C200: Let's give Canon a list of items that should be fixed in the next firmware update!

While I like the focus guide and sometimes find it helpful, frankly with lenses like my much used 18-135 STM IS, it is close to useless because of focus by wire. There is no correlation between input from my manual focusing and actual response of the lens and therefore the display to the focus guide. On lenses like the 70-200 2.8 IS II, that seem to be actually mechanically linked to the manual focus, it's a useful function but with those STM lenses, not so much. STM lenses do much more good when used with DAF.
 
puredrifting said:
We posted this list quite a while ago and basically none of the isues have been addressed since then. Therefore, I think we are stuck with what we are stuck with as far as these issues. In a way, no hope about them addressing it is good. Not good that they didn't care enough to take care of their customer base who requested these but good in the sense of if you are a new buyer, know that the C200 has these limitations and likely will have them for the foreseeable future. Most can be dealt with and lived with. I do. Some of them have almost hosed me on a few shoots but if you are aware of the issues, you can at least address them and work around them. Or just go buy a different camera, that's always an option.
Click to expand...

Yes it would be nice if Canon would at least fix a few things (like switching to 60P every time you switch from Raw to SD!), but it is helpful to think of this as 2 cameras in 1. It's basically a Mini-C700 cinema camera and/or a 4K C100 prosumer camera. I agree, if those don't check your boxes on what you need, definitely get a different camera.
 
chris f said:
Yes it would be nice if Canon would at least fix a few things (like switching to 60P every time you switch from Raw to SD!), but it is helpful to think of this as 2 cameras in 1. It's basically a Mini-C700 cinema camera and/or a 4K C100 prosumer camera. I agree, if those don't check your boxes on what you need, definitely get a different camera.
Click to expand...

It's so simple. right? I've rarely seen a camera frustrate so many potential buyers who WISH that it had something that doesn't fit into Canon's marketing strategy. It is what it is. If what it is isn't what you want, buy what does do what you want it to do. So straightforward!
 
I would like them to implement 10bit raw at 24, 25 and 30p so one could get double the amount of recorded material on the cfast card. IF they wont give us a 10 bit codec this could be a comprimise to give us an opportunist to utse raw on More projects
I would like to be able to move the focusbox in a gridpattern maybe based on the rule of thirds so I with just a few clicks on the joystick cab Cross the screen or quickly track a subject where I change composition. Moving the box now is tedious IF you do it While running and guning. I too would very much want the tracking focus to work as it does on their dslrs you touch once and it tracks that subject.
Give us At least 8 bit 4k 4:2:2. Come on the xc10 had it .are they goding to lie and say it wouldnt work on the c200?
Give us a wider gamut option when recording to MP4 (IF technically possible on h264
 
Teodor Miljevic said:
I would like them to implement 10bit raw at 24, 25 and 30p so one could get double the amount of recorded material on the cfast card.
Click to expand...
I guess that would be an option but a 256GB card on my C200 does the same 34 minutes in 10-bit 60p as well as 12-bit 24, 25 and 30p? I don't think their codec is set up as VBR in that way, from what I understand, all frame and bit rates in CRL are roughly the same data rate?
 
But if it is a constant bitrate shouldnt it be half the bitrate if you encoded only 25 or 24frames in 10 bit or are you saying that canon has Set a standard where canon raw light only encodes in one specifik bitrate?
 
Teodor Miljevic said:
But if it is a constant bitrate shouldnt it be half the bitrate if you encoded only 25 or 24frames in 10 bit or are you saying that canon has Set a standard where canon raw light only encodes in one specifik bitrate?
Click to expand...

The latter. I believe the bit rate for all Cinema RAW Light frame and bit rates are fixed at 1Gbps? I could be wrong, I'm not that much of a camera nerd to know this stuff off the top of my head but I defintely read that at the lead up when the camera was introduced last year. At least that's what they list on the website specs https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/cinema-eos-c200-cameras/specifications

Screen Shot 2018-09-05 at 2.45.37 PM September 5.jpg

Although they mis-label the data rate as "bit rate"?
 
Thought I would bump this thread to remind all of us C200 owners that Canon has still not addressed almost any of the requests from this thread in the previous or most current firmware update for the C200.
As stated, we don't expect the much requested 4:2:2 10-bit update, we get it, that's a market segmentation issue. Just fix the bad operational issues please Canon!
 
puredrifting said:
The latter. I believe the bit rate for all Cinema RAW Light frame and bit rates are fixed at 1Gbps? I could be wrong, I'm not that much of a camera nerd to know this stuff off the top of my head but I defintely read that at the lead up when the camera was introduced last year. At least that's what they list on the website specs https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/cinema-eos-c200-cameras/specifications

View attachment 132544

Although they mis-label the data rate as "bit rate"?
Click to expand...
A bit, a byte, a nibble.
A bit rate is a data rate, part of my license plate.
A riddle, and a rhyme, but Canon didn't blow it this time.
 
Stills2HDConvert said:
A bit, a byte, a nibble.
A bit rate is a data rate, part of my license plate.
A riddle, and a rhyme, but Canon didn't blow it this time.
Click to expand...
Well- a poet, don't you know it? If you feel it, then flow it.
If you got the shots, show it- if you got the data, blow it.
If this one can't be nip in the bud, then maybe it could be a bit in the nub (is worth a byte on the hand)...
 
groveChuck said:
Well- a poet, don't you know it? If you feel it, then flow it.
If you got the shots, show it- if you got the data, blow it.
If this one can't be nip in the bud, then maybe it could be a bit in the nub (is worth a byte on the hand)...
Click to expand...

This thread is taking a literary/poetic turn, getting strange!
 
I think I took a wrong turn, was looking for the camera poetry/ know it tree... :grin:
time to rhyme (or reason) over...
 
Did not read entire thread, but 2 things would be an easy fix, if only those Canon people were listening:

Magnifying bring back waveform (and all infos you set to be there) even if you were on clean display (pretty annoying as when I'm last checking focus right before shooting, with a clean display on evf and lcd, my left hand is under the lens. Don't want to move my thumb to push display button again)

Is it difficult to have magnify function going straight to the center of frame? Vast majority of time I have to move joystick from a different position then the one where it was when I got out of the function. No sense
 
This thread was dead on arrival the moment it was posted.
The C200 is a great camera, but the firmware updates have been nearly dismal.
A lot of good, practical concerns are in this thread.
Were any of them ever implemented in any firmware update?
 
Traditionally, the Japanese have never changed their cameras too much based on feature requests.

They'll fix major problems, and succumb to massive worldwide outcry (like adding C-Log to the 5D Mark IV or internal F-Log to the X-T2 or working on AF on the GH5/s, and occasionally you'll get that one camera that really gets a lot of attention, etc.), but for the most part you won't see user inconveniences addressed.

ARRI - RED - Blackmagic are the ones who turn their cameras into completely different systems over time because of user feedback and interaction (especially BM).
 
This thread might be a bit dead, but you never know.

My feature request:

I want to be able to assign the record button to another function button, so that my assistant on the other side of the camera can trigger recording with the '10' button.
 
NorBro said:
Traditionally, the Japanese have never changed their cameras too much based on feature requests.

They'll fix major problems, and succumb to massive worldwide outcry (like adding C-Log to the 5D Mark IV or internal F-Log to the X-T2 or working on AF on the GH5/s, and occasionally you'll get that one camera that really gets a lot of attention, etc.), but for the most part you won't see user inconveniences addressed.

ARRI - RED - Blackmagic are the ones who turn their cameras into completely different systems over time because of user feedback and interaction (especially BM).
Click to expand...

You're right of course, but I'd consider the camera resetting the frame rate because I changed codecs to be a major problem. It's only a matter of time before I find myself dealing with a 60fps clip when I meant to record in 23.98 as I do 98% of the time.

Honestly it's the only thing that actually annoys me about the camera at this point.
 
No thanks on the BM cameras.
Their images can be stunning.
Their reliability is not.
Look at how many of the new BMPC 4k have failed even in reviewers hands.
Some are even suggesting that you buy 2 so that you have a backup.
I've been lucky with my BM cameras but I'm only going to keep one that has a global shutter.
Now that cameras like the C200 are delivering the kind of features that BM did, I'll take the autofocus and reliability of a C200 any day.
puredrifting is the only one who I can recall has reported C200 issues and look at what he puts them through.
How many BM cameras would he have gone through in the same environment?
Canon has few and far between updates, but I'd take a Cannon now over a BM.
And Arri, the gold standard, well they're the gold standard.
No comment on RED.
I work with some people who used to work for RED.
I'll stay mum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top