morgan_moore
Major Contributor
I think it is winner take all. It is because the current crop of cameras are all losers. Mainly as the dont have a really good method of controlling focus and seeing in the sun at the same time!
FS7: Sony in a C300III World
- Thread starter Joshua Milligan
- Start date
I think it is winner take all. It is because the current crop of cameras are all losers. Mainly as the dont have a really good method of controlling focus and seeing in the sun at the same time!
Clermond
Veteran
My guess there won't be very much switching from FS7 to the C300iii. The FX9 is at the same price point, FF, has a very good AF and way better color science than the FS7. SloMo is a bit outdated and 4K120p won't be a reason for a big step towards a new brand. Most people will stay in the Sony e-mount eco system.
It's the price that Canon pays for crippling cameras and the high price point at the launch of the C300II. They lost the market to the FS7. Instead of the C200 they should have launched a basic C300 XAVC 4K60p at 9,999$ and a C300 RAW with added CRL for 13,999. Probably they were blinded by the success of the C300 MarkI which was expensive too but sold very well.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
The bbc wanted 50mbs and only the 300i would do it. They made a must have tool and could charge for it - that. Changed at least half a decade ago
Grug
Veteran
They’ve clearly learnt their lesson now (and well). I guess we’ll see whether it’s enough, or too little too late.
C300 was an anomaly. The market was supposed to be split between it and F3 and between C500 and F5 a tier higher. But various factors - not limited to the lens selection - made 300 the runaway success.
Likewise, the current/upcoming structure will start with FX-6 (should be announced in a week) and C200, followed by FX-9 or C300 MKIII (do note how few overlapping features the two of them have), then C500 MKII. The next tier still has a long-in-the-tooth F55 and the never-was C700/FF. Then Sony has Venice. Canon has R5.
Likewise, the current/upcoming structure will start with FX-6 (should be announced in a week) and C200, followed by FX-9 or C300 MKIII (do note how few overlapping features the two of them have), then C500 MKII. The next tier still has a long-in-the-tooth F55 and the never-was C700/FF. Then Sony has Venice. Canon has R5.
Run&Gun
Veteran
At the time, the original 300 was a bargain. Maybe expensive if you were coming from a 5D series, but for those of us coming from $45K VariCam’s, they were the deal of the decade. I knew guys that were buying them in pairs.
G
Guest
Guest
Lol
dmitrizigany
Veteran
Cinema5D’s Test measured the C300mkIII’s DR at slightly below the C500mkII so not sure the FX9 will compare unfavourably.
Remains to be seem though.
G
Guest
Guest
Regardless, the DGO is only helping significantly at iso800 and 60fps or lower. So, it isn’t a catch all feature.
Panasonic punted here ... on 3rd down.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
It's hard to argue that any of these 4K cameras is incapable, including the previous generation.
The c300i shot in HD, no slomo. The codec options of the new generation are not the leap forward that happened during previous upgrades.
Unless and until i need RAW or more than 4K or more than 60p, I don't think my clients will care which camera I use.
But it's a pity that the C500mk2 doesn't have DGO and that neither Canon camera has RF mount.
The c300i shot in HD, no slomo. The codec options of the new generation are not the leap forward that happened during previous upgrades.
Unless and until i need RAW or more than 4K or more than 60p, I don't think my clients will care which camera I use.
But it's a pity that the C500mk2 doesn't have DGO and that neither Canon camera has RF mount.
G
Guest
Guest
Well, that is the truth.
The C500ii was always a repackage C700FF, and hopefully no one bought one thinking otherwise.
The C3003, is great specs for this spring, but the camera is coming out later this year when few want to spend money, so it will be interesting to see what happens.
Not sure the Fx9 is out of the running. It still has more lens options and is better suited out of box for shoulder mount ergonomics and tripod use. And, had it not been for Covid, the Fx9 would be getting people work today. Whereas the C3003 is stil a ways away. By this time next year, who is to say what i’ll think of the C3003 as a purchase. Cameras these days are just good. Can’t hate on them. I wouldn’t say they are where i’d like. Would love to have better DR than Arri sometime in the near future. Kind of sucks that is where we are stuck. Sure, most cameras over 12stops DR aren’t fussy, but even the Arri has “look” for sunny day exterior. Not saying it is bad, just saying i could still use a little more roll off, if it were possible. But i am talking about the near invisible nuances in roll off. Would love to have more subtly, than The look we call “videoy” or what we used to mean by “digital”.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I wonder what the physical limit of DR is with CMOS sensors...
Although, in theory, if you can do DUAL gain output, you should be able to do quadruple gain output and squeeze out another stop or 2, right? (While compromising other aspects, such as sensitivity or readout speed, perhaps.) I'm not saying the tech will go that way, but I agree that film still beats Arri for highlight roll-off.
G
Guest
Guest
I don’t know about CMOS.
One thing that would make me jump to FF35 or MedForm, is if they had giant dual gain pixels at 4K. Then i get enough resolution for better gradation, and still get the “better pixels”. Similar to Arri Mini LF. Seeing how good Red has done with pretty much no in camera processing, even with slightly smaller pixels, If someone made bigger than Arri pixels and DGO and Feel frame 4k and modern tech, I think we could see something really really nice.
As for s35 cmos, i just don’t know enough about them to know what the theoretical limits are, although, seeing how quickly we hit a glass ceiling, i’d assume that’s it. So, hopefully we find some other methods, and soon. For now, i am happy to keep using whatever. And unless something beats Arri, i have what i need and will rent what i don’t. I guess exposure is part of the job, but i just don’t like the roll off on most digital cameras. Arri is about it, and Venice and Gemini as close seconds. Just that they at least have real resolution.
Last edited:
Run&Gun
Veteran
Original C300 shot slow-mo. Did it all the time.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
In 720p?
Run&Gun
Veteran
Yes.
G
Guest
Guest
Yeah, anyone in the fast pace world worried about the C300’s seem a but unwarranted. Obviously personal preference is one thing, but they’re svelt cameras:
I can’t remember which drone they used. Was a DJI something. Main camera was C300ii, has some slomo.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I should have specified that it had no *full* HD slomo. Maybe your clients are ok with a drop in resolution, but maybe only until a no-compromise camera is available...