C200: The new Canon C200 with 4K

puredrifting said:
I've also been trying to figure out how the C200 would work as a shoulder mounted camera? I bet third party providers will come out with a loupe for the LCD screen but then you couldn't use the touchscreen to AF. Say you were using a Zacuto Recoil system with the Gratical Eye instead of the LCD screen with a loupe? If it doesn't allow the grip joystick, the C200, the DPAF/Face Tracking would be limited if you were using it shoulder mounted for run & gun documentary shooting. I wonder if you can still control the DPAF box with the joystick as you can with the C300 MKII? Fingers crossed on that one. If the C200 can only position the DPAF box using the touchscreen, that would mean any shoulder mounted shooting you would need to just turn on continuous AF and hope for the best or only manually focus?
Click to expand...

Does a longer video cable exist that would let you move the LCD anywhere, in this case a better position for shoulder mounting?
 
IanTheM said:
What's interesting is that by adding RAW and having the same sensor as the C700, this camera is the perfect gimbal/B-Cam/steadycam on larger productions running the C700. You can match the quality of your main cam, but in a much smaller package.
Click to expand...

I think the C200 would match the C700 pretty effortlessly in that scenario same as the C300ii, as I'm sure the current Cinema Eos cameras all use the same sensor, though the C700 (non global shutter) uses a larger cut of it compared to the C200/C300ii. The C700 sensor has the same pixel pitch as the C200/C300ii (6.4x6.4µm), though the total megapixel count is higher (11.54 vs 9.84), hence the 4.5K raw "open gate" mode. Effective image area is 26.2 x 13.8mm (29.6 mm diagonal) when shooting 4K/2K modes and 28.9 x 15.2 (32.6mm diagonal) in raw 4.5K, which actually changes the crop factor from 1.47ish to 1.33ish interestingly enough.
 
What about mounting the touch screen near your left or right hand, e.g. within thumb reach on the handgrip? Could you get the same DPAF overlays on a zacuto eye? Then even though you can't see the LCD you can still focus. Do you think this would work?
 
chris f said:
After reading/watching every review possible today I have a few thoughts on why I think this will be a great camera that I will probably replace my C100MK2 with (still keeping my C500 & Odyssey 7q kit to fill in the codec gaps when needed and/or for 2-cam shoots that require 4K)

-Feb. 2018 is not that far away for the "missing" codec gap that I will probably use 75% of the time once it's out. That's only 8 months from release date to unlock what could easily be a workhorse camera that I own and use for many years to come (I'm not jumping on the 8K silliness, so at minimum 4K Raw should be "future proof" for as long as I have an imagination for and at maximum the new codec should be "good enough" for the majority of my work for several years.)

-Most of my work is handheld short-doc work, gimbal work, and controlled environment/studio work that almost all goes to web distribution (where people are probably finding my work embedded in their Facebook feeds or watching a Vimeo or YouTube link on their iPhones). My C500 will still work great for studio stuff & now with a C200 I'd have a perfect cam for handheld/gimbal work. With no need for adittional external monitors/recorder and therefore no additional external power supply needed, I can get back to stripping the cam down to nothing, ditch the Easyrig for my back, and be light and simple. I can shoot Raw when needed, otherwise 4K 150mbs .mp4 can easily float me by for 8 months. Plus I now have 60fps in 4K and 120fps in 1080. (Compared to my C100mk2 spec-wise and to my C500+Odyssey7q+Anton Bauer ergonomic-wise this is a great upgrade)

-The few times a year that I land a "big" commercial gig, I would have an incredibly powerful camera that could produce all the quality I'd ever need. I could rent a few extra CFast cards if needed and shoot the entire project in Raw and if the project really required high speed more than 60fps (I've had exactly ONE of those projects in the past 8 years) I can rent another camera for those specialty shots.

-I'd probably buy the 200B to have better odds at using it on my Ronin-M since it has no viewfinder to get in the way. (I never use the viewfinder on my C100mk2 because I can't pull accurate focus with it & I took the viewfinder off the C500 from day one and never looked back & as a result the C500 works better than the C100 on my Ronin-M because of it). If the monitor can attach directly to the C200 (and from pictures it looks like it can) I'd probably ditch the handle as well to keep the profile even smaller for handheld/doc work.

-Being able to use the C200 monitor by repositioning on top the gimbal would be amazing. Again, no more need for an external monitor w/batteries, which would make gimbal work even lighter and simpler. Also, having awesome face recognition autofocus will make it even better since I only use Canon still glass with image stabilization for gimbal work anyways.

-This all goes without mentioning that Canon's images look great straight out of the camera.

I am hoping to attend Cinegear this weekend, so I'll let you know if that drastically changes my opinion one way or the other.
Click to expand...

I would be looking to run the same setup as I have no use for my evf on my c100 and from the reviews it seems the external monitor can be used outside in the sun - plus the autofocus will help. And there will always be 3rd party options. Can you check if you can do away with the top handle at Cinegear? Basically just the side grip and external monitor with the attachment is necessary. Makes it about $7140 off BH.
 
I've only scanned the feedback to the release of the C200, but is it fair to say that the consensus is that Canon screwed this one up royally?

I am seeing much puzzlement, quizzical response, negative response, wtf's, and articles with titles such as "Who Is The Canon C200 For?" and "TOO LITTLE TOO LATE?"

This comment to the Newsshooter review of the C200 sums it up for many:

"Not having a solid 10bit internal HD 50mbps codec is a deal breaker really. Maybe they did that to save the c300mk2 market but it's essential for anyone needing a solid doc workhorse camera. They've totally missed the sweet spot."
 
JPNola said:
I've only scanned the feedback to the release of the C200, but is it fair to say that the consensus is that Canon screwed this one up royally?

I am seeing much puzzlement, quizzical response, negative response, wtf's, and articles with titles such as "Who Is The Canon C200 For?" and "TOO LITTLE TOO LATE?"

This comment to the Newsshooter review of the C200 sums it up for many:

"Not having a solid 10bit internal HD 50mbps codec is a deal breaker really. Maybe they did that to save the c300mk2 market but it's essential for anyone needing a solid doc workhorse camera. They've totally missed the sweet spot."
Click to expand...


Presumably that's not a processing limitation like with the C300 lacking 4K 60p, they can still get it together.
 
Okay, whose going to start the petition to Canon to include XF-AVC 10-bit as soon as humanly possible? I really think waiting for 8 bit XF-AVC will be a strategic blunder for them. But then again, I also have the supposition that the EOS Cinema business is somewhat of a corporate hobby for Canon anyway so they may just not care.
 
puredrifting said:
Okay, whose going to start the petition to Canon to include XF-AVC 10-bit as soon as humanly possible? I really think waiting for 8 bit XF-AVC will be a strategic blunder for them. But then again, I also have the supposition that the EOS Cinema business is somewhat of a corporate hobby for Canon anyway so they may just not care.
Click to expand...

If it is a hobby for Canon and what you say is true, they don't care, then they should include it..... right? I think they are protecting the C-300 mkII, it's just that simple. after all you cant have an unsuccessful hobby.

If it had 10 bit internal would you buy one?
 
puredrifting said:
Okay, whose going to start the petition to Canon to include XF-AVC 10-bit as soon as humanly possible? I really think waiting for 8 bit XF-AVC will be a strategic blunder for them. But then again, I also have the supposition that the EOS Cinema business is somewhat of a corporate hobby for Canon anyway so they may just not care.
Click to expand...

I'll be the second to sign it after you. There's no question in my mind: if they add 10 bit I will buy one in a second. Possibly a second and third body next year. Without it, I'm going a different route (and no, not a c300 ii).
 
Adding 10-bit XF-AVC would complete the triumvirate of codecs, RAW, mid-line and proxy/web. Only having 8-bit means you will have super nice robust XF-AVC that still has banding on gradients, skies and spotlights which is ridiculous for a pro camera in 2017/18.
 
By the time the firmware comes out the C300 MKII will be ~2.25 years old, it'll probably be heading for another price drop (or had one) and an update late 2018.

So giving the C200 10 bit XF-AVC in January would not be a cannibalisation as it's 3rd generation bigger sibling would be the C300 MKIII, announced only 6 months after the firmware update at Cine Gear 2018.

the C300 MKIIs sales would be hit, but it would be much cheaper by then, maybe very close in price, but would still have a market because of the broadcast features for those that need them.

Eh?
 
puredrifting said:
Okay, whose going to start the petition to Canon to include XF-AVC 10-bit as soon as humanly possible? ...
Click to expand...

I don't know if you saw one of my posts on the A9 thread where I wrote that buyers ought to quit accepting every implausible explanation that the PR hacks can throw at them and begin asking tougher questions about these intentional feature cripples.

So, for everyone who goes to CineGear over the weekend or will attend the special product presentations or simply has to work the retail side and field these uncomfortable requests - hold the manufacturer reps feet to the fire (not literally, we've had enough of these Kathy Griffin type debacles lately), know when these guys try to weasel out of the direct answer and don't be timid enough to ask the follow-up.
 
I'll be buying a new camera this year. I said before if this new C200 didn't have 10 bit 422 I wouldn't buy it...... but I never anticipated 12 bit 4K raw-lite. The problem is I need three cameras to shoot a musical performance shooting the C200 in raw and the other two in 8 bit will be hard to match, one will stick out like a sore thumb. I think at this point I'll hold out for the C300 MKII when the price drops.
 
DLD said:
I don't know if you saw one of my posts on the A9 thread where I wrote that buyers ought to quit accepting every implausible explanation that the PR hacks can throw at them and begin asking tougher questions about these intentional feature cripples.

So, for everyone who goes to CineGear over the weekend or will attend the special product presentations or simply has to work the retail side and field these uncomfortable requests - hold the manufacturer reps feet to the fire (not literally, we've had enough of these Kathy Griffin type debacles lately), know when these guys try to weasel out of the direct answer and don't be timid enough to ask the follow-up.
Click to expand...

Maybe we could put on some Pussy hats and protest until Canon gives us 10 bit.
 
Michael Thames said:
I'll be buying a new camera this year. I said before if this new C200 didn't have 10 bit 422 I wouldn't buy it...... but I never anticipated 12 bit 4K raw-lite. The problem is I need three cameras to shoot a musical performance shooting the C200 in raw and the other two in 8 bit will be hard to match, one will stick out like a sore thumb. I think at this point I'll hold out for the C300 MKII when the price drops.
Click to expand...

Selling my c300ii if you want it!!
 
Can't believe what I'm hearing (actually, I can, it's a human nature to turn something positive into a negative).

I heard so much crying about 'if only this camera (1D C, 1DX MII, 5D MIII, C100 MI/II, C300MI/II, C500...) would have RAW and DPAF and touchscreen and C-Log and bla and bla and bla...'.

You all got your cake, now you'll just have to eat it too.
 
laverdir said:
Can't believe what I'm hearing (actually, I can, it's a human nature to turn something positive into a negative).

I heard so much crying about 'if only this camera (1D C, 1DX MII, 5D MIII, C100 MI/II, C300MI/II, C500...) would have RAW and DPAF and touchscreen and C-Log and bla and bla and bla...'.

You all got your cake, now you'll just have to eat it too.
Click to expand...

The camera's hardware has everything one could want codec-wise built in, it's just arbitrarily being limited. I really wish the C300IIs superiority was based on hardware/body, and not software. They'll make a killing selling the C200, but having 10-bit would make it even harder for many people not to go Canon, meanwhile the C300II/III should be the option of professionals that need the outputs/dual CFast/TC/Highspeed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top