C200: The new Canon C200 with 4K

It obviously uses the same cable since the new viewfinder also works with the C300II. I would love to be able to have the monitor disconnected from the audio unit, especially since I already have the audio unit that came with my XC15.
 
That would be amazing for C300 Mark II owners, but I feel that if you could use it with that camera, Canon would have announced that bit of info along with the C200.

But maybe they are saving the added functionality for a surprise FW update as mentioned. (Not sure if the cameras would need a hardware upgrade for any reason.)
 
TRIPP GREEN said:
While there no denying RED media and accessories aren't cheap, a RED camera at 4.5K fits more like 40mins on a 128GB at a reasonable compression ratio. REDCODE is their main selling point really. With small productions, particularly narratives, just the cost of drives for storing and properly backing up C200 footage at 1Gb/sec starts to become a headache. Most of the indie features I've shot land just shy of 6TB on RED at 4K, and thats also with cards in constant rotation. With the C200 that becomes more like 15TB before any backups are made. This is where I think the EVA may have an edge, assuming the image quality is solid. I'm sure the Canon RAW is great, and I love their color, I just really wish they would get past 8bit and put a "middle" codec in there that's at least 10bit 4:2:2.
Click to expand...

Good point about REDCODE compression ratios. Here is the calculator for RED footage where you can figure out how much footage fits in a card:
http://www.red.com/tools/recording-time

According to that, shooting RED Raven 4.5K at 8:1 compression fits around 45 minutes onto an $850 120GB MiniMag. By comparison, for $920 you can get two of these 256GB CFast cards ($460 each) and record around 60 minutes of 4K Canon Raw Light on a C200. I think that puts them on par as far as shooting media costs.

Your point about storage and backup costs is important, too. Canon Raw Light definitely means spending more on hard drives for archiving. However, hard drive costs continue to plummet, and CFast cards will drop in price, too. I still think it ends up being cheaper to get a C200 + CFast cards + Storage HDDs than a RED Raven + MiniMags + Storage HDDs. And you get the amazing touchscreen autofocus.

All that said, I really wish Canon would include a 10bit 4:2:2 codec when they update the C200 firmware in 2018.
 
When the Raven body was at $5950, it was a better comparison. But now at $8950, it's like a different camera.

The touchscreen and a power module/solution will add another $3K+ before you even start to consider mags.
 
NorBro said:
When the Raven body was at $5950, it was a better comparison. But now at $8950, it's like a different camera...
Click to expand...
Speaking of prices of other brands : FS-5 just took a $1,000 haircut. What did I say about competition?
 
It's been a few days since it has dropped...but you still need an external RAW recorder to really get the most out of it.

That's the one thing I LOVE about this C200...the internal RAW. Basically the highest-quality corporate could give you in this body.
 
TBH, 1 Gps isn't really that fast of a transfer rate. It's only 125 megabytes per second, while the good CFast cards are up around the 500 mark. Cheaper CFast cards can cover that speed easily, a lot of them are only 350 mb/s but even that's more than enough. There should really be some slower CFast cards that are significantly cheaper being made, 'cause most of them right now are serious overkill, as long as they're actually reliable. I use a Biwin card on my 1DX II, that has some issues, but I've never lost any data on it, it's simply that every once in a while it fails to initialize on the camera giving me an error. So I can't fully recommend that particular one.
 
IanTheM said:
TBH, 1 Gps isn't really that fast of a transfer rate. It's only 125 megabytes per second, while the good CFast cards are up around the 500 mark. Cheaper CFast cards can cover that speed easily, a lot of them are only 350 mb/s but even that's more than enough. There should really be some slower CFast cards that are significantly cheaper being made, 'cause most of them right now are serious overkill, as long as they're actually reliable. I use a Biwin card on my 1DX II, that has some issues, but I've never lost any data on it, it's simply that every once in a while it fails to initialize on the camera giving me an error. So I can't fully recommend that particular one.
Click to expand...

That's my hope, that we will be able to use the less expensive Delkins and Transcends but time will tell. We will have to buy a few different brands and run some benchmarks.
 
Someone here suggested the Transcend CFast 2.0 CFX600 for the C300/II. Currently about $230 on CDW. Kinda hard to source. It's not on the approved list, but I got one, and so far so good in all modes on the C300/II.

ETA: Forgot to say, it's a 256GB card.
 
Using "non-approved" media just scares the hell out of me and I won't do it. I don't care how much money it saves or how many other people have used them "successfully". Too much at stake and too much to lose.
 
Run&Gun said:
Using "non-approved" media just scares the hell out of me and I won't do it. I don't care how much money it saves or how many other people have used them "successfully". Too much at stake and too much to lose.
Click to expand...

+1

Worst place to cheap out.

And that CFast-to-SSD adapter would not be on my buy list either.
 
Run&Gun said:
Using "non-approved" media just scares the hell out of me and I won't do it. I don't care how much money it saves or how many other people have used them "successfully". Too much at stake and too much to lose.
Click to expand...

It is on a F55, Alexa, F65, helium, Varicam. By the time, you get down to C200, there's no reason not to consider all the options.

Unless one's ego can't handle it. (RIM SHOT)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EgoDisk-Pro...253158?hash=item3adbd4b3e6:g:WEAAAOSwtfhYsKVF
 
DLD said:
It is on a F55, Alexa, F65, helium, Varicam. By the time, you get down to C200, there's no reason not to consider all the options.
Click to expand...

My idea with the unapproved Transcend card on the C300/II was to use one approved card, and one of the non approved at the same time. That way I'd be covered in the unlikely event that the non approved card shat the bed. Obviously can't do that on the C200.
 
My biggest concern with cheap media is corruption in footage without knowing it.

You hope recording would stop after dropped frames are detected (or any other malfunction), but there is always a possibility that it doesn't and you go about your day filming thinking all is well when it's not. Only later in post you learn that you have dropped frames, random blackouts, strange digital phenomenons, etc.

I think the camera would terminate recording more times than not if the performance wasn't there, but you never know.
 
drummondb said:
My idea with the unapproved Transcend card on the C300/II was to use one approved card, and one of the non approved at the same time. That way I'd be covered in the unlikely event that the non approved card shat the bed. Obviously can't do that on the C200.
Click to expand...

I have a couple of the unapproved Transcend 600 cards. They also make a 650. The 650 uses a different type of flash generally approved for more read write cycles than the 600 and I haven't found anything indicating the exact speed. The 600 is meant as a consumer level product like SD cards. Anyway, I doubt that Canon has even looked at the Transcend cards as neither the 650 or the 600 are approved. From my tests, the 600 and the 650 seem to work fine but I tend to record double slot so I'm not concerned. I would, however, be willing to bet money that the 600 will not keep up with demands of the RAW Lite. The bit rate is quite a bit higher than in the C300 II, correct?
 
Cinema RAW Light will be similar to PR 444XQ...not sure what the C300 Mark II's highest option currently is (internal specs vs. external RAW).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top