C200: Some good C200 footage appearing now!

NorBro said:
Nope.

But the C200 is a much better value if you don't need what RED offers overall (specific camera specs/features and credibility from certain potential employers).

Plenty of people will make a living with their C200 and won't need anything else...really just depends on your own career/goals/thoughts.
Click to expand...

I am curious why do you say the C200 RAW image isn't comparable to the Raven image? What is it specifically that you think the Raven delivers with it's image that the the C200 lacks? I am planning on renting one later this month to test it out but I would love to hear more from people who have shot with the C200 and RED.

Thanks!
 
I've tried both, they both have advantages over the other but I haven't used the footage on same timeline.
That's why I feel I actually need both for different reasons.
The red image is better but it needs light and it needs more work to shoot with, no NDs etc.
The c200 has speed and is lightweight with a raw image that gets close but in post it's more time consuming with transcoding etc
The red is ready to cut in FCPX or premiere with built in red controls.
I would much rather use the c200 on a gimbal and use DAF all day long for those traveling shots.
The red gives you that commercial image straight out of the box with some grading obviously.
I personally like image from the red better but I still would need a safe bet cam like the c200
 
Last edited:
Gary T said:
I am curious why do you say the C200 RAW image isn't comparable to the Raven image? What is it specifically that you think the Raven delivers with it's image that the the C200 lacks? I am planning on renting one later this month to test it out but I would love to hear more from people who have shot with the C200 and RED.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I just personally can't compare the two.

The C200 RAW sounds great ON PAPER, but it does not deliver cinematic quality like the RED Raven or Scarlet-W (I haven't used any of the more expensive ones after those and don't have much experience with DSMC1 bodies).

I know I've said the following before, but the C200 simply looks like a Canon; that's the best way I can put it.

When you rent the Raven, you'll see that even just filming in DRAGONcolor2 and REDgamma 4 produces very pleasing results. The colors, the gamma, the motion; whatever is happening in the camera just looks and feels better to me if that makes any sense.

REDCODE is truly something special and I think most people that spend some time with it are enlightened a bit (I was).

If you're just comparing the two in other areas...NDs, DPAF, small batteries, less expensive media, XLRs on the body without paying $4000 for an XLR module; all lovely. Would love all of that on the RED.

But pure cinematic image quality, it's a no contest IMO. I think a C300 Mark II will produce identical results to the C200...it's only missing 4K/60p.

P.S. I love Canon...just sharing what I think.
 
for those of you who have shot on canon C200 raw, how's the highlight roll off when you are doing 12bit raw? also is it possible for you to test for overexposure? like say if its overexposed 2-3 stops over, can you still rescue the footage in raw? and what about the noise in raw? is the grain somewhat pleasing? Also ? do you feel with canon raw you need more time grading it to look cinematic like RED/BMD
 
But, but, with 4K RAW and a LUT you can make it look like anything. So, just apply a Red LUT to your C200 footage and it will look exactly the same.

Think of it like a mediocre looking person, putting a mask on them of a beautiful/handsome person, and then they are exactly the same.
 
Yeah, it works until you realize how much time, effort, and money went into making that mask. And sometimes the mask breaks down under harsh conditions. Often, it just doesn't fool people. And it's never the same as the real thing.
 
I had the RED Raven and returned it. They are 2 different cameras. The Raven really shines when used in a studio or an enviroment with studio lights. The C200 is great for run and gun, wedding, and documentary stuff. BUT, I think the c200 will also shine in studio as well, where as the Raven would not do as well in a wedding or doc style. I took a lot of test footage with the Raven, nothing blew me away, but again, nothing was done in a pro environment. When I look at vimeo, the best raven footage is shot with professional lighting and I think thats where the camera really shines. I don't shoot in that enviroment, so its not for me.
 
I usually work with REDs and I tried some C200 RAWs on Resolve 14 yesterday...balanced straight of the box colors as always with Canon but...and it's a big BUT...that RAW is a joke! I know understand why they call it Light...it seems to work with 8bit vs RED R3Ds...so thin!!!!!
 
dia3olik said:
I usually work with REDs and I tried some C200 RAWs on Resolve 14 yesterday...balanced straight of the box colors as always with Canon but...and it's a big BUT...that RAW is a joke! I know understand why they call it Light...it seems to work with 8bit vs RED R3Ds...so thin!!!!!
Click to expand...

pics or it didn't happen :)
 
dia3olik said:
I usually work with REDs and I tried some C200 RAWs on Resolve 14 yesterday...balanced straight of the box colors as always with Canon but...and it's a big BUT...that RAW is a joke! I know understand why they call it Light...it seems to work with 8bit vs RED R3Ds...so thin!!!!!
Click to expand...


That's an interesting observation. Was this footage you shot or did you acquire it from someone else? Would you mind posting screenshots and more details about your workflow in Resolve 14?

Thanks!
 
you can't explain it with pics, just download some C200 and some RED raw files and play with Resolve 14...you'll understand the huge added flexibility in the R3Ds...DSMC2 with STH OLPF and IPP2 pipeline has now pleasing colors finally too...
 
BTW I never worked with Sony RAWs from the F55 or F65 but I imagine 16bit linear RAWs would yield the same impression working in Resolve...more flexibility...a THICKER negative so to speak...
 
ahahah actually it's standard tho (except the OLPF, I prefer the STH vs the STD since I don't need the added sensitivity), btw try both RAWs yourself in Resolve and get back to us...don't take my word...try it.
 
dia3olik said:
you can't explain it with pics, just download some C200 and some RED raw files and play with Resolve 14…
Click to expand...

Well, if there is a huge difference you should be able to show what you mean in either images, or by describing something reproducible. We ARE not talking your word for it (we are also not saying you are wrong), just asking you to back up what you say.

So what is it exactly that you mean? Saying the image is "thicker" is not a proper technical explanation.
 
mmm I just wanted to help, I'll surely don't have to post an example to something so obvious and without an exact A/B comparison done with the same scene...

Actually "thicker" is the perfect word to describe it, TRY IT YOURSELF, apply LUTs, start to grade, and the C200 image FALLS APART quite quickly for being a RAW file, that's a fact.

I was disappointed a lot, I had much higher expectation from the C200 RAWs.

BTW On the other hand I was absolutely IMPRESSED by the quality the puny MP4s give you in comparison tho! I didn't expect much but they're very usable!

Here's some files to have fun in Resolve:

http://www.red.com/sample-r3d-files

and

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B51J6ZyC5b6-aU12LUhfVU51N1U
 
dia3olik said:
you can't explain it with pics, just download some C200 and some RED raw files and play with Resolve 14...you'll understand the huge added flexibility in the R3Ds...DSMC2 with STH OLPF and IPP2 pipeline has now pleasing colors finally too...
Click to expand...

Since we are talking about motion picture post production a picture or sequence is exactly what we would need to see what you are talking about. A few screen shots along with your settings would be very helpful.

If I understand you correctly it sounds you are saying that found it much easier to adjust the R3D files than the Cinema Raw Light files in DaVinci Resolve 14. This wouldn't be surprising since as you may have already read, Peter Chamberlain of Blackmagic Design says in the thread linked below that full RAW controls for Cinema Raw Light aren't yet in Resolve 14. If they are delivered it might make it much easier work with Cinema Raw Light but that doesn't mean that a professional colorist can't get fantastic results with the current controls.

Was this footage that you shot or did you download it? It would great to know what you were working to get a frame of reference.


https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=61984&p=361768&hilit=c200#p361768
 
dia3olik said:
mmm I just wanted to help, I'll surely don't have to post an example to something so obvious and without an exact A/B comparison done with the same scene...

Actually "thicker" is the perfect word to describe it, TRY IT YOURSELF, apply LUTs, start to grade, and the C200 image FALLS APART quite quickly for being a RAW file, that's a fact.

I was disappointed a lot, I had much higher expectation from the C200 RAWs.

BTW On the other hand I was absolutely IMPRESSED by the quality the puny MP4s give you in comparison tho! I didn't expect much but they're very usable!

Here's some files to have fun in Resolve:

http://www.red.com/sample-r3d-files

and

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B51J6ZyC5b6-aU12LUhfVU51N1U
Click to expand...
So basically, in order to get the absolute best quality out of your C200, shoot with the absolutely impressive MP4s and don't shoot with the RAW lite which is disappointing and falls apart quite quickly.


You can't really shoot a baked in look with RAW lite, can you? Of course you can with MP4. It'd be interesting to imagine that compressed RAW, which must be graded, but may not grade well, could actually result in lower quality than compressed MP4, which, being able to bake in a look, can look good without grading, and thus possibly result in better quality. I doubt that's the case, but it would be ironic if it was.
 
hahahah you completely missed my point Gary, read better what I wrote!

IT'S NOT JUST an instance or a particular condition that exacerbate the problem.

BTW Resolve 14 is reading the ENTIRE C200 RAW data even without the RAW controls enabled, as written clearly even in the thread you posted.

Guys stop dreaming and start downloading the footage and playing around, then we'll talk. It's VERY noticeable.

IT'S NOT SUBJECTIVE AND IT'S NOT A SUBTLE DIFFERENCE, so it's easy to feel by EVERYONE who ACTUALLY TRY BOTH in Resolve.

If you shoot well and you need that exact result for the final export/delivery it's smooth sailing, but if you want/need to heavily move things around...good luck with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top