C200: The new Canon C200 with 4K

I believe that the C200 story will be like every other camera story. Talent, glass, lighting and skill at composing trump 8 bit over 10 bit, 4:2:0 over 4:2:2. May of us fall into the trap of getting obsessive about specs and sometimes fail to see the big picture. I'm not saying specs aren't important but not all specs are created equal. The Arri cameras are under spec as far as raster size but it doesn't seem to have held them back from achieving success very much. I agree with Osslund when he speaks about the low spec codec in the C100. With good glass and lighting, that wimpy 24 Mbps codec can look amazing so there is no reason why the 35 Mbps codec in the C200 for 1080 and the up to 150 Mbps codec with UHD cannot look equally amazing or better. Sure, for TV production and delivery to a lot of clients, we'll need the XF-AVC at 305 Mbps or 410 Mbps. Even if Canon makes the awful decision to make the C200 XF-AVC implementation 8-bit, it's not going to keep talented DPs from making visual magic with the camera. I'm not making excuses, I am going to be massively disappointed that Canon wimped out on some specs on this camera and went overboard on others. Canon EOS C cameras have lots of compromises, I agree, but so does every other camera on the market. But the bottom line is, they work, they are reliable, they get the job done, they make you money. Clients, for the most part, care a lot more about color science than output specs and codec specs. If all that mattered to clients were specs, everything on a theater screen today could be shot on a $2,000.00 GH5. But specs don't tell even come close to the whole story.

As far as the FS7, I agree, Sony was really smart in how they developed and deployed that camera. As long as the FS7 makes you money and you are happy and your clients are happy with the end result, it is a great camera.
 
But there's always that nagging feeling you have shooting a lower quality 8-bit 4:2:0 to get it really right in camera to avoid problems in post. Shooting so many hours on both C100 and FS7 I often reach the limit with the C100 when grading but with the FS7 it's more creative choices instead of limitations. That's worth much.
 
Unlike Pure Drifting I have no shame I'll post anything... ha!

This is the Helix and C100 MKI. The lens is the 11-18mm. I had it set to 11mm and looked too fish eye for me, next time I'll do 18 mm and see what happens. I went a little nuts with the movements just because I could, best used in a slower and calm fashion. For what I do it's a go addition to my gear.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x3lc6ZcbWcQ
 
Holy smokes... the Panasonic EVA1 was just announced and I think it's going to really take from the C200 sales. Did any of you watch the live stream? It isn't ready yet and didn't quite have a price other than "less than $8,000", but the specs look good. Looks like it will be a while before it's released.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
Holy smokes... the Panasonic EVA1 was just announced and I think it's going to really take from the C200 sales. Did any of you watch the live stream? It isn't ready yet and didn't quite have a price other than "less than $8,000", but the specs look good. Looks like it will be a while before it's released.
Click to expand...

Now the other thread can get 500 more pages of speculation talking about a camera that is in "theory" stage.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
Holy smokes... the Panasonic EVA1 was just announced and I think it's going to really take from the C200 sales. Did any of you watch the live stream? It isn't ready yet and didn't quite have a price other than "less than $8,000", but the specs look good. Looks like it will be a while before it's released.
Click to expand...

You kinda have to decide what features you want. Stuff like touch screen auto focus is pretty amazing, so is a viewfinder...

240fps 2k internal is amazing, so is 4k/60p to an SD card.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
Holy smokes... the Panasonic EVA1 was just announced and I think it's going to really take from the C200 sales. Did any of you watch the live stream? It isn't ready yet and didn't quite have a price other than "less than $8,000", but the specs look good. Looks like it will be a while before it's released.
Click to expand...

I watched. Some very impressive specs were announced. Personally the two cameras seemed aimed at different users to me, Canon more toward the corporate video/commercial type shooter and the Panasonic more at the indie filmmaker. DPAF is necessary and powerful for event/documentary/OMB photography whereas not really needed for narrative production with an AC pulling focus. I find 5.7k imager to be of more use to most of us than on-board RAW recording but time will tell if that stays true. You will see the benefits of the 5.7k imager in everything you shoot at 4K. How many of us are actually going to do more than just experiment with RAW? A few but I bet not many documentary or event filmmakers as we cannot afford $5,000.00 worth of CFast cards. It's all quite the conundrum, both cameras will be really intriguing, nice products. 240p 2K is super cool but then again, is it really needed? 240 fps is pretty slow motion for most things other than sports or action. 120 fps slow motion is more in the area of what you would actually need but it appears the Panasonic will be recording that 240 fps 2K at a 10 bit 4:2:2 level, versus the Canon's 35 Mbps 4:2:0 8-bit. Hmm...

IMHO Varicam color science is in the same league as Canon color science, i like them both. We live in interesting times.
 
Ben_Ericson said:
You kinda have to decide what features you want. Stuff like touch screen auto focus is pretty amazing.
Click to expand...

This is the one AF feature that Panasonic got right with the GH5, where you can tap where you want to camera to focus and it will do it almost instantly. So I would expect the EVA1 to be at least as good as the GH5 on this feature.
 
puredrifting said:
Personally the two cameras seemed aimed at different users to me, Canon more toward the corporate video/commercial type shooter and the Panasonic more at the indie filmmaker.
Click to expand...

Canon made a BIG mistake by banking on 8-bit internal recording and RAW recording that's going to cost $1,000 per hour of recorded footage. I shoot mainly corporate work and I won't go back to shooting 8-bit footage, and I won't pay $1,000 per hour for memory cards to shoot RAW.
 
TheDingo said:
Canon made a BIG mistake by banking on 8-bit internal recording and RAW recording that's going to cost $1,000 per hour of recorded footage. I shoot mainly corporate work and I won't go back to shooting 8-bit footage, and I won't pay $1,000 per hour for memory cards to shoot RAW.
Click to expand...

Same here.
 
TheDingo said:
Canon made a BIG mistake by banking on 8-bit internal recording and RAW recording...
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm still missing it. Has anyone confirmed with Canon (or seen online confirmation from Canon) that the C200 will only do 8-bit internal? I don't mean for the proxy-ish MP4, but for the even-further-in-the-future XF-AVC upgrade?
 
Jim Feeley said:
Sorry, I'm still missing it. Has anyone confirmed with Canon (or seen online confirmation from Canon) that the C200 will only do 8-bit internal? I don't mean for the proxy-ish MP4, but for the even-further-in-the-future XF-AVC upgrade?
Click to expand...

I'll have to recheck again... but I was thinking it was 10 bit raw... but everything else was 8 bit.
 
GaryinCalifornia said:
I'll have to recheck again... but I was thinking it was 10 bit raw... but everything else was 8 bit.
Click to expand...

I can't remember which site wrote this, but there was something about Canon taking until February 2018 to rewrite the 10-bit XF-AVC CODEC from the C300 into an 8-bit XF-AVC CODEC for the C200, and this was the reason for the XF-AVC CODEC delay on the C200.
 
Pulled this from B&H...

Cinema Raw Light
Resolution: 4096 x 2160
Bit Depth: 12-bit (29.97P/23.98P/25P/24P), 10 bit (59.94P/50P)
Bit Rate: 1 Gbps

Maybe thats where I got the 10 bit part... but everything else is 8 bit... it seems according to the specs on their site (B&H).
 
Newsshooter:

"Interestingly, Canon also plan to add the XF-AVC codec from the C300 MkII at a later date – currently planned for the first half of 2018. Apparently the delay is due to the complexity of re-engineering a 10bit codec to play nicely in 8bit. So possibly it’s not going to offer a dramatic increase in quality of footage when it arrives. But there is a roadmap, it’s planned as a free update, and once implemented it means footage from the C200 should fit nicely within a C300 Mk II workflow."
 
TheDingo said:
Canon made a BIG mistake by banking on 8-bit internal recording and RAW recording that's going to cost $1,000 per hour of recorded footage. I shoot mainly corporate work and I won't go back to shooting 8-bit footage, and I won't pay $1,000 per hour for memory cards to shoot RAW.
Click to expand...

I'm kind of hoping that they offer 305 Mbps XF-AVC on the C200. That nets you a record time of 110 minutes per $679.00 256GB CFast card. Nobody will see the difference between 410 Mbps and 305Mbps. So $1,360.00 for 220 minutes of XF-AVC recording time is expensive, but acceptable to me. Three hours and forty minutes will get me through some shooting days, not all, but I can slowly acquire more CFast cards as they hopefully come down in cost as they increase in size, like P2 cards did over the years.
 
Jim Feeley said:
Sorry, I'm still missing it. Has anyone confirmed with Canon (or seen online confirmation from Canon) that the C200 will only do 8-bit internal? I don't mean for the proxy-ish MP4, but for the even-further-in-the-future XF-AVC upgrade?
Click to expand...

It has not been decided yet or made public yet. There was anectdotal evidence that someone blogged the delay was from Canon engineering having to shoehorn a 10-bit XF-AVC codec into 8-bits for the C200. But Canon have not stated 8 or 10 bit yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top