It's 4K 10bit 30p and 2K 12bit 4:4:4
Very happy with the 2K 12bit image but I'd also be happy with C200 with 4K raw 60p to run alongside the C300 MKII
C200: What stops the C200 from being a near perfect camera?
- Thread starter Fishflavour
- Start date
It's 4K 10bit 30p and 2K 12bit 4:4:4
Very happy with the 2K 12bit image but I'd also be happy with C200 with 4K raw 60p to run alongside the C300 MKII
I had it as b-cam on a 2 day shoot for a construction project with the Atomos inferno, external recording was 4K 10bit, it wasn't bad but what do you expect at that price point it's still a dslr at the end of the day.
8-bit 4:2:0 longGOP looks 0K-ish if the image is static, there are no subtle gradients over larger portion of image and you don't plan to do much in post.
Here is an example what happens with motion:
Bit-depth requirement rise with resolution: 8-bit for SD, 10-bit for HD, 12-bit for UHD and so on.
cpreston
Veteran
I had that experience when I picked up the GH4 to test it out. Even with an external recorder, the image just didn't hold up as well as I was hoping it would based on the specs alone. Pulling a key was not particularly easy. The actual resolution didn't appear to be very high. I am guessing part of the problem was how noise reduction was implemented. I never ended up finding a use for the camera.
rob norton
Veteran
While I understand you're exaggerating for effect, your analogy is way off. No one thinks the c200 is a ferrari. Its autofocus system isn't as trivial as a soundsystem either. If anything, the autofocus is the engine - people will be buying the camera because of it. The codec etc. really is the soundsystem - an unimportant feature to many shooters who don't need 10 bit.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. Yes I definitely agree it's a shame the c200 doesn't get a 10 bit codec because it has to protect the c300 ii. I more meant since they set this decision in stone, they'll still have better than 10 bit footage to show, without having to give people 10 bit.
(waits for Eric to make slightly funny car/camera joke)
Liam Hall
Veteran
It's not that I think it's a Ferrari, it's not, it's simply that it's been intentionally hobbled, making it less than the sum of its parts. Maybe with a decent 10 bit codec it would be a Ford Focus RS...
Clearly, you see the autofocus feature as more important than a robust 10 bit codec. That's cool, many others see it a different way. I guess, it depends what you shoot. For me, there are some jobs I do where RAW lite would be great but for many others I'd need 8 256GB Cfast cards and be forced to offload a couple of terabytes of footage at the end of an average shoot day, usually in my hotel room, when I should be in the bar - taking away my beer time is a deal breaker!
You shoot on RED also though no? Surely there is no difference, this is a cam aimed at those projects where shooting raw works for the project but a bit more practical on the field with the built ND's etc
On those days shooting RED then that's a room service / beer up in the hotel room day isn't it ?
Liam Hall
Veteran
My Red shoots have a crew, so I generally don't get involved in DITing. I also shoot some jobs on my FS7 and Odyssey 7Q+ - they can get quite high data wise, fine if it's a quick shoot, but not great on longer jobs. Most jobs though, about 4 out of 5, are smaller shoots with little or no help but they still have to look good. I'm usually traveling on these jobs, so when it comes to backing up time transferring plus the number and size of of back-up drives becomes an issue. A 10 bit/400mb/s codec is the sweet spot for me. I love that these new cameras offer a good choice and range of codecs that fit different applications, it's just the C200 covers the high-end side quite well, but not the day to day - at least not my day to day.
I agree, but its the same rule of using the right cam for the right job, a lot of people complain about the lack of features but we all know not every cam will work in every situation.
It sounds like the FS7 or C300 MKII is that everyday cam for things like corporates/conferences/events and anything higher end you could save a bit of cost and bring along the C200 or hire the RED with extra crew. It's clear that the C200 starts to become a tempting proposition as an alternative to the RED especially with Dual AF and low light on gimbal work.
If I was still an FS7 owner then yep, It would probably be wiser to go with the 7Q and XDCA-FS-7 extension unit but it seems like a bit of slog when you have something like the C200 which does raw internally in a smaller form factor, the only other camera to compare I think of, is the Red Raven and maybe the URSA mini pro but its a slightly bigger form factor.
The Red Raven would still be a good alternative option with 4K Dragon sensor and a good price point but I wouldn't replace my C300 MKII with it, you still need need something for day to day but it would be nice to have the C200 and share the C-fast media/batteries etc and access the 4K 60p raw
You're right. Frankly, the original c300/c100 is good enough for most day to day jobs that don't require the highest quality recording and the high data workflow that comes with that, because most of those jobs don't require shooting in 4K anyway. The C200 seems to give you what you'd get with a RED: internal compressed RAW with great color science, high DR and overcrank; but with a 4K c100 built in and sold as a ready to shoot kit for less than the least expensive RED brain.
Sounds really appealing when I think about it that way. I don't shoot for broadcast (although some of my stuff has made it to air; ironically mostly dslr stuff that's way below spec). If I had to worry about minimum broadcast specs, I suppose I'd have to go for the more expensive and in some ways less powerful c300 mk 2.
Hey maybe the worlds largest camera manufacturer knows more about selling cameras than I do? Who knew?!?
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
In order to get high DR you need to shoot Clog2/3. I would not want to try and post a 14+ stop scene with 8bit 420 footage leaving raw as the only option to get the proper DR out of the sensor but limiting you to a single slot. When you overcrank you get only 10bits for raw leaving you very little information to process raw. The C200 has some great features but there are some serious caveats involved also.
The whole point is, that you have the choice, this camera is not right for every situation, it's a raw internal cam that has the 8bit proxys if you need it, pretty much exactly like the Red Raven and if you need higher bit's or more overcrank then it's all about the next level up, hire the Weapon or Alexa etc
It has some caveats yes but it's raw internal 4K 60p at a much lower price point with some added benefits of low light sensitivity and built in ND's
puredrifting
Major Contributor
It appears that people expect a $7,500.00 camera to behave like a $16,000.00 camera. Why? Sure it's hobbled but this is nothing new for Canon, they have segmented in this same way since the first EOS C cameras were introduced, don't understand why people are shocked and offended. So much teeth gnashing over marketing decisions made in Japan that buyers have zero control over, Canon operates old school Japanese, all of the Japanese companies have or still do market segmenting in the same way. It's so simple, if the C200 features don't work for you, don't buy it. If you can live with the compromises as I probably can, I gain a new camera that will punch way above it's weight class for a pretty low cost. Even the single slot CFast, big deal. I used to shoot 10 minute film magazines, being able to shoot 30-60 minutes of Cinema RAW Light, then having to take a :15 break to pop in the next card, OMG, I cannot work this way! Get real people. I am very excited and thrilled by the options the camera has. It's not perfect or the ultimate camera and I like a lot of the features of the EVA 1 better but I still think the C200 will be a great tool for a large portion of my work and I predict the C200 will be a runaway hit, sold out for months. You may not like or agree with Canon's marketing decisions but they still sell a lot of cameras.
Correct me if I'm wrong or misreading the specs, but from what I've read the 8bit files will behave similarly to the C300/C100 files, but with a higher bitrate in 4K and the same or higher bitrate in HD. Because you likely would use RAW for something that's going to be seriously graded or for green screen work, I'm betting most will use whatever the equivalent of PP4 is on this camera when they aren't shooting RAW. Besides, I used to shoot clog on the 1st gen C series and never ran into any issues. The 8-bit there seemed to me to be more robust than the 8-bit on a lot of other cameras.
I think we'll have to see how this one shakes out when we get our hands on those 10-bit files.
I don't see those caveats as serious, but I'm betting you're going to work differently than I am. I've been using blackmagic and RED in RAW for the serious stuff and C100/C300 mostly for the event and corporate stuff these last few years. This camera seems to combine all of those into one, which is perfect for me. I'm betting I'm not alone.
cpreston
Veteran
I don't think clog of any form will have much use on the C200. RAW doesn't use it. My personal opinion is that the 420 long gop Canon Codec really suffers under it. You can get much more vibrant pictures not shooting in clog with the C100. In any type of controlled shooting, there is no actual need for the perceived DR increase you get with Clog. If you are a clog shooter that needs it for something like uncontrolled doc environments, the C300 II is going to be much better for your needs.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Right there with you, the C200 is a category "re-definer" and is a bit schizophrenic, at times a higher end RAW capable cinema camera and at other times, a pretty low end event/corporate type camera for non-discerning clients who don't know, care or understand the differences between 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 and 8-bit versus 10-bit. If the images are sharp, have nice Canon colors and are well shot, these clients will love the .MP4 output and largely could care less about specs.
Thats a given and why you should only use it for the right situation, in the same way the A7SII benefits from a cleaner image not shooting Slog3 and dialing in a look but a lot of shooters like to match with other Sony cams which is where it comes in handy even if the footage is 8bit and may not hold up as well in the grade, it's all subjective for the project.
Agree 100%
Liam Hall
Veteran
I think you miss the point; the FS7 was released nearly 3 years ago, it has an excellent 10 bit codec, can shoot HFR, can shoot RAW, is ergonomic, uses lowish cost media and costs less than a C200. Sony didn't hold back features to protect the F5. It amazes me that people are so happy to accept this nonsense, Jim Jannard created Red because he wouldn't accept this nonsense and I don't see why any of us here should be so accepting of it either.
Last edited:
Liam Hall
Veteran
Well that's an interesting take on it. I'm sure there are users who will use it that way, but I think most people who buy the C200 will be using 8 bit and 8 bit only.
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
That's the beauty of capitalism, nobody is forced to buy or accept anything, we all have choices about which tools to buy to do our work and we all vote with our wallets. I have yet to see a populist consumer protest change Canon's mind about anything. C100 MKI, no 1080 60p, sub-par EVF, C100 MKII, no 4k when everyone thought/wanted it to have it, C300 MKI, no 10-bit, massively overpriced upon introduction, no 1080 60p, C300 MKII, no 4K 60p, windowed 1080 slow motion FOV. Canon does what Canon wants, period. In my mind, they are not dumb, they very aware of the competition, they know the FS7 has out specced and outsold the C300 MKII for years. The C200 kind of proves that they don't give a poo emoji about that, it's not really a direct reply to the FS7 or FS7 MKII. I just find it illogical when people post "If it only had this" or "why doesn't it do this or that?". Because Canon wants it that way, they don't accidentally mis-interpret the needs and wants of the market, they just stick 100% to their marketing and segmentation strategy, damn the torpoedos.
From a marketing and business execution strategy viewpoint (I worked for a global management consutancy for a few years for Fortune 200s, Canon was never our client but Sony was), I kind of really admire the balls that Canon shows the market, they think they know best. Most of us don't agree with them, but many of us still buy their flawed cameras for a reason. They work, are reliable, have the best color science in their class and have a great lens selection available. Both of my Canons C100/300 are totally flawed yet they have made me a lot of money and I like shooting with them, the C200 will carry on that fine tradition of being frustrating yet ultimately reliable and profitable for me. It must work for Canon fiscally as they are one of the most successful companies in the world. I have to kind of admire their old-school Japanese market hubris and arrogance in a way, even though they frustrate the hell out of me at times.