Seriously... are you reading my posts! YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSS. The XF100 is a $3000 camcorder... it's the same codec.
Interview with Canon's Larry Thorpe on C300 - Explains a lot
- Thread starter Piolet
- Start date
- Status
Seriously... are you reading my posts! YEEEEEEESSSSSSSSS. The XF100 is a $3000 camcorder... it's the same codec.
dustylense
Veteran
It's NOOOOOOOOTTTT the same sensor!!!!! And, as an XF105 user, I will TELL you that the codec is fabulous! Now if my canon 5Dmk2 had this codec and NO moire, I would be blown away! And that camera will come!!!!!
Ok, time to get this thread back on track. I suggest ignoring any post that appear to be troll bait.
I found another interview with Larry Thorpe, courtesy of HD Magazine. This one is a 13 minute audio interview: http://www.definitionmagazine.com/j...y-thorpe-on-the-c300s-design-and-origins.html
Some highlights:
0:00 Talks about the sensor and how it works. Lots of technical details
2:22 Talks about the processor
3:11 Goes into why HD-SDI isn't 10 bit
4:00 "We will move from that [8-bit] in future cameras that we have planned."
5:12 Tells story of how he got involved in the camera
6:15 Talks about the camera's origin and development
8:14 Talks about the EOS and video divisions
8:45 Explains why there are two separate, fixed lens mounts
10:40 Explains Canon's strategy and reasoning behind the C300
12:37 Politely talks about competitor's cameras
13:45 "[The C300] is not the next generation. We are very aware of what the next generations are in codecs and things like that. You can be sure down the road we will be playing with things like that."
I like how Larry seem very honest and frank. This guy really is a legend in the HD television world. Canon is in good hands with this guy on board.
I've edit the original post of this thread to consolidate links to all the interviews. I hope these interviews have been informative. So many times people ask, "Why did do this? What were they thinking?" and here we get a rare glimpse into why.
I found another interview with Larry Thorpe, courtesy of HD Magazine. This one is a 13 minute audio interview: http://www.definitionmagazine.com/j...y-thorpe-on-the-c300s-design-and-origins.html
Some highlights:
0:00 Talks about the sensor and how it works. Lots of technical details
2:22 Talks about the processor
3:11 Goes into why HD-SDI isn't 10 bit
4:00 "We will move from that [8-bit] in future cameras that we have planned."
5:12 Tells story of how he got involved in the camera
6:15 Talks about the camera's origin and development
8:14 Talks about the EOS and video divisions
8:45 Explains why there are two separate, fixed lens mounts
10:40 Explains Canon's strategy and reasoning behind the C300
12:37 Politely talks about competitor's cameras
13:45 "[The C300] is not the next generation. We are very aware of what the next generations are in codecs and things like that. You can be sure down the road we will be playing with things like that."
I like how Larry seem very honest and frank. This guy really is a legend in the HD television world. Canon is in good hands with this guy on board.
I've edit the original post of this thread to consolidate links to all the interviews. I hope these interviews have been informative. So many times people ask, "Why did do this? What were they thinking?" and here we get a rare glimpse into why.
cowpunk52
Veteran
Thanks for those samples, Dusylense - I actually set up a thread in the Canon forum for discussing & showing grading capabilities and pitfalls with the XF codec. Feel free to post some before and afters there!
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?266986-Grading-Samples-with-XF-Codec
Jester2138
Well-known member
They have, in my view at least. They took what should have been a $10,000 camera and made it $20,000. That slows down everything. Canon was in a perfect position to put out a mind-blowing camera at a mind-blowing price and totally revolutionize and take over a certain market. Think the first RED camera. Instead, they came in slightly above their competitor, who'd already been out for a while anyway. That's not revolutionary, that's just standard playing it safe. The entire cinema camera industry slows if a major company like Canon takes small steps. Yes, the C300 is a terrific camera, and I'm sure it's way better than the anemic specs suggest. Still, there are other terrific cameras for similar prices. Maybe not as good as the C300, but pretty darn close. The C300 should have and could have blown them all away.
Exactly the problem. Hollywood is fading. The best cinematography is, by far, not happening in Hollywood. Stop making "Hollywood" cameras for "Hollywood" cinematographers so the film industry can get moving again, and maybe we can get closer to the day when "Hollywood" is no longer synonymous with "bad movies" and overdosed trashy actresses.
That said, I don't have anything against a freaking camera or anybody who uses it. Just the mindset that produced it. I'd love to use a C300 on my next short if I could afford it. I'd also love an F3, or a Scarlet, but anyway... Happy shooting!
dustylense
Veteran
Hollywood is fading? Then why if I drive in a 10 square miles can I see every major studio? I can't do that in Phoenix or Dallas. Films are started and finished in Hollywood due to weather and industry support (rentals, post houses, service..). Where do you live Jester?
dustylense
Veteran
Thanks Cow. I actually bought the camera after seeing some on your work and advice both here and on Vimeo.
dustylense
Veteran
Nice find. Listen to the interview where he talks about the sensor guys. Forget the codec (which rocks by the way) and forget about bits.
Jester2138
Well-known member
Fading, not gone... I live in between New York and New Orleans, both of which are seeing major increases in feature film work as productions increasingly move outside LA. I'm a bit surprised though, I've never actually met or spoken to anyone who denied that LA is fading as a center for feature film production. It's been pretty much accepted fact for a few years now.
dustylense
Veteran
Again, they start in LA and they finish in LA. Production is everywhere. The business is still here though in terms of studio, rental, and support. Hollywood is much larger than "feature films". ANd this threads topic is the C300, where I have said that the camera is geared at "Broadcast" television. Ya know, the thing you watch many times more than feature films. That is why Canon revealed the C300 in good ol' Hollywood, and made a service tech center here too.
As for feature films...
http://boxofficemojo.com/studio/?view=company&view2=yearly&yr=2011&p=.htm Look at the top 5 studios for each year going back. All Hollywood.
http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross Dare I say, Hollywood....
Now go look into Broadcast, and see there the studios call home.
Last edited:
8 bit is fine for grading. ive seen footages from canon dslrs that were so badly overexposed and were graded back to something beautiful. also there were times they weren't.
bottomline if a professional works on an 8 bit cam, exposes it properly-- 8 bit wont matter.
wanting 10 bit is also great. you get to have more gradient to play with in post, specially if there significant contrast ratio on the shot. but if your a DP you know what to do and you light your scene if youre limited.
now c300 is overpriced for me. canon always overprice video cameras they always do. its not unexpected. i dont see the point in why to keep hammering on this.
l
bottomline if a professional works on an 8 bit cam, exposes it properly-- 8 bit wont matter.
wanting 10 bit is also great. you get to have more gradient to play with in post, specially if there significant contrast ratio on the shot. but if your a DP you know what to do and you light your scene if youre limited.
now c300 is overpriced for me. canon always overprice video cameras they always do. its not unexpected. i dont see the point in why to keep hammering on this.
l
Amazing.
Here is the statement:
Here is the fact:
That's it, nothing more. Nothing less.
I am not speaking about 8bit now, I am speaking about Dynamic Range.
The response has come from the manufacturer itself. Yet instead of dealing with this clearly defined point, which is in actuality a concrete fact that still no one has chosen to address, several users have chosen to focus on me personally instead. I have been told I am enraged and am "hammering down" the manufacturer (never mind that I moderate a forum specifically devoted to that manufacturer every day) and am a troll.
It certainly strikes me that there is a lot of "irrational exuberance" around this camera. It has been consistently stated in this thread and elsewhere that the C300 has a larger dynamic range than everything out there except the Alexa and that it surpasses the F3. And that is simply not the case. We now have a clear statement to the contrary released yesterday from the manufacturer itself.
The oldest argument in the world when faced with facts is to divert attention to the character of the person who is presenting them rather than dealing with the arguments which are being presented.
I have no personal investment in this. However, have we really arrived at a place where the only legitimate response to a camera's release is to sing it's praises? What would that say about discussion or debate on this or any other forum?
My concern remains the disparity between what is presented, how it is being presented and what actually exists in the marketplace.
Here is the statement:
Here is the fact:
That's it, nothing more. Nothing less.
I am not speaking about 8bit now, I am speaking about Dynamic Range.
The response has come from the manufacturer itself. Yet instead of dealing with this clearly defined point, which is in actuality a concrete fact that still no one has chosen to address, several users have chosen to focus on me personally instead. I have been told I am enraged and am "hammering down" the manufacturer (never mind that I moderate a forum specifically devoted to that manufacturer every day) and am a troll.
It certainly strikes me that there is a lot of "irrational exuberance" around this camera. It has been consistently stated in this thread and elsewhere that the C300 has a larger dynamic range than everything out there except the Alexa and that it surpasses the F3. And that is simply not the case. We now have a clear statement to the contrary released yesterday from the manufacturer itself.
The oldest argument in the world when faced with facts is to divert attention to the character of the person who is presenting them rather than dealing with the arguments which are being presented.
I have no personal investment in this. However, have we really arrived at a place where the only legitimate response to a camera's release is to sing it's praises? What would that say about discussion or debate on this or any other forum?
My concern remains the disparity between what is presented, how it is being presented and what actually exists in the marketplace.
Last edited:
its a couple of guys hammering on the c300, a couple of guys prasiing it and the rest who just dont give enough crap to post about it
cowpunk52
Veteran
I haven't heard anyone claim that the C300 has more dynamic range than any camera. I have heard some describe the image as 'Alexa-like.' Can you link to a post where someone says it has more DR than the F3 or the Alexa? We've known about the 12 stops of DR since November 3rd. Also please remember that dynamic range is not the sole measure of total image quality. Who cares how much DR you have if moire and aliasing are ruining your shot? In any case, 12+ stops in LOG is still quite good to me. Sure, i'll probably never own the camera until it drops a good bit in price, but it's well within the rental price of my budgets - i'm excited about using it. It has an extremely unique feature sets that will fit my workflow quite well. Obviously it won't fit yours. Move on.
Last edited:
Yoclay, my comment about troll bait is mainly directed at GH2user who keeps hammering away about the codec and why this camera isn't worth even $3500, despite me giving real information for why that is unreasonable. It's just ridiculous now because the statements are clearly exaggerated and sensationalized to illicit a response. I'm not going to respond anymore.
But you're also hanging on this 12 stops thing like it's some smoking gun to prove us wrong or something. It's like bursting into the room and saying Aha! See, you guys are all wrong.
The thing is, the 12 stops has never been a secret. Canon has said this since day one and has been extremely open and honest about this camera's specs. They even published a chart in their brochure saying exactly what the latitude is with log at different ISOs and how much it differs for the shadows and highlights. Who else publishes this much information? I even posted this chart in another thread like a week ago!
Have you considered that maybe Canon's spec is just conservative? Maybe they don't want to get into a pissing contest with who has the biggest number. After all, latitude is not a hard measurement that can't be disputed like size or weight. Those last few stops at the extremes can be debatable. So instead, Canon says just look at our picture and decide for yourself. AFAIK, no one here has said the latitude is positively more than 12 stops. We only said, based on the images we saw (some of us saw the footage in person) it feels like there's more than 12 stops.
What's frustrating is people trying to slit hairs using specs as the ultimate decider.
Nuno looked at the picture and felt that, to him, it looks better than an F3. That's his opinion. If you don't feel the same way, no sweat. But to come back here with a spec to try to prove an opinion wrong just seem confrontational.
But you're also hanging on this 12 stops thing like it's some smoking gun to prove us wrong or something. It's like bursting into the room and saying Aha! See, you guys are all wrong.
The thing is, the 12 stops has never been a secret. Canon has said this since day one and has been extremely open and honest about this camera's specs. They even published a chart in their brochure saying exactly what the latitude is with log at different ISOs and how much it differs for the shadows and highlights. Who else publishes this much information? I even posted this chart in another thread like a week ago!
Have you considered that maybe Canon's spec is just conservative? Maybe they don't want to get into a pissing contest with who has the biggest number. After all, latitude is not a hard measurement that can't be disputed like size or weight. Those last few stops at the extremes can be debatable. So instead, Canon says just look at our picture and decide for yourself. AFAIK, no one here has said the latitude is positively more than 12 stops. We only said, based on the images we saw (some of us saw the footage in person) it feels like there's more than 12 stops.
What's frustrating is people trying to slit hairs using specs as the ultimate decider.
Nuno looked at the picture and felt that, to him, it looks better than an F3. That's his opinion. If you don't feel the same way, no sweat. But to come back here with a spec to try to prove an opinion wrong just seem confrontational.
Cool it.
Again, to get this thread back on track, see the latest interview I found: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...plains-a-lot&p=2471611&viewfull=1#post2471611
This is it. Well said.
indiawilds
Veteran
A few guys seem to have been highly offended or their dreams crushed by the pricing of the C300. Else, I don’t understand the vehement attacks on the C300. It is making it difficult to have a decent discussion.
I don’t agree with one of the moderators saying that the C300 will only be of interest for people who has a ASC attached to their names. If you think so, then please wait and watch.
I was surprised to see the form factor of this camera. Very small, DSLR like and the bottom plate that protrudes to the front seems to be a really well thought out thing. The low weight is a great boon for people like me who would take it on difficult terrain (my only interest is in wildlife).
20k USD seems to be a high price for me personally. If the street price is around 14K USD then it will be easier. If it is 16k USD, then still I can push for it. Money is never enough in wildlife filming, however, I believe it is all about value rather than price.I believe the DSLR crowd (I do film and shoot with a Canon EOS 1D Mark IV) wanted something cheaper. However, you nothing in life comes easy. Rather than venting your frustration, it is better to use that energy creatively.
Till now, I haven’t had the pleasure of touching this camera neither watching the films in Paramount. So I appreciate the feedback of the guys who have done so.
Manual Exposure:
I read that this camera doesn’t have the regular auto exposure like the Canon DSLRs. So fully manual exposure. It would be difficult for some of the DSLR crowd. Infact, that will need some discipline, especially in a run and gun situation during treks. However, having started photography in the manual camera days, I don’t have much of an issue with it.
Codec/CF card recording:
I don't have any aversion for the codec as it would be accepted by BBC and National Geographic. It would be really great that I can record to my CF cards rather than buy SSDs that are not only costly but also will take up space and weight. With a small crew, I am already fully loaded with the filming and sound recording equipment. The lower the weight the better it is for me.
High ISO:
The main attraction for me is the high ISO ability of this camera. 20000 ISO being used in a shot and displayed in a Hollywood studio means a lot for me. With my Canon 400mm f2.8 L IS USM lens ISO 20000 opens up new avenues. Believe me, this is huge. I will also be waiting to see how the high ISO in the 1DX works out. I still don’t have much information about how high ISO RED’s EPIC and Scarlet camera’s can shoot.
Lack of 60p at 1080:
I am a bit disappointed that there is no 1080 at 60p. That would have helped in capturing action better. However, no point in banging my head at this point of time, as I need a camera in 2012. So one needs to work around limitations. Scarlet is an option, however, no one has seen a clip from it. For me it is not a great selling point when someone tells me that sensors that are not good enough for EPIC are used for Scarlet. Also, I am not very convinced about the 2k mode reading only from the central part of the sensor. The crop factor in that mode is likely to be 3.24 or something. So when I use 800mm it will become more than 2500mm and the framing goes for a toss. For eg. While shooting a scene where an elephant and calf or a gaur (Bos gaurus which looks like huge buffalo) is being harassed by wild dogs (cuon alpinus), and the scene is close by, I have to immediately shift to smaller telephoto lenses to maintain the same PoV while shooting at high fps in 2k. Not sure how will be the noise, as the 2k mode is like shooting in a very small sensor camera (2/3rd camera). Frankly speaking these cameras were not available earlier, so filmmaking these days is much easier with good equipment available. So no point in bashing cameras. One needs to select equipment according to own requirements (or client’s dictates).
Dynamic Range:
I head read somewhere that though the DR of C300 is 12, canon representatives privately say that they are being conservative. Did I read it in Vincent’s blog? I am an engineer myself. I am not discounting technology. However, I believe Canon’s method of read out from the sensor is great and should not be compared with the existing deBayer methods and the corresponding results. Have patience and wait for the camera’s to hit the market before making a judgment on whether to buy or not. Unfortunately, in the internet world mostly the motive is just to berate a large company or new product to imply that the person concerned is better.
Price:
I guess in a month's time we will see more from this camera as well as know the actual pricing of the PL version and the EF version. If I were Canon, then I would have priced the PL version of the C300 camera at a higher price point and kept the EF version at a lower price point. That would have ensured many people to buy the EF version as well as the lenses. Win-win for us and Canon. Let us wait.
I don’t agree with one of the moderators saying that the C300 will only be of interest for people who has a ASC attached to their names. If you think so, then please wait and watch.
I was surprised to see the form factor of this camera. Very small, DSLR like and the bottom plate that protrudes to the front seems to be a really well thought out thing. The low weight is a great boon for people like me who would take it on difficult terrain (my only interest is in wildlife).
20k USD seems to be a high price for me personally. If the street price is around 14K USD then it will be easier. If it is 16k USD, then still I can push for it. Money is never enough in wildlife filming, however, I believe it is all about value rather than price.I believe the DSLR crowd (I do film and shoot with a Canon EOS 1D Mark IV) wanted something cheaper. However, you nothing in life comes easy. Rather than venting your frustration, it is better to use that energy creatively.
Till now, I haven’t had the pleasure of touching this camera neither watching the films in Paramount. So I appreciate the feedback of the guys who have done so.
Manual Exposure:
I read that this camera doesn’t have the regular auto exposure like the Canon DSLRs. So fully manual exposure. It would be difficult for some of the DSLR crowd. Infact, that will need some discipline, especially in a run and gun situation during treks. However, having started photography in the manual camera days, I don’t have much of an issue with it.
Codec/CF card recording:
I don't have any aversion for the codec as it would be accepted by BBC and National Geographic. It would be really great that I can record to my CF cards rather than buy SSDs that are not only costly but also will take up space and weight. With a small crew, I am already fully loaded with the filming and sound recording equipment. The lower the weight the better it is for me.
High ISO:
The main attraction for me is the high ISO ability of this camera. 20000 ISO being used in a shot and displayed in a Hollywood studio means a lot for me. With my Canon 400mm f2.8 L IS USM lens ISO 20000 opens up new avenues. Believe me, this is huge. I will also be waiting to see how the high ISO in the 1DX works out. I still don’t have much information about how high ISO RED’s EPIC and Scarlet camera’s can shoot.
Lack of 60p at 1080:
I am a bit disappointed that there is no 1080 at 60p. That would have helped in capturing action better. However, no point in banging my head at this point of time, as I need a camera in 2012. So one needs to work around limitations. Scarlet is an option, however, no one has seen a clip from it. For me it is not a great selling point when someone tells me that sensors that are not good enough for EPIC are used for Scarlet. Also, I am not very convinced about the 2k mode reading only from the central part of the sensor. The crop factor in that mode is likely to be 3.24 or something. So when I use 800mm it will become more than 2500mm and the framing goes for a toss. For eg. While shooting a scene where an elephant and calf or a gaur (Bos gaurus which looks like huge buffalo) is being harassed by wild dogs (cuon alpinus), and the scene is close by, I have to immediately shift to smaller telephoto lenses to maintain the same PoV while shooting at high fps in 2k. Not sure how will be the noise, as the 2k mode is like shooting in a very small sensor camera (2/3rd camera). Frankly speaking these cameras were not available earlier, so filmmaking these days is much easier with good equipment available. So no point in bashing cameras. One needs to select equipment according to own requirements (or client’s dictates).
Dynamic Range:
I head read somewhere that though the DR of C300 is 12, canon representatives privately say that they are being conservative. Did I read it in Vincent’s blog? I am an engineer myself. I am not discounting technology. However, I believe Canon’s method of read out from the sensor is great and should not be compared with the existing deBayer methods and the corresponding results. Have patience and wait for the camera’s to hit the market before making a judgment on whether to buy or not. Unfortunately, in the internet world mostly the motive is just to berate a large company or new product to imply that the person concerned is better.
Price:
I guess in a month's time we will see more from this camera as well as know the actual pricing of the PL version and the EF version. If I were Canon, then I would have priced the PL version of the C300 camera at a higher price point and kept the EF version at a lower price point. That would have ensured many people to buy the EF version as well as the lenses. Win-win for us and Canon. Let us wait.
- Status