C300: The New Canon C300 Mark III and New 25 - 250mm Zoom Lens

rob norton said:
Is parfocal a less desired quality now that AF is getting really good?
Click to expand...

I would say no. Most of our "real" video lenses are still manual focus and there are reports of people doing quick zooms with the Sony's that continually adjust, and they can "outrun" the lenses ability to maintain focus.
 
James0b57 said:
Zeiss made the 21-100mm. I only ever heard people complain “not wide enough” or “not long enough”. Thought it was interesting, because the lens covers the entire normal range. Yet, i guess it never did anything special. But i’d imagine in use it was quite practical. But i never saw one in use.
Click to expand...

I tested it together with the 18-80. The image quality is fantastic but I am not sure what the target group for this lens is. It is heavy and long, I cannot shot r&g hand held with it. At 50mm it is almost at T3.9. For the price point you get a set of 35 / 50 / 85 CP.3
 
Run&Gun said:
Because still lenses don't have to perform in the same way as video/motion lenses, at least historically speaking.

Video Lenses(typically):
Constant Volume(don't trombone)
Inner Focus
Smooth, constant "live" zoom
Don't go back and forth between pin-cushion and barrel distortion while zooming
Usually fairly well controlled focus breathing(depends on lens)
Smooth manual iris
Servo capable of repeatable, ultra smooth, variable speed zooms
Long zoom ratios, coupled with
Fast aperture(a lot are between f1.3-f1.7 starting out)
Heavier duty construction-at least with ENG lenses, they become a "structural" part of the camera, with the camera being held/controlled by the op by the lens grip.
Economies of scale: Even expensive sill lenses are being sold by the tens of thousands vs maybe hundreds of ENG lenses.
Click to expand...

Really good list.

I had to ask Sam the question semi rhetorically, because to be honest, i am not a lens designer. I know what has been true about lens design, but i don’t what the limits are. Flange distances are mich shorter on s35 than they use to be. So, i don’t actually know how much that changes the possibilities in lens design. So, i was just seeing if Sam had some information we don’t.

The size, weight, and speed of the 25-250+1.5x lens is the most light weight thing i’ve seen in this class. To me, it is impressive, and biases toward a range i’d rather have available on the fly. Seeing the announcement i had to do a double take... no, actaully a 1.5x take ;)
 
Last edited:
Clermond said:
I tested it together with the 18-80. The image quality is fantastic but I am not sure what the target group for this lens is. It is heavy and long, I cannot shot r&g hand held with it. At 50mm it is almost at T3.9. For the price point you get a set of 35 / 50 / 85 CP.3
Click to expand...
Thanks!

Yeah, i still can’t fully figure it out. I will say, cameras are so small and low noise that the Zeiss LWZ don’t bother me for rng. Essentially it is carrying around a lens, and the rear cap happens to be a camera. Have to get a handle to carry the lens, and attach the monitor to that handle. Changing settings can be a little annoying at times.

I saw a guy do this also with a GH4 and an old cinema Angeniuex.
 
I think RnG basically had it right. ALthough F1.3-7 is much easier to acheive on a small image circle and the trade off of smallpixels/chip vs wide iris kind of adds up to nothing. You need a wide iris to collect enogh light for a small chip. I think FF-f4 captures as many photons as 2/3F1.5 or more.

I think lenses are held back by market perception rather than physics - like people moan about the 18-80T4.4 - T4.4S35 is less dof that T1.5 at 2/3 in and lets in plenty of light if your have a clean 4000iso camera.

There is a perception that F5.6 zoom would be terribe - not so on an S35 camera capable of cleanish 4000 ISO.

The real trouble with the cheapo zooms is they are so horrible to touch. And do what you want an hour after being asked!
 
Last edited:
Thanks, i bookmarked the link if you need to delete it here on dvx.

Just looking at it briefly, i like the Nikon better.
 
I know a lens developer in China, if you want, i’ll put you guys in touch. The lens will likely be softer than Japanese or German design, but will be in the price range you mentioned, possibly. What specs do you want? We’ll see if they are interested.
 
Does anyone know if the C300III sends 4k raw out of the SDI? I'd much rather run externally to a Atomos and shoot in Prores for certain jobs where raw isn't needed and prores would be easier on my iMac. Even if it only outputted 4k at 25fps, for certain jobs this would be useful.
 
boosh said:
Does anyone know if the C300III sends 4k raw out of the SDI? I'd much rather run externally to a Atomos and shoot in Prores for certain jobs where raw isn't needed and prores would be easier on my iMac. Even if it only outputted 4k at 25fps, for certain jobs this would be useful.
Click to expand...

Not according to any of the specs I've seen. You'll get a clean 4k 10-bit 4:2:2 signal out of the 12G-SDI for recording 4k Prores though.

James0b57 said:
It is claimed to. One of the more compelling features.
Click to expand...

Where has that been claimed?
 
Grug said:
Not according to any of the specs I've seen. You'll get a clean 4k 10-bit 4:2:2 signal out of the 12G-SDI for recording 4k Prores though.



Where has that been claimed?
Click to expand...
I misread @boosh’s question. Thought he just meant 4K out. Sorry, didn’t see the “raw”.
 
James0b57 said:
I misread @boosh’s question. Thought he just meant 4K out. Sorry, didn’t see the “raw”.
Click to expand...

He just mentions getting 4k from the camera to feed to the Teradek, not getting 4k raw. I'm pretty saw the raw is internal only (like the C500ii).
 
Grug said:
He just mentions getting 4k from the camera to feed to the Teradek, not getting 4k raw. I'm pretty saw the raw is internal only (like the C500ii).
Click to expand...

I’m pretty saw too. Yeah, i never meant to imply it did raw out, i just read boosh’s question too fast. Good catch.
 
Thanks for confirming guys. The internal codecs are actually very good and offer a wide range of bit rates so I won't complain. They will more than suffice.

Does any know if the Autofocus and IS will work on the C300III with non Canon brand EF mount lenses i.e. Sigma EF mount, Tamron EF mount etc...
 
This is the first Canon cine Camera I'd consider purchasing. The C500 mk2 is nice too but I feel like this hits all the nails on the head for less cash.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
So Run&Gun, do you think you'll buy the 25-250? If so, when?
Click to expand...

Right now, unless something crazy happens, no. Eventually? Probably. I shot on a sizzle that's being pitched to Netflix shortly before everything went to crap and this lens would actually be perfect for it, because part of it would be shooting some stage/event/performance stuff(I shot on a Netflix comedy special last summer. I was center/medium cam and I was on an Angie 24-290). The stuff we shot for the pitch was HD, so I was able to go "center punch" with my F55/17-120(which gets me equivalent to 34-240 angle of view), but I'm presuming we would be doing the real thing if it happens in 4K, so no center punch option. 25 would give you decent crowd/stage/back of house type shots up to reasonably close to subject on stage. Depending on shoot days, etc., renting may be a good/better option, but I hate renting and I could find a lot of other uses for it, especially in the sports world and being able to rent it out to others, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top