C200: shoot 4k and downres instead of 10 bit 422? Good enough?

[nickbeef]

I shoot a lot of "doc style" videos for non-profits and educational work, where I have to shoot in what ever, often undesirable, situations I get thrown into. I've always wanted a more robust codec to deal with this in post (fixing color issues, fixing over and under exposure issues). I even bought a Ninja Blade for my C100, though I rarely used it mostly because I do a lot of hand held work and I never found a good affordable way to not just have it get in the way.

Anyways, now that I've got a C200 my problem isn't entirely fixed. Raw lite seems overkill and unrealistic unless I have some control of the situation to deal with increased swapping cards, downloading footage, etc. However, I've heard from a couple sources that have suggested that the severity of the C200 lacking a 10 bit 422 option is a bit exaggerated, because if you shoot 4K and then downres to 1080, what was 420 color sampling, now has increased color "resolution" (for lack of a better term) which will almost aways be the case since 95% of the time you are delivering in 1080p.

Not exactly 422, but is it close enough, or at least enough of an improvement to convince me to shoot 4K in these situations (something I've always avoided.) Not sure if any of this makes a difference between the 8 bit and 10 bit either, my understanding of all this is limited. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[puredrifting]

Not to sound glib but you could always just nail exposure and composition? I've shot internal .MP4 for 1080 delivery and it's fine unless you totally blow white balance and exposure. Being a film shooter, I probably pay more attention to trying to nail exposure and white balance than most newer shooters who have never shot film. Film was that way, do it right or you get nothing. Shooting Cinema RAW Light is what the camera was designed for. I've been shooting the C200 now for almost ten months and I always tell people, it's a RAW camera that has a proxy, that's it. If you can't shoot RAW, buy a C300 MKII, you'll be happier. It seems like all of the voices who berate Canon for not including a 10-bit 4:2:2 code are finally getting the message. If those specs are important to you, this is the wrong camera. Buy an FS7, C300 MKII or other camera with that codec.

 

[Spartacus]

This idea became popular with the GH4 I think. Bitdepth stays, but color improves because you start with four times the information. Maybe this helps http://dgarygrady.com/2016/06/04/converting-8-bit-420-uhd-to-hd/
So the only advantage I can see would be having more information for grading (or if you key a lot for keying). But then again similar to what Dan said: If you're intend is heavy grading and creating a stylised look, why not just use the best the C200 has to offer - CRL?
For everything else, as Dan said: Just shoot it right. The MP4 will still offer some room for tweaking...

 

[nickbeef]

Obviously I'm always trying to nail exposure and white balance. But when working in fast moving "doc style" environments, sometimes things don't go as planned. Mostly I struggle with ugly color florescent lights, mixed daylight & tungsten situations, peoples faces being somewhat underexposed in order to compensate for over exposed back grounds, or just generally moving too quickly and not getting the settings exactly where I'd like them.

Maybe these aren't issues that either 10 bit or 422 color space would be able to resolve. The tests that I did with my C100 and a ninja blade were an improvement in terms of bringing up under exposed images, but run & gun with that setup just didn't work out for me.

 

[puredrifting]

Obviously I'm always trying to nail exposure and white balance. But when working in fast moving "doc style" environments, sometimes things don't go as planned. Mostly I struggle with ugly color florescent lights, mixed daylight & tungsten situations, peoples faces being somewhat underexposed in order to compensate for over exposed back grounds, or just generally moving too quickly and not getting the settings exactly where I'd like them.

Maybe these aren't issues that either 10 bit or 422 color space would be able to resolve. The tests that I did with my C100 and a ninja blade were an improvement in terms of bringing up under exposed images, but run & gun with that setup just didn't work out for me.

I had the exact same setup, C100 MKI and the Blade and I agree, fine for tripod/greenscreen but kind of a PITA for handheld documentary shooting. All I can tell you is I am shooting two documentaries currently, one largely from crazy, tight, chase boats on the ocean and the C200 with just a Hoodman H400 on the screen and the 18-135 STM IS, shooting mostly CRL has been a dream. I am very pro CRL now, it's a great format, works well and the drive space is a little large but drives are cheap too now. Costco has 6TB Seagates for $109.00 until July 28th, buy a pile of them and some Ego Disk CFast cards and go sick. Thats what I am doing and no compaints really. If I run out of CFast cards on a given shoot (I have six of them so have only ran out once), I can always just switch to UHD MP4 and it's been surprisingly decent too. I don't see the lack of a 10-bit codec as much of hindrance. My C100 MKI and C300 MKI were both 8-bit cameras and my clients loved the images, C200 is no different with the added bonus of 4K CRL. Don't get brainwashed by specs. yes, they are important, to a point, but in the end, no clients or audiences are going to not watch your gripping footage because it's 8-bit and not 10-bit.

 

[indiawilds]

Not to sound glib but you could always just nail exposure and composition? I've shot internal .MP4 for 1080 delivery and it's fine unless you totally blow white balance and exposure. Being a film shooter, I probably pay more attention to trying to nail exposure and white balance than most newer shooters who have never shot film. Film was that way, do it right or you get nothing. Shooting Cinema RAW Light is what the camera was designed for. I've been shooting the C200 now for almost ten months and I always tell people, it's a RAW camera that has a proxy, that's it. If you can't shoot RAW, buy a C300 MKII, you'll be happier. It seems like all of the voices who berate Canon for not including a 10-bit 4:2:2 code are finally getting the message. If those specs are important to you, this is the wrong camera. Buy an FS7, C300 MKII or other camera with that codec.

I come from still photography shooting slide films where anything more than half a stop of exposure means straight to the trash bin. There is no reason not to get the exposure to reasonable range. For photography I used to move the wheel/knob furiously and the same thing now. For me the most important problem is visualising the best composition while run-n-gun.