Is the C300mkII flopping vs the FS7 at rental? (from EOSHD)

Wouldn't be surprising to me at all. C300ii doesnt even have real LUT support and has been shown to have equal or lesser DR despite having a new sensor supposedly with dual amps vs the FS7's much older sensor from the F5 without...

Canon had a reason to be cocky since they had many loyal customers but they forgot what market they were in. If it were all about color and look everyone would be shooting on Arri, but these are midrange cameras for owner-operators so features matter. It's ironic because the C300 vs F5 market pretty much proved people didn't care about 4k, but then Sony went ahead and beat them in pretty much every category at half the price with the FS7 and Canon pretty much didn't change anything except add 4K and expected people to pay twice as much for their camera. Frankly the A7S/A7RII/A7SII really reminded people that Sony actually cares about what they want in the meantime while also helping many people realize E-mount gives them many more options Canon doesn't allow...
 
I know more DP's that went to the FS7 and not the C300 MKII including me. Some have clients that want Canon so they buy Canon but I do think the FS7 is more popular due to features and price.
 
david_p said:
how do the day rates differ between these to cameras? do you think price of rental if the key factor in which gets used? do you think the C300mkII not having 60fps in 4K is hurting it much?

david
Click to expand...
I guess not so much as lack of high frame rates without a crop. Well... I think it's everything: lowlight, lens flexibility, 4k60fps, lut support..
 
For many people the $8,000 price difference (in the US) did not justify the difference in the performance, which wasn't linear anyway. Even as many preferred Canon's color more, a decent LUT off SLog 2/3 can make the "Sony look" disappear.

And, for the narratives, one ought not neglect Red's Raven and Scarlett W and Panasonic's Varicam LT. They may be the new boys on the block but many deem them as "cinema" cameras while C300MKII is more in line with reality TV and goes no further.
 
I still have YET to receive one request for a C300 MK II. Not ONE. I still shoot with and have rental requests for my original 300. It went out on two separate rentals last week and I shot with it twice the week before, as a matter of fact. I've said it before, there is nothing about the C300 MK II that makes me say, "Ooo, I've gotta have that", like the original, and apparently that goes for a lot of people, especially if you already own the original. In the 4K realm, I have an F55, which is WAY more marketable with regards to 4K, than Canon. I still prefer Canon's colors and overall "look" over my 55, but Canon's (video)bodies SUCK. It's bad enough that they made the original like they did, but to turn around and do it AGAIN after so many people expressed their displeasure… Like I said in another post, the only way I would buy a MKII would be if I'm losing a LOT of work by not owning one.
 
david_p said:
This is interesting as the original C300 was a widely used camera. Id love to hear from the people here that use and rent these 2 cameras? Do you buy this?

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/20537-canon-c300-mark-ii-flopping-vs-the-sony-fs7-at-rental/

david
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, although the FS7 sells well and rents better than the C300 II, I wouldnt; call the c300 II a flop. The above contains huge generalisations with no concrete data. I work for a major rental and sales company in the UK, and our C300 II's are just fine. It is also possible that some companies are clearing inventory for the new BIG Canon camera, which will stir some pretty strong opinions but will prove many people wrong.

I've shot with both cameras, although not extensively. I'd take the C300 II any day, any time.

Canon have never done a camera like (their new "mystery camera"), but **** is about to get real in a week's time at IBC. Expect many jaws to drop and many people to bring out the pitchforks.... it will be so much fun to watch the mayhem in the comments on here and the rest of the internet... come one people, these are only cameras, metal and plastic boxes.... all of a sudden the 5D IV and C300 II "failures" have been announced mostly by people who've never used any of them.
 
The C300mkII isn't a failure. My rough thoughts: Perhaps the C300mkII should be compared to more price-equivalent cameras such as the Varicam LT and Red Scarlet/Raven (once it's kitted up) rather than the FS7. If so, then the C300mkII is doing pretty well. The Canon and Sony are pretty different cameras, and I've worked jobs with each where the other would not have been a better choice.

Then the question becomes not is the C300mkII a failure, but rather why doesn't Canon have a modern camera that's price and feature competitive with the FS7? Be it a C200, a C100mkIII, or something else entirely. Seems like there's currently a big hole in Canon's line. And Sony's more than happily filling that hole with a good (but not perfect) camera.
 
Last edited:
Just my experience:

The only cameras I've used this year include:
C300 MKI
C300 MKII
ARRI Amira
Phantom Flex 4K

Clients are booking out C300 MKII in one month blocks at a time for doccu work.
Viacom, Warner Brothers, PBS and internet clients all want C300.
 
Andrew Reid said:
The work-a-day video industry seems to have stuck with the original C300, not seeing the point of a 4K codec or Dual Pixel AF. The C100 Mark II meanwhile offers a way to get Dual Pixel AF for for a much lower day rate. To make matters worse, the original C300 had Dual Pixel AF enabled later, a bizarre decision by Canon. This is just my personal opinion but A – why was it not enabled from the start if the sensor was fully capable of it? And B – why give it away on the old model when it is the main selling point of the replacement?!

Meanwhile, the C500 which has the same sensor as the C300 has had no Dual Pixel AF update at all despite being higher up in the range and more expensive. Many of the productions using a C500 of course have manual focus pullers and a crew so demand for the feature didn’t register. But the question remains the same – why disable something in a flagship camera in the first place after going to the expense of designing and manufacturing it?
Click to expand...
All of this talk of the Dual Pixel AF as if it's not a selling point of the C300 Mark II since the previous Mark I's had it, yet no mention of the very obvious substantial improvements to the Dual Pixel AF which is one of the main selling points of the C300 Mark II for run n gun doc style shooters over the previous C-series cams. Andrew had to know of the differences since he's up-to-date on these things, but choose to ignore it in this section of his article, because of...bias?

I'm guessing after the release of the universally hated by video people 5D Mark IV, Andrew felt the need to unleash his Khaleesi on the C300 Mark II.




Run&Gun said:
I still have YET to receive one request for a C300 MK II. Not ONE.
Click to expand...
I tend to go by a "If you build it they will come" business model. Has worked so far for me. Most of the cameras I've bought, no one was specifically requested that camera prior to me buying it. I bought it, I marketed myself and my work with it, and then work with that camera came in, and I made a good profit.

Let's consider an Arri Amira; I've rarely been asked by a client for it. Is it a popular camera? Yes. I just haven't been asked for it often, which has little bearing on how popular the camera actually is. For sure in large part because I don't currently have the client base that needs that level of camera. But I've considered buying one. And if I did buy one, then I'd need to market to that client base, and start getting clients that would pay for that level of camera.

But to buy a camera only based on what you're currently being asked for...seems a bit short sighted, and not necessarily a good method for growth. Then again, I'm sure your client base works differently than mine.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
Andrew had to know of the differences since he's up-to-date on these things, but choose to ignore it in this section of his article, because of...bias?
Click to expand...

I'll say this about Andrew: he's passionate and he puts in the work. He seems to be experimental in a good way and curious to learn. I think he's got good overall knowledge of how various components of film making fit together and how cameras work.

But I also feel he lacks perspective. Inability to connect dots. Has difficulty separating what he 'wants' from how tings 'are'. Too often a sensationalist. Likes to preach to the choir.

I remember when the 1Dc launched. There was no other camera offering that image quality at the time in such a portable package. Needless to say Andrew was all over Canon as a company and the 1Dc as a camera—calling it 'game over' for Canon. Then, through the magic of time passing, the 1Dc drops to a price he can afford and it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.

I tried to have a reasonable discussion with him on Twitter, the result being he blocked me—and I'm still blocked from his tweets to this day. I still have the discussion saved, and looking at it now I can honestly say I tried being constructive and to the point, while he was calling me a troll.

General tip to anyone: never, never, ever drag 'camera price' into 'camera specs' when comparing cameras. The price becomes VERY real at the time of purchase but it has NOTHING to do with the product's design or performance. It is a ROOKIE mistake to start getting emotional about cameras you can afford when comparing agains cameras you can't afford.

Feel free to compare FS7 to C300mkII—but leave price out of it. Completely. I know how tempting it is to think "what you get 'for the money'", but that is an illusion. If you truly want to compare cameras, or camera SYSTEMS, it needs to be under the pretence that you rented it or that it was given to you. Once it's in your hands the cameras strengths and weaknesses become very REAL… but price? It could be $100000000 or $3995. Doesn't matter at that point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top