C200: The new Canon C200 with 4K

A lot of NLEs will natively support it (if all goes well) and the idea is to import and start editing right away.

No transcoding, no other software*.

*Some NLEs may not be ready when the camera begins to ship, so you might have to use something else in the meantime, but Resolve should most definitely be one and probably the first one ready to go. Straight from the CFast card.
 
NorBro said:
A lot of NLEs will natively support it (if all goes well) and the idea is to import and start editing right away.

No transcoding, no other software*.

*Some NLEs may not be ready when the camera begins to ship, so you might have to use something else in the meantime, but Resolve should most definitely be one and probably the first one ready to go. Straight from the CFast card.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I've another question for you : What do you think about Power Zoom Adapter PZ-E1 for Canon? I just watched this video :

The autofocus seems to have a lot of problems to focusing on the books. I don't think it's usable.
 
I actually don't know much about the C100 Mark II and I have never zoomed like that when using DPAF, so I'm not sure if that's a common behavior based on the subject (fine print), lowish-light, and/or lens. I'm not sure if all DPAF is created equal, but I think more testing would need to be done in different scenarios and maybe with different cameras for comparison.

This result is common, however, with some fixed lens cameras where the AF is just confused and it's too difficult to lock focus. Maybe changing some settings/values inside the camera (if possible) would help too.
 
NorBro said:
This result is common, however, with some fixed lens cameras where the AF is just confused and it's too difficult to lock focus. Maybe changing some settings/values inside the camera (if possible) would help too.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I've seen similar problem on Panasonic GH5, but I believe that C200 MK II has a more robust AF to work with. Hope someone has used the Power Zoom Adapter PZ-E1 to say if it works good.
 
I don't think the adapter has anything to do with it...doesn't it just control the lens' movements? It only affects the zooming motion.

I imagine the AF results are going to be determined by the lens and the camera's AF system.
 
NorBro said:
I don't think the adapter has anything to do with it...doesn't it just control the lens' movements? It only affects the zooming motion.

I imagine the AF results are going to be determined by the lens and the camera's AF system.
Click to expand...
If I've understood correctly, there's just one lens (NANO USM) that works with the adapter, so probably is the lens that has a bad autofocus. Other than that I believe that just STM lenses works good in autofocus with Canon without any noise, but Canon advices the 24-105 f/4 L IS USM with C200, and it has noise when focusing. Probably this NANO USM lens has no noise when focusing, but problem with autofocus.
 
puredrifting said:
Perhaps by this time next year, we will have 1GB CFast 2.0 cards selling for $500.00? That would make the Cinema RAW Light workflow actually do-able, especially if FCP X, Premier Pro and AVID can all ingest it natively.
Click to expand...

Off a "non-scientific" observation, CFast 2.0 card prices have been falling at about a 30% per year rate since 2014 ... but, as cards, they were designed to work with not-as-compressed as Raw Light Raw, so perhaps something like Delkin (495 MB/s max write speed, $299 for a 256 GB card) may work just fine with Canon's codec.
 
DLD said:
Off a "non-scientific" observation, CFast 2.0 card prices have been falling at about a 30% per year rate since 2014 ... but, as cards, they were designed to work with not-as-compressed as Raw Light Raw, so perhaps something like Delkin (495 MB/s max write speed, $299 for a 256 GB card) may work just fine with Canon's codec.
Click to expand...

Fingers crossed. I would not mind settling into the Cinema RAW Light workflow, as long as I could afford to own with about 3-4 hours of media. As of this moment, that cost $5,432.00 in CFast 2.0 cards to own 4 hours worth. If that comes down closer to $2k or even $2,500.00, I could live with that I think. $5,432.00 means that if the trend continues, in a year, it would still cost $3,803.00, still too high for a $7,500.00 camera. If Canon doesn't make the XF-AVC codec too lame in February, that may be the stop gap measure as we wait for the CFast 2.0 prices to drop to where they should be. The 410 Mbps XF-AVC implementation on the C300 MKII buys you 80 minutes per 256 GB $679.00 card. If they went for the 305 Mbps XC15 implementation, that buys you 110 minutes per 256GB card. Obviously, for many projects, we would all like to be able to shoot Cinema RAW Light, but it will depend on how much footage per day you need to shoot and how does your computer and drives hold up under huge files and lots of processing power needed, although perhaps the Light is light enough to where it becomes just a normal workflow, as some are saying it will be? Shooting 12-bit 4k RAW as your "norm" would be pretty cool.
 
Last edited:
Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but for the high end user this Raw Lite is close to alexa mini, which is around 7minutes per 128gigs on the same Cfast cards. Add in the small batteries/AF/high ISO/etc this is a pretty amazing little camera. I'm sure some one will end up putting a PL mount on this thing which could open up a lot of interesting possibilities.
 
Newsshooter said the following about the recording time:

"Canon say that from their testing they’ve been getting around 15 minutes of record time from a 128GB CFast 2.0 card."
 
Looks like Canon are committed to CFast 2.0 and BP-Ax0 batteries for the 3rd gen cameras.
That's good for people who started "investing" in them as they will translate to any future siblings of the C300MKII/C700/C200.
So if you think you'll stay in the ecosystem long term you'll probably get good value out of the cards + batts over time.
 
3 points:

1. Mitch Gross' description of the EVA-1s autofocus was not very inspiring, it came across as "it will have a feature that could be described as some type of autofocus".

2. EVERY camera that comes out is overpriced according to TEH INTERNETZ !!!1!!! Every. Single. One (except maybe BM). At this price level though they are all reasonably close, so they are all overpriced or these internet people are not realistic.

3. I think in about 2 years all these low end 4K camera owners will realise that the UHD standard specifies REC2020, not REC709 (that's for FHD fellas!). They got the pixels, but it's not UHD. So we'll start off another round of "I DEMAND HDR REC2020 FOR UNDER $2K !!!!1!!". But us Canon shooters have it for years in the C500/C300MKII/C700/C200 (raw). ;-)
 
chrisfromlilongwe said:
For all the people that have gotten to handle the c200 so far. I have only found one footage sample. The canon one. And that did not really resonate with me. Anyone else seen other footage? Preferably straight from the camera?
Click to expand...

Philip Bloom just posted an ISO Ramp shot in RAW with a rec 709 out applied in a second past. FWIW, I'm not a fan of this method of showing ISO, as he's necessarily starving the sensor for light at the lower ISO's to allow for minimal overexposure in the Higher ISO's -- making the shadows in the ISO 640 stuff look horribly noisy, but -- this is a perfect demonstration of how Canon's "ISO science" works...as you really don't see any increase in noise as the iso/gain increases...the shadows get less noisy over time, and the brighter tones largely remain the same--as with the C300mark II...always better to shoot at a higher ISO for a brighter result and then grade darker than the opposite. Anyway rant off -- you can download the 4444 prores file from Vimeo...and cloakroom media has a few nice tests posted on vimeo as well.

https://vimeo.com/220223129
 
Other than the codec implementation and the lack of integrated shoulder mount/EVF where it should have been, I am digging pretty much everything else about the C200. At least they lowered the centerline and center of gravity and reduced the overall height, it's a step in the right direction. No 4K over SDI kind of bums me out but in a way, if I am shooting Cinema RAW Light, it won't matter as I can run an EVF or monitor off of the 1080 SDI. One side of me bristles at the deliberate handicaps to the codec, no T/C/ I/O, no 4K out the SDI, etc. But Canon is a traditional Japanese company with traditional market segmentation strategies. That's life. I feel the positives of shooting internal Cinema RAW Light outweigh many of the negatives about the camera. The Touchscreen DPAF does as well. It's far from a perfect camera but it will be very usable and will allow me to catpure many shots that most other cameras would not, so that's the bottom line for me. I can live with the subpar internal codecs for a few months until February, I have the Ninja Blade for 1080 green screen, it's not going to look any worse than my C100/C300 do now into the Blade.
 
Yea, for sure - that's a good video, overall.

I have a lot of experience with it myself so I know what it's capable of...9am EST tomorrow...lol.
 
NorBro said:
Yea, for sure - that's a good video, overall.

I have a lot of experience with it myself so I know what it's capable of...9am EST tomorrow...lol.
Click to expand...

I have been impressed with the DPAF both on my 80D on a gimbal and the C300 MKII. Even the old version on my C100 MKI isn't too bad, it's semi useful at least.
 
I had heard that the DPAF doesn't work well (or maybe at all) with the Sigma 18-35. Any word if there's going to be any expanded lens comparability with the C200 or if firmware upgrades have or will hit for current DPAF cameras? I also have a Tamron G2 70-200 f2.8 and was wondering if it would possibly work with that as well. I'm a C100 owner and have been for about 4 years now I think, so looking to finally upgrade. On the fence between the C200 and EVA but the DPAF would be really nice! What is everyone's thoughts on Canon betting that "RAW is the future." Is this because storage cost is going to drop, or workflow requirements for the future of post-production? I've never shot raw so I have no perspective on this.

I really like the look of Canons, that's why I never went Sony, but I LOVE the look of the Varicam even more. I'm waiting to see some footage from the EVA to see how it actually stacks up. The Canon look is very clean and pleasing still, but no longer feels like it has as much style to it after watching a ton of Varicam stuff. That being said, knowing I could reliably get more usable shots with the DPAF sounds really, really great. But there's also the 2k 240fps of the EVA as well that has me intrigued. I actually kinda just want to get both of these dudes, but I've gotta pick one first. I also want one that I can use for short films as well as my everyday productions. Sorry for the rambling, it's been a while since I've made a big camera purchase and finally two have came along that I think would be great fits and worthy of an upgrade for me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top