What's 'knockoff C300 Mark II'? Chinese copies, or genuine Canon's?
C200: The new Canon C200 with 4K
- Thread starter Michael Thames
- Start date
What's 'knockoff C300 Mark II'? Chinese copies, or genuine Canon's?
Yeah, those 300% punch-ins definitely look superior to the C300/II. I know we're pixel-peeping, but damn, those are good pixels.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I agree, that is a reasonable cost to be able to shoot that much Cinema RAW Light. Changing cards once per hour is totally acceptable. Having a single CFAST slot with the dual 2K proxy recording along with it is totally acceptable. I shot green screen interviews yesterday for a popular animated show. It was a typical day, single camera interviews for single subjects, shot about two hours of interviews. If I have the three 512 GB cards, I would still save for and eventually would buy two or three more, but I could buy one per month of something. Now I just have to convince my clients of the benefits of me handing them Cinema RAW Light and proxies for their business model. We will have to verify if these EgoDisk cards are reliable for the C200. Anyone know if the C200 supports a 16:9 framing guide when shooting the DCI 4K RAW? I don't have a problem shooting DCI and having the ability to crop/re-frame a touch in post, I come from shooting 35mm for 4:3 in the SD days so I am used to croppping guides and safety markers. If you think about it, having the little extra image could be helpful in certain cases.
Another thing I was thinking about is Devin Graham. I've been reading how his company generates a large portion of their earnings, millions of dollars per year, in stock footage sales. Whether or not you find him inspiring or annoying as a personality, the guy has smartly figured out a tremendous business model. He shoots in all of these super cool, visually impressive locations, uses the footage in his YouTube clips, then licenses the footage out for stock. He shoots 6K with a RED, which is obviously very desirable for future proofing. While the C200 can only shoot 4K, I like the idea of shooting 4K Cinema RAW Light and then potentially licensing out the Cinema RAW Light footage. I don't think anyone is doing this because before the C200, RAW was just too large to consider this. As a buyer of and user of stock footage, even if I didn't use Canon, I think it would be pretty cool to be able to license Cinema RAW Light footage and to be able to tweak all of the gamut, LUT, White Balance, output formats to my own taste and to better fit in with footage shot for my projects on other non-Canon cameras. I end up in some pretty cool places myself on projects and have shot some great stock footage over the years, but mostly in 1080 unfortunately. I'd love to be able to afford a RED Weapon with the Helium and 8K but the reality is that I can't. But for the next few years, being able to shoot some of these spectacular locations even in 4K Cinema RAW Light will open up some great possibilities. As I go down my list, I have really cool footage I have shot in Morocco, Italy, South Africa, Tunisia, France, UK, Brazil, Mexico and I pitching a project that will shoot for three weeks in Japan. I hope that the C200 can help me to effectively capture footage in my travels going forward that helps me build my stock shot library.
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
From Sebatian Wober of Cinema 5Ds hands on review test of the C200. He really liked the camera, the .MP4 is exactly what it should be, usable for long for shooters, even though it feels under-spec'd. The C200 RAW is outstanding, download the files in 4K and take a look, looks very "Arri-like" to my eye, having shot the Amira a few times.
https://www.cinema5d.com/canon-c200-review-camera-impressive-raw-footage/
"There is HDMI and SDI out and, contrary to some rumours out there, I can confirm that both of them output your Canon Log signal. You can also apply LUTs to individual outputs. There is no Canon Log 2 on the C200."
https://www.cinema5d.com/canon-c200-review-camera-impressive-raw-footage/
"There is HDMI and SDI out and, contrary to some rumours out there, I can confirm that both of them output your Canon Log signal. You can also apply LUTs to individual outputs. There is no Canon Log 2 on the C200."
cpreston
Veteran
Are you sure that you can't? You can roll on the SD card in the C300 II without the CFast card. You just have to remove the CFast cards.
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I've read from a couple of sources that you can only get the 2K when rolling the Cfast. Which is dumb, if true.
Cary Knoop
Veteran
Perhaps I am missing something but I did not see any link to the raw footage.
Where is the link?
puredrifting
Major Contributor
That overhead shot of the leaves in the stream is so Arri looking, just lovely colors and texture, you feel as if you can reach out and touch it.
Last edited:
Run&Gun
Veteran
That's just Eric being facetious/attempting to be funny.
Agree . The footage looks amazing.
Cary Knoop
Veteran
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I wish he had photographed some people though. Nature shots are boring as far as judging what the camera can do. I want to see skin tones, how it deals with skin imperfections, hair, movement rendering, etc. Carl's (ProAV) test footage on his review of the C200 has some nice footage of a model with a wonderful shot of her walking toward camera, it is pretty impressive how well the face tracking keeps her in focus but he wasn't able to shoot any Cinema RAW Light like Sebastian was.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
What would you use to process the .CRM file? Utility is not released yet from what has been written. Sebastian was probably given a beta copy from Canon?
Cary Knoop
Veteran
I am sure we will be able to do that shortly.
My point is that RAW footage is not the same as post processed RAW footage into a video (with an undisclosed process).
I don't understand the notion that 'RAW looks good', all footage starts with RAW and either gets internally or externally processed into video.
The advantage of RAW out of camera is the maximum flexibility in post but that does not imply that RAW processed in camera must be of an inferior quality.
Did you actually take a look at the downloaded footage?
It's 50Mb/s 4:2:0 8 bit H.264.
Last edited:
I actually believe that Blackmagic 14 (beta 3) can natively support the .CRM files now
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Wish my computer could run DaVinci in 4k. Too old and slow.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Yes, but it's like looking at any highly compressed footage, you can still compare it against other highly compressed footage. If it looks pretty good being so compressed then the Prores 444 version on a nice screen will look amazing. I'm always frustrated by how H264, layered with YouTube and or Vimeo compression makes my files look. We always output a Prores HQ movie as the "master", then we output an H264 version from that "master" to post for clients. For me, H264 is good enough to at least get an idea of how the final master looks in person. With your eye, just imagine added sharpness, detail, contrast and make the colors more solid and you are pretty close. I guess the only way to see the RAW file is to look at your screen in the utility or Resolve before it is output, right? But even then, you aren't really seeing the RAW, right? The conversion program has to be applying some sort of "look" before you output it into Prores 444 in order to actually display the .CRM file, doesn't it?