C500: Rise of the C500

Finnegan

Finnegan

Well-known member
Back when Canon announced and subsequently shipped the C500, it seemed to me that people were largely uninterested. I think the main complaint was that for what the camera offered it was too expensive. It didn't help that it shares the same sensor with the C300, yet was nearly $10K more at checkout. However, nowadays it seems like there's way more interest in the camera than ever before but I can't really figure out why. Can anyone enlighten me?

I have a hunch that it's 4K related. Perhaps the C500's 4K RAW acquisition and workflow is more efficient and streamlined than RED's, or other 4K cameras?
 
Depends on what you do. For wedding and events it's just overkill... very expensive overkill.

For corporate work, maybe I can see it. But again, the C300 is a more wise choice.

For film work the C500 seems to be the goto camera.

I also think its down to some deals canon have on at the moment that make it almost the same price as a C300 in some territories. Not here in the UK, it's still £10k more.
 
Arguably "Best low light production camera in the world" Shane Hurlbut. I am working with the C500- 6.4lbs fully loaded. Add Odyssey 7q 4k & 2k raw, 1.2lbs. Add one of the fast CN E primes- for example 50mm t1.3 at 2.5lbs, and a Senn 600mke at 1/2 lb, and a couple of cables= 11lbs lowlight monster. Start here and go up.
 
wellllllll…. no annoying glares when filming someone backlit from the sun coming through a window. Beeeeecause of the internal ND filters, thank god!

I'd go with the C500 over a RED for sure.
 
I've got both a 300 and 500. The 300 is really my go to doc camera but the 500 can play that game too, recording internally to CF. When you jump to 1920x1080 12 bit which you can do with a pix240 you can really go to town with grading, which might seem an anachronism because ungraded log seems to be the new black these days. Judging by my first few attempts at grading in FCPX the 1920 12 bit is really off the charts in what you can do with it. I had one shot that was chroma saturated and even 4 stops of over exposure didn't kill it. Once the training wheels come off the 7Q and they get some recording options available besides .dpx the 500 certainly will reach its full potential.
 
corycross said:
I'd go with the C500 over a RED for sure.
Click to expand...
Yup.
I've used RED and I own a C300. If I had to shoot Raw and 4K, Id get the C500 over any of the Red cameras anyday!
Im not a fan of red whatsoever. I like how its upgradable and customizable. Thats about it. I find the Canon much better
 
When the 500 was first announced there were very few smooth running external recorders. The gemini did a strange data striping and the codex was just as pricey as the camera. Now with the 7Q out and the latest firmware that supports ACES and higher framerates it's a pretty amazing setup. I'm debating selling my 300 to upgrade, since I now have a 7Q on the way already.
 
jm.gardiner said:
When the 500 was first announced there were very few smooth running external recorders. The gemini did a strange data striping and the codex was just as pricey as the camera. Now with the 7Q out and the latest firmware that supports ACES and higher framerates it's a pretty amazing setup. I'm debating selling my 300 to upgrade, since I now have a 7Q on the way already.
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons I've been hearing around the traps - that and the price reductions. I think you'll find theres a number of C300 owner / operators starting to consider moving to the 500 as the logical path.
 
The 7Q isn't quite there yet because .dpx is very data heavy and the firmware upgrade we'd all like to have isn't out yet, "Soon only not yet". That said the 7Q will be amazing once it is updated and will do wonders for recording the C500.
 
i think that sums it up pretty well, that the big turnoff was lack of internal recording options. at that level, i would gather the opinion would be to go external or go home. tis odd/interesting that they chose to be so limiting with its internal recording abilities. the sony cameras make more sense to that effect because they are designed for 'backpack' modules. the canons though really are optimal with minimal additions. there certainly were plenty of media choices, but they chose CF, instead CFast 2.0, though perhaps it wasn't available during the design phase, but then theres SxS, but i guess the smell of sony on it acts as a deterrent....
 
Mark Smith said:
The 7Q isn't quite there yet because .dpx is very data heavy and the firmware upgrade we'd all like to have isn't out yet, "Soon only not yet". That said the 7Q will be amazing once it is updated and will do wonders for recording the C500.
Click to expand...

I would not count on any update from "any" manufacturer until it is out and has been tested. If you really need a certain feature and your putting big money down (a camera) with the expectations that something will happen in the future with a recorder that is not good business. The bleeding edge is called that for a reason. I too believe that the C500 and 7Q has the potential to be a great combination, but I will wait until I know it works they way I need it to work. So I guess I am agreeing with you Mark, that the 7Q is not quite there yet.
 
CFast 2.0 - are not even available right now, or at least i dont know any store where it would be available for sale, and i dont even think the price was announced for CFast yet. the bad news from what i read online CFast are not compatible with CF cards, and it sucks..... as at the end in that interview https://vimeo.com/79361465 , Mr Onda told something about using CFast tech in future products..... my english is not perfect, but i think his english is even worse, maybe some can check for us that info....
 
greenheron said:
I would not count on any update from "any" manufacturer until it is out and has been tested. If you really need a certain feature and your putting big money down (a camera) with the expectations that something will happen in the future with a recorder that is not good business. The bleeding edge is called that for a reason. I too believe that the C500 and 7Q has the potential to be a great combination, but I will wait until I know it works they way I need it to work. So I guess I am agreeing with you Mark, that the 7Q is not quite there yet.
Click to expand...


The 7Q for its price point is an amazing monitor . I've spent nearly as much for a sony monitor that had nowhere near the capability, image quality and low power consumption as the 7Q. I am slightly irked by the releasing of products that "aren't finished" until they get a firmware update some time in the indefinite future.

"Why yes Mr Smith, you'll be able to download the firmware update that will turn the skate board wheels on your new Corvette into the 18 inch low profile bad ass wheels seen in the publicity photo sometime soon only not yet" .
I think Convergent will pull it off, they do have a solid track record, I just want them to step on it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who wants that.
 
Mark Smith said:
I am slightly irked by the releasing of products that "aren't finished" until they get a firmware update some time in the indefinite future.
Click to expand...

I've been a long time member of the camp that says you should buy a product for the features it has now, not for what it may be able to do later. However, I've noticed an increasing amount of products released over the last few years that do just this (Red probably would be the earliest to digital camera to exploit this), and I think that we're going to see a lot more of this type of thing happening with future technology. These days, hardware is really the easy part. Writing code that can take full advantage of the advanced hardware is extraordinarily painstaking & difficult. Firmware update "road maps" are going to become a regular part of tech spec sheets, and how well a company can stick to their map will be another way to differentiate them from the pack. I think this is going to be something that we'll all have to accept.

In the case of an affordable recorder for the C500, until the Odyssey 7Q has completed their firmware, there isn't a recorder that can take full advantage of the camera's capabilities outside of the $15,000 Codex S Plus recorder. Want 12-bit Compressed HD? Pix 240i. Want uncompressed HD? S.Two OB-1. Want 4K Compressed? Aja Ki Pro Quad. Want 2k or 4k Raw? Gemini RAW. Want 4K uncompressed? Astro HR-7510. I can see a situation where I might want any of those flavors of recording, and Convergent Design is the only company promising to deliver most of those options.

What is dangerous, I think, is basing purchasing decisions based on the possibility of unannounced upgrades. I wouldn't buy a camera with a feature missing that I needed in the hope that it might be implemented if I wrote enough letters. But if an established company publishes a planned upgrade program, then I'm much more inclined to consider it for purchase - and I believe that's going to be a selling point on most advanced technology products in the very near future.

Mark Smith said:
I think Convergent will pull it off, they do have a solid track record, I just want them to step on it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who wants that.
Click to expand...

From Mitch's unwavering participation in the 7Q's discussion on this board and elsewhere on the 'net, I'm certain they're well aware of our impatience and are just as anxious as we are to get features delivered. But like I said, writing the code is the really really hard part. And if they screw it up, imagine the sh*tstorm that would ensue. Online camera nerds like us are notoriously unforgiving.
 
Last edited:
Finnegan said:
Back when Canon announced and subsequently shipped the C500, it seemed to me that people were largely uninterested. I think the main complaint was that for what the camera offered it was too expensive. It didn't help that it shares the same sensor with the C300, yet was nearly $10K more at checkout. However, nowadays it seems like there's way more interest in the camera than ever before but I can't really figure out why. Can anyone enlighten me?

I have a hunch that it's 4K related. Perhaps the C500's 4K RAW acquisition and workflow is more efficient and streamlined than RED's, or other 4K cameras?
Click to expand...

The C500 is an extraordinary performer that is, like it's older sibling the C300, hampered by a spec sheet that at first doesn't seem to offer much at a price that's a little too far out of reach. However, like the C300, it's proving to be more effective in practice than on paper. The color is just spectacular, and having the greater bit-depth and resolution options open the door to the sensor that Canon has. I don't think the workflow with it's Raw files will be much easier than working with Red's, but it is far easier to get really pleasing images and colorimetry out of the C500. Now that affordable video recorders are hitting the market that can take full advantage of the C500's output and also add incredible features on their own to augment the camera (Odyssey 7Q), people are starting to give the C500 another look. The price drops have definitely played a heavy hand in this as well. I purchased a C500 during the rebate double-dip and paid less for it than I did for my C300 less than 2 years ago.

Combine all that with the fact that the camera has been out for a year and in the hands of professionals who have put it through the ringer and found it suitable to use alongside film, Alexa, and even as a-cam on planned theatrical releases, and you have a lot of people who read numbers and push pencils begin to think that the C500 deserves a second look. What I think they'll find is that, when combined with a recorder, the C500 gives spectacular images across a range of resolutions, codecs, and formats. Want 4K raw or compressed? C500 looks incredible. Want 2K/HD raw or compressed? Again, C500 look incredible. Want TV production friendly HD recording? C500 looks incredible. It's a swiss army knife of camera in a very light and efficient body that can deliver consistent, beautiful performance in nearly any lighting* condition or situation to whatever format you choose. There's a lot of power in that.

*not only does it look great in low-light, but check out it's IR performance compared to other cameras in daylight with heavy ND filtration! It blows every other digital camera out of the water.
 
Last edited:
a few more reasons why a C500 is a good investment-I rest my glass-

a few more reasons why a C500 is a good investment-I rest my glass-

Canon_EF_EOS2012.jpg
 
Last edited:
Saw a blog where the writer wrote when the rebate was in effect... he got 2 500's with the Q7's and outfitting them for the cost of outfitting a single Epic...

does anyone know if it the Q7 will just record 2k 444 non raw or 4k 444 non raw... to same storage space...
 
Canon C500 Recording Option Updates: New Formats Support

- QHD up to 60p

- 2K 12-bit 444 in .DPX up to 60p

- 1080p 12-bit 444 in .DPX up to 60p

- 1080p 10-bit 422 up to 120p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top