C200: The new Canon C200 with 4K

DLD said:
Also, one has to figure that Raw Light is here to stay and that C200 won't be the only Canon camera with it.
Click to expand...

This, apparently, is what has a lot of people not understanding the game plan and how Cinema RAW Light works. If you read the comments all over the web, people who reject the C200 are rejecting it largely because they think RAW = too huge and too burdensome to work with. While I have not yet tried it, as none of us have, it seems as if the implementation with all of the major NLEs will make it a viable "normal" workflow, just as it is for stills. If it ends up being anything like stills, you will look back and marvel that you used to NOT shoot RAW, how archaic that wokflow was where you couldn't adjust everything after the fact. ;-)
 
Fahnon said:
I have to say that I've shot exactly that kind of work with C100 and with A7s, both 8-bit, and gotten repeat work from my footage.
Click to expand...

8-bit is not quite the kiss of death many make it out to be. Sure, 10-bit is better, but the C100s, C300 and many dozens before them were all 8-bit and somehow, some beautiful images got made with those cameras and that handicapped bit rate. Of course we would all prefer 12-bit but many of us will do lots of good work with 8-bit on the C200.
 
Bern Caughey said:
Does the C200 offer variable frame rates, such as 48fps?
Click to expand...

4K DCI 60p/50p Cinema RAW Light
4K UHD 60p/50p .MP4
1080 120p/100p .MP4

Is all they show in the specs but one would think the frame rate would be stepped or variable underneath those maximum frame rates?
 
ade4all said:
having 2 slots would have made things a lot easier and with the possibility of redundancy, be a little nervous putting all your faith in that one very expensive cfast card. Tis all I'm saying
Click to expand...

I think Panasonics announcement is for you then. I also think that Panasonic knows exactly the price they're going to sell it for and they threw that under $8000 price tag out there so they could grab the people on the fence about the c200 when they offer it for $6999.
 
cane141 said:
As far as I've read, the Canon raw lite is still no walk in the park, clients or producers still shudder when I mention R3D for certain jobs today and I don't see many BM Ursa mini 4.6 users shooting a lot of compressed raw even though it's in there, they are more than happy with the prores.

It's a move in the right direction from Canon but as I mentioned, you will most likely still need a safe workhorse alongside for the corporate gigs etc, this camera is aimed squarely at indie films or as a b-cam to the C700 for sure without it being confused as a workhorse.

Canon also has the Dual AF and good low light capability which makes both the C200 and C700 and amazing combo for indie features against the RED's or BM's

I may completely change my mind on Canon when we get to see the EVA1 footage start to drop but I'm also a bit skeptical about how it would stack up as I have never seen anything jaw dropping on the Varicam LT, yes there are some nice clips out there, but it's not a very popular cam where I am.
Click to expand...

If it helps any, both Master of None and Love on Netflix shoots Panasonic (full Varicam35). If the EVA looks like Varicam, it could be great:
http://www.panasonicforbusiness.com/2017/03/mark-schwartzbard-master-of-none-and-love/
 
cane141 said:
I think Canon have restricted the C200 in some clever ways, to make people think this way, it's also my natural reaction, to think I need both, to serve different requirements, C200 internal raw for higher end TVC's or gimbal shots as no one really needs hours or gimbal shots anyway along with the 4K 60P and the C300 MII as the main workhorse for the bulk of work.
Click to expand...

Nearly all "higher end TVC's" won't even consider using the c200. Sure it might happen, but they'll be few and far between.

And let's get real - renting cards? The whole point of owning your own camera, particularly from the C line, is that you don't ever have to go to a rental house.

Even if you're willing to set up your own post system to handle Canon raw, like Osslund said, many times you're at the mercy of the preferences or system of the person actually doing the editing.

I shot a green screen interview recently and the requirement was "10 bit 422" - that was the only demand we had to meet.

Regarding redundancy, I've only ever used and seen two slots being used separately. Recording the same thing to two cards is a little over the top in 2017. You can hit me with numerous horror stories but it's worth the "risk" in my opinion.

SIDE NOTE - I wonder who's buying the c300 ii now too - the world's tallest camera!?
 
Last edited:
rob norton said:
Nearly all "higher end TVC's" won't even consider using the c200. Sure it might happen, but they'll be few and far between.
Click to expand...

Of course they won't as the A-cam and that's 100% agreed, why would they even consider it on anything high budget, but could be useful for gimbal shots or alongside the flagship C700 or even as a c-cam for low light, small spaces, action shots etc

Then again maybe cameras like the Red Raven or Alexa Mini already cover that so I guess the C200 is a bit of an oddball...
 
Last edited:
cane141 said:
Of course they won't as the A-cam and that's 100% agreed, why would they even consider it on anything high budget for gimbal shots, maybe or alongside the flagship C700 it makes sense or even as a c-cam for low light, small spaces, action shots etc

Then again maybe cameras like the Red Raven or Alexa Mini already cover that so I guess the C200 a bit of oddball...
Click to expand...

I like "oddballs" as long as they perform functions I need them to, which it seems the C200 will.
 
RED Raven 4.5K footage uses approximately 14 minutes on a 120GB MiniMag. That's $850 for 14 minutes.

Why are people complaining about shooting raw on the C200? A Sandisk 128GB Cfast card costs $350 and holds 15 minutes of raw footage. Compared to shooting on RED, it's positively cheap!

I see the C200 as the perfect RED Raven / Scarlet killer for indie films & music videos shot on raw to Cfast cards. Cheaper camera, cheaper media, badass autofocus, Canon colors. And it also happens to shoot compressed 4K to SD cards for jobs that don't require color grading. I have a feeling Canon will sell a gazillion of these. I know I'm getting one later this year!
 
Yea, for sure. I am buying one just to make a video for DVXuser showing how I'm editing Cinema RAW Light in FCP X on a MacBook Air.

I can listen to arguments about not having various 10-bit options in the camera all day long, but anything about this beautiful RAW option that Canon - the cavemen themselves - are offering us is just silly.

Camera will be super popular.
 
Omg what were we thinking all these years shooting with our c300/c100 with blade in rubbish 8bit.
Now production company's are going to shy away? from a camera that can deliver everything from low 8bit mp4 to 12bit raw internal and 10bit 422 external.????

i will be happy to hang my blade on this puppy and get glorious 10bit hd (still the main delivery format these days) and if that's not enough the 12bit raw will get me there.

personally i find the new panasonic a bit plastic fantastic looking in their choice of materials, wich says nothing about it's abilities but time will tell.
can't wait until a few brave ones use these cameras and give us real reviews .
 
puredrifting said:
This, apparently, is what has a lot of people not understanding the game plan and how Cinema RAW Light works. If you read the comments all over the web, people who reject the C200 are rejecting it largely because they think RAW = too huge and too burdensome to work with ...
Click to expand...
Canon Raw Light will take about 30% more space than ProRes 422 HQ, so hand wringing seems to be excessive (and, for the anti-Canon views and opinions, just take a loot at the DVX User Sony forums).

Speaking of ProRes, it looks to be on its way out as the dominant codec, since every major manufacturer - Sony (X-OCN and XAVC), Canon (XF-AVC, Raw Light), Panasonic (AVC-Intra) - has released an own recording format, which then can be easily used on a major NLE.
 
Jaime Valles said:
RED Raven 4.5K footage uses approximately 14 minutes on a 120GB MiniMag. That's $850 for 14 minutes.

Why are people complaining about shooting raw on the C200? A Sandisk 128GB Cfast card costs $350 and holds 15 minutes of raw footage. Compared to shooting on RED, it's positively cheap!
Click to expand...

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.
 
DLD said:
Canon Raw Light will take about 30% more space than ProRes 422 HQ, so hand wringing seems to be excessive.
Click to expand...

But you can use cheap off-the-shelf SSD drives to record ProRes 422 HQ externally, but the C200 only has uber expensive CFAST 2.0 cards in a single card slot.
 
Apple dropped QT support for Windows and after that Prores became dead to me and quicktime in general. It's of less interest today and I find it very good that most choose MXF files as I believe it's the best option today.
 
Osslund said:
Apple dropped QT support for Windows and after that Prores became dead to me and quicktime in general. It's of less interest today and I find it very good that most choose MXF files as I believe it's the best option today.
Click to expand...

Also, DNxHD is joy to use on a windows PC.
 
Are we 100% sure the HDMI HD out is 10-bit 422? I seem to recall a mention in one of the early C200 videos (the AbelCine one maybe?) that it was 8-bit in a 10-bit wrapper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top