about it.

 

[Piolet]

The Canon C300 is not for the guerilla filmmaker, and never was intended to be for them. If your name doesn't have the suffix of "ASC", you aren't in the target market for the C300. So ignore it and move on already. Let the people who are interested in it, have a productive discussion about it.

I appreciate your comments Barry and I agree with what up said up this point. But I think we should refrain from saying things like "If your name doesn't have the suffix of "ASC", you aren't in the target market for the C300." This will just serve to inflame things again.

Canon did consult ASC members (as well as people in New York and overseas) to advise on the physical layout of the camera. But the camera is just a S35 sensor camera that shoots 4:2:2 at 50 Mbps in a cinematic fashion. It's just a camera. Everyone is welcome to use it, if it happens to fit your needs. In fact, the camera will probably see most use in TV production, many of whom are not ASC members. So even if you can't afford it, there's always the option of renting (as with any camera, not just this one).

 

[Barry_Green]

Perhaps a bit too much to say it's limited to ASC members, agreed. Point was that it's for Hollywood (including big-budget TV production) and not for guerilla shooters who were looking for a video DSLR. I think the C300 can best be understood by keeping it in context with the glitzy Hollywood introduction and the Hollywood service center. Certainly nothing about that would limit it to members of the ASC, that's true.

 

[dustylense]

Canon and the C300 will do well in LA. And it will only get better. It's Canon. But, there are all sorts of choices out there. Pick the one to use and go for it if the budget allows. And those making that decision are going to look and most likely used. It's still small like the 5Dmk2, just with a far superior codec. Don't knock Canons 50mit 422. I think that when most get a handle on that codec in a s35 sensor they are going to get their kicks. And that codec is nice and quick to use. Now there is a 5D'ish camera in the market with a nice working codec. Lot's of talk about the new sensor tech in the interview.

Let's just stretch out and see what the camera does and who uses it (either A cam or B cam) when we start seeing the thing in action. But Barry's right, this camera is "targeted" at Hollywood broadcast.

 

[Nuno Dias]

Canon made a smart move at making the C300 'premiere' in Hollywood. Although its a fact that they intend to 'conquer' the film industry right in the heart of Hollywood, I think the bigger picture for them is, if the rest of the world sees Hollywood using this camera, then the rest of the world will use it as well.

They're not kidding.

And despite all the negative input the camera has received so far (by few, for sure) , I really can't wait to use it. The F3 is a good camera, but I don't think its delivers the C300's image, the F35 does, but not the F3. And if we think about it, Canon is running too big a risk at this. If the camera doesn't perform, it will be very difficult for them to return, they can't afford to f*** this up. So I'm pretty sure, they know this camera won't disappoint.

It really is a 5/7D on steroids. Nothing wrong with that.

By the way, does anyone know if there is any more footage/films out there from the C300?

Thanks.

 

[yoclay]

s

Canon made a smart move at making the C300 'premiere' in Hollywood. Although its a fact that they intend to 'conquer' the film industry right in the heart of Hollywood, I think the bigger picture for them is, if the rest of the world sees Hollywood using this camera, then the rest of the world will use it as well.

They're not kidding.

And despite all the negative input the camera has received so far (by few, for sure) , I really can't wait to use it. The F3 is a good camera, but I don't think its delivers the C300's image, the F35 does, but not the F3. And if we think about it, Canon is running too big a risk at this. If the camera doesn't perform, it will be very difficult for them to return, they can't afford to f*** this up. So I'm pretty sure, they know this camera won't disappoint.

It really is a 5/7D on steroids. Nothing wrong with that.

By the way, does anyone know if there is any more footage/films out there from the C300?

Thanks.

http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/understand_log_gamma.shtml?categoryId=22

From the horses mouth (Canon):
12 stops DR with it's log function.

So sorry folks the F3 wins on that front: 12+ stops before SLOG.
(See Abelcine's tests if you have any doubts)

So all you folks who placed your bets against the Sony, it's time to pay up.

 

[Nuno Dias]

Whatever...

You're obviously enraged about something. Surely Canon has done nothing wrong to you personally I hope...

 

[GH2user]

The Canon C300 is not for the guerilla filmmaker, and never was intended to be for them. If your name doesn't have the suffix of "ASC", you aren't in the target market for the C300. So ignore it and move on already. Let the people who are interested in it, have a productive discussion about it.

Totally understand the marketing and who it's targeted at. That's not the problem. The problem is that they're clearly using technology that's found in a $3000 camcorder, putting "cinema" in the name, and then flipping it for $20k.

Also, if you have "ASC" in you name and are satisfied with a 8-bit cameras that only shoots 30p... then I don't know what to tell you. These things are fine for guerrilla film making and DSLRs... because they're cheap and "good enough". But to have these specs on a professional $20k "cinema" camera is just crazy.

Even if you can afford this, or have a budget, there is still a reason to be upset. Canon under-delivered and are making us wait around as they "trickle" out the technology over the next 10 years that is EASILY producible now for 1/10 the cost. How could a real DP seriously invest in a camera that can't even over-crank?

 

[dustylense]

Totally understand the marketing and who it's targeted at. That's not the problem. The problem is that they're clearly using technology that's found in a $3000 camcorder, putting "cinema" in the name, and then flipping it for $20k.

Also, if you have "ASC" in you name and are satisfied with a 8-bit cameras that only shoots 30p... then I don't know what to tell you. These things are fine for guerrilla film making and DSLRs... because they're cheap and "good enough". But to have these specs on a professional $20k "cinema" camera is just crazy.

Even if you can afford this, or have a budget, there is still a reason to be upset. Canon under-delivered and are making us wait around as they "trickle" out the technology over the next 10 years that is EASILY producible now for 1/10 the cost.

Have you worked with the camera yet? Have you worked with MXF 50mbit 422 at all? It grades really well. And on the C300 I can't even begin to imagine what it will look like with the sensor they produced from scratch. I bought the the XF105 for run and gun shooting, and I'll will tell you that the files stretch off this camera really well for a single chip. Ungraded graded. Now, toss the C300 and some sweet glass with this codec, combined with easy workflow, and you have a power house. Tech in a $3000 camcorder? Well, that C300 sensor is not in any camcorder last I've checked. This C300 camera with EOS mount cines (Cp.2's or Canons new ones) and we will see outstanding images in a VERY COMPACT platform. And yes, it will trickle down sooner than we might think. Can't afford it, rent it. 1/10th the cost? Really? You expect them to release this camera with s35 and this codec at $2,000? Silly....

 

[cowpunk52]

I'm actually shocked - shocked - that yoclay and gh2user still feel the need to come into the thread and hammer down those that are interested in this camera. Honestly, it feels a little like you two are somehow threatened personally by the C300? I just don't understand, and it makes me want to come back to this site less and less because of the rampant hostility here...

We all get it - you guys don't like the camera. Good for you. Nobody is forcing you to look at it, read about it, buy it or even use it. Please, why don't you go visit the threads where they discuss tools you are interested in using?

 

[Erich Ocean]

I'm actually shocked - shocked - that yoclay and gh2user still feel the need to come into the thread and hammer down those that are interested in this camera.

@cowpunk52 The easiest way to deal with people who are inappropriate on forums is simply to ignore them. Click on their username in the upper left corner of one of their posts, and click View Profile. You'll see a link on the left called "Add to ignore list". Click it.

I haven't needed to use this on DVXUser yet, but I use it over at RedUser all the time. It really cuts down on the noise, and if I really want to see what an ignored user has said, their posts still show up, just with no content. Click the "View post" link in an individual ignored post (or whatever it's actually called) and the content will appear.

Since I started doing this on forums 18 months ago, I've been a much happier forum visitor, and far more likely to contribute to threads.

Hope this helps!

 

[GH2user]

Have you worked with the camera yet? Have you worked with MXF 50mbit 422 at all? It grades really well.

For the last time, yes. It's a great codec. BUT IT'S FROM A $3000 CAMCORDER. There's no reason for it to cost $20k all the sudden... THAT is the problem. Not the codec.

Honestly, it feels a little like you two are somehow threatened personally by the C300?

Why would I be threatened? To most people, and online audiences, the C300 is not going to have much better perceived quality than a 7D or GH2. I'm just frustrated that camera tech was finally coming to where it needed to be, and then canon slammed on the breaks again. I wouldn't even pay $3500 for the C300 simply for the fact of a lack of over-cranking alone. Canon also has no reason to progress forward now that they know people are biting on their new marketing strategies.

 

[Max Smith]

Canon made a smart move at making the C300 'premiere' in Hollywood. Although its a fact that they intend to 'conquer' the film industry right in the heart of Hollywood, I think the bigger picture for them is, if the rest of the world sees Hollywood using this camera, then the rest of the world will use it as well.

They're not kidding.

And despite all the negative input the camera has received so far (by few, for sure) , I really can't wait to use it. The F3 is a good camera, but I don't think its delivers the C300's image, the F35 does, but not the F3. And if we think about it, Canon is running too big a risk at this. If the camera doesn't perform, it will be very difficult for them to return, they can't afford to f*** this up. So I'm pretty sure, they know this camera won't disappoint.

It really is a 5/7D on steroids. Nothing wrong with that.

By the way, does anyone know if there is any more footage/films out there from the C300?

Thanks.

Look, I'm pretty brand agnostic- FS100 vs. AF100 is a perfect example- both around the same price, both deliver a similar picture, both have different strengths and weaknesses. Which camera I would recommend to someone would depend on what their setup was and how they wanted to use it. Doesn't matter to me if Panasonic gets the sale, doesn't matter if Sony does. I don't see any of that money either way.

I just want to be clear on that because I'm not an F3 cheerleader.

The thing is, from the very limited amount of footage we've seen from the C300 I just don't understand the logic behind your assumption that it delivers a better image than the F3. I'm not going to sit here and say 100% it doesn't. I haven't seen enough footage- I don't think anyone has, and if I'm not mistaken you were asking for more yourself- and no one has seen any tests. So I really don't know. But I do think that your assumption that it shoots a better image seems somewhat presumptuous considering the lack of evidence.

If you look at the technical sepcs the sony seems to have the edge- clearly in terms of latitude, dynamic range, and the ability to shoot 1080 60p- for a similar price.

I think there are a lot of us who are not bashing the C300, just questioning the initially implied 20k price for a camera that seems- and I'm saying seems here because just about all we have to go by right now are the technical specs- to deliver slightly less than the F3.

 

[dustylense]

For the last time, yes. It's a great codec. BUT IT'S FROM A $3000 CAMCORDER. There's no reason for it to cost $20k all the sudden... THAT is the problem. Not the codec.

Come on dude, really. Is the XF305 a $3,000 camcorder? Have you shot anything with the MFX codec? Or do you want everything from this point forward to be priced at $899 because some russian hacked a Bestbuy camera? As most will agree, the C300 is targeted for Hollywood Broadcast. Why don't you just wait for the 1Dx or even the rumored 1Dc to come along. Canon see's that "HOLLYWOOD" has implemented the 5Dmk2 in their productions and built a camera for THEM, not indie people. This camera just is not for you by the tone of your posts. Move along, this isn't the droid you were looking for. And please, don't respond that the Gh2 competes with this camera. I have one too. And it's a pain in the ass to shoot production on.

 

[cowpunk52]

@cowpunk52 The easiest way to deal with people who are inappropriate on forums is simply to ignore them. Click on their username in the upper left corner of one of their posts, and click View Profile. You'll see a link on the left called "Add to ignore list". Click it.
Hope this helps!

Nice tip! Done and done!