quick'n'dirty C300 vs F3

[alpi69]

Our colleague Stefan Krösbacher (krost-audiovisual) received his S-Log finally, so I rushed over there and we put the cams to a very quick shootout scene.

Both with a Samyang 85mm (his new, mine 3 years old, but should be very similar glass)
F3 in S-Log - C300 in C-Log (CP8)
both in 5600k preset
focus was at the flower, but since the C300 operator (me) is a media-slut and had to sit in the middle of the frame its focus was a bit toward the cam.

The scene was extreme contrast with fresh snow on the mountains. We had a GoPro box with small writing on it, a flower and a person in shadow.

results: as long as we kept the highlights in check it was close. Once we blew out the highlights the S-Log showed its two extra stops and the C-Log clearly fights with the snow and clouds above 100IRE. The C300 is turning the shadows blueish (something I feel it does all the time; this is why I work on a setting with blue gain at -5). But the C300 has more resolution and when highlights are held in check the C300 to me looks pretty much the same. In extreme situations the F3 (WITH S-LOG) has step though.

The C300 C-Log is a bit too saturated for a log-setting, but apart from the blueish shadows is very true to the color with only small adjustments needed while the F3 needs a lot more work in the image in post.

**EDIT: managed to upload larger images below.

 

[alpi69]

Bigger images

 

[stevedocmaker]

Great test! I'm glad someone was finally able to post something like this. If you're looking for DR, then IMHO, from these images the F3 wins hands down, but I see your point about the C300 image being better out of the camera when exposed for highlights. But I am especially disturbed by the highlight color shift and the fringing in the blown-out C300 image, noticeable even at this resolution. I would think that at this price point one wouldn't have to be concerned about such things ruining a shot, especially for a camera being sold for doc work.

Was the F3 footage recorded in camera, or with an external device?

 

[cowpunk52]

Nice comparison, and I agree with your assessment. The grades are incredibly close, and I personally prefer the way the colors are rich and pop on the C300 (of course, this can be adjusted to taste in cam via the CP menu). Canon's have always been known for their rich blues!

 

[cowpunk52]

But I am especially disturbed by the highlight color shift and the fringing in the blown-out C300 image, noticeable even at this resolution. I would think that at this price point one wouldn't have to be concerned about such things ruining a shot, especially for a camera being sold for doc work.

Vastly overblown issue. Try the camera out before you make a final decision about it.

 

[Cory Braun]

F3 looks like it has more dynamic range, and the C300 looks like it's a bit sharper. Can't really go wrong with either one.

 

[alpi69]

Yes guys, we all see pretty much the same and also it is as expected.
The F3 recorded in-camera, no external device.
F3 has a bit more DR which helps on both ends. There is more in my face but also the snow mountains hold better. Still both images look incredible good. Make no mistake, tis was a stress test which I would hardly shoot like that, but in a doc it could happen.
The F3 in this test ended up to look a bit more filmlike. But as I said it is awfully close when we compare the material we shot so far with these cams.

docmaker, both cams need work in post when shooting in Log-modes. So while the F3 needs to be hue-shifted a lot (to me skins are a bit magenta, blues are green tinted ) the C300 needs a bit of highlight-protection in post. Actually I recommend not to go over 105IRE in C-LOG.
But for docwork, IMO, and Stefan might of course disagree since he owns a F3, the C300 is hands down the better camera, because of the way everything works in a system as it should. No MFT-adapter that needs fiddling, weather-sealed housing, smaller, much better ergonomics for handheld work, better menus especially with the "My Menu option", lighter, smaller, MUCH better EVF and LCD, 4:2:2 internal codec etc etc.
So IMO the F3 has the edge on IQ, but is harder to work with and the C300 is very close especially with its advantage on resolution.

*edit: have I mentioned stabilized lenses ;-)

 

[maarek]

But if you shoot s-log on the internal codec with the F3, doesn't it cause visible banding once you start grading the image so that skin tones look natural?? Isn't the whole point of s-log to capture it externally thus bypassing the 35mbps mpeg2 encoder?

 

[alpi69]

true, S-LOG only makes "real sense" with a Gemini.But it is not the way we use the F3 (mostly). So it was recorded internal; I doubt there is banding, but you lose with the 4:2:0. We also have a Samurai here that would gain a tiny bit especially in the dark areas.
Our test was a quick test what the cameras can do. That´s what it is. Not scientific, not to be the holy grail of tests, simply to see how the cameras alone produced. If you want to add a Gemini (worth 50% of the camera again) go ahead. We can´t afford it; we can´t rent it. And the Samurai will be used, but not in this test.

That is why the C300 is so appealing: it does 4:2:2 in-camera to a great codec. Forget the 8-bit discussion. In post you can push the Canon Log just as much or more than the internal XDCamEX of the F3. Once you add external devices the F3 will win again. But at a price in versatility, weight, handling and money.

 

[alpi69]

I have just made some tests on settings and might have found a problem with our F3-C300-test. We didn´t white balance, but went to preset 5600k on both cams. Since the C300 has a tendency to blues, it might need a whitebalance for such a comparison-test. A rating of 6400k might have helped here.

But the same is valid for the F3, because that green tint in the sky is not at all what we saw out the window. Just for those who will test in the future ;-)

Stefan is just cutting some piece with our two cams and I believe they fit together very well.

 

[krost-audiovisual]

Hi Guys,
yep the c300 is hands down better suited for docstyle/sports shooting. especially for the stabilized lens (on our shoot in London we used a 100-400mm stabilized Canon lens - that's around 600mm HANDHELD)... the f3 gives you more DR and an overall more filmic look, preferred for narrative/commercial work. But both cameras are wonderful! Last year we covered a Bicycle race with the F3 and it simply handles as an EX-1. Power On, Shoot...
Honestly i just got Slog, but as far as i can tell i'd get away with the internal codec most of the time as long as i don't do extreme color grading - but i'll make me a LUT that does add some contrast for general shooting. (check abelcine's blog on how-to)

you'll gain another halfstop or so i you record to an external device with the SDI-A output of the F3 for this signal doesn't run through all the processing engines in camera...(didn't know that 'til recently) Nice firmware update coming from Atomos for our Samurai's. I have it mounted with an arm onto my berkey cheeseplate on the f3. pics coming sometime ;-)

anyway, wonderful cameras. both!

 

[cowpunk52]

Hi Guys, yep the c300 is hands down better suited for docstyle/sports shooting. especially for the stabilized lens (on our shoot in London we used a 100-400mm stabilized Canon lens - that's around 600mm HANDHELD)...

This really can't be overstated enough - but it's versatility certainly doesn't stop at documentary or sports. Two nights ago I shot a pick-up scene for a feature shot on Red MX - a foot chase and kill in a parking structure. Production ran out of time during principal to shoot it, and are almost completely tapped out of funding. Still, they had to have the scene for the film. Enter the C300: I shot the whole thing with a 24-105L IS lens @ f/4 and ISO 6400 with only a couple of battery powered LED lights, and a gel kit to match the ambient. I was able to get 28 set-ups in the can in less than 5 hours. That's more than production was able to get in a full 12 during principal photography!

The footage has already been ingested and graded, and it matches perfectly with the Red MX material.

anyway, wonderful cameras. both!

That's the truth!

 

[alpi69]

I have no doubt the C300 intercuts with basically anything. It has the DR and resolution to be on set next to a RED, F3, Alexa. And Canon´s launch-show showed us that on day 1.

 

[alpi69]

Finally we got to shoot something with the F3 S-LoG and the C300 C-Log.
It was a concert of Mother´s Cake in Innsbruck (@ the Treibhaus).

Again not a scientific test, because we had different lenses and jobs:
F3 with 28-75/2.8 zoom lens
C300 with 85/1.4 and 24-105/4L lenses

The F3 stayed between 6-9db (what´s that in ISO? 16003200?)
The C300 was at ISO1600 - 6400. I have to say when it gets dark and underexposed @6400 it gets noisy. But as long as the sensor gets light it looks nice. I did move the ISO around a lot since I kept the lens open, but especially on the 4L lens stayed at 6400 a lot.

Not scientific, but it shows these two cams are a great combo ;-)

 

[cowpunk52]

Finally we got to shoot something with the F3 S-LoG and the C300 C-Log.
It was a concert of Mother´s Cake in Innsbruck (@ the Treibhaus).

Again not a scientific test, because we had different lenses and jobs:
F3 with 28-75/2.8 zoom lens
C300 with 85/1.4 and 24-105/4L lenses

The F3 stayed between 6-9db (what´s that in ISO? 16003200?)
The C300 was at ISO1600 - 6400. I have to say when it gets dark and underexposed @6400 it gets noisy. But as long as the sensor gets light it looks nice. I did move the ISO around a lot since I kept the lens open, but especially on the 4L lens stayed at 6400 a lot.

Not scientific, but it shows these two cams are a great combo ;-)

Everything looks really nice here - the cameras could cut together brilliantly! Good to know for future since I have quick access to a couple of F3's from friends here in LA.

Yeah, the sensor likes light - it always performs best when it's not underexposing by any more than 2 stops. Regarding the 24-105 f4 lens, I have a sneaking suspicion that the optical elements in that lens really suck up light and it's t-stop is probably close to 5. Beautiful lens for handheld work, but it definitely requires bumping up the ISO in low-light environments. The good news is there is barely any penalty from the C300 for doing so!

 

[alpi69]

Here is finally the video that corresponds to the last screens I posted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0Yos5XurOY&sns=fb

Shot on F3, C300 and some DSLRs + 2 GoPros. You can easily spot the DSLRs, but it is tough to distinguish the C300 from the F3. Both extremely strong cameras in such tough environment and ISO 6400+/9dB+

there is also an EX-1 (the safety cam showing the static stage)

 

[alpi69]

We had another production with the F3 and C300 being used as A/B-cam.
The F3 has more DR, the C300 has more resolution. I like the C300, because it works faster, handheld and without any rigging. The F3 needs an Atomos or other device and it is IMO behind in overall ergonomics and menustructure. Also Once in S-Log everything becomes cumbersome...overcranking and such...it all seems tricky to achieve especially when you shoot such a vast area and clip in 2 days. The F3 also is afraid of water drops and dust, while I have no problems to put the C300 into a water sprinkler for a few seconds.
I think this spot shows how well the cut together, despite the fact that the F3 was mostly shooting with a 30/1.4 prime while the C300 was used with Canon Zoomlenses (24-105/4 and 70-200/4). Once you consider that, the C300 is really holding up well here.
https://vimeo.com/45690368