C200: What stops the C200 from being a near perfect camera?

Barry_Green said:
Which means it has the biggest pixels possible for an S35 4K sensor. It should excel in dynamic range, sensitivity, and noise performance. But it won't be the sharpest 4K camera in terms of resolved detail, nor will it come close to sampling 4K 4:4:4. You'd need an 8K sensor (at least) to deliver fully -resolved maximum sharp 4K at 4:4:4. And that would likely mean an 8,192 x 4,320 pixel matrix, which would mean about a 35-megapixel sensor.

(Which would mean less dynamic range and perhaps less sensitivity, although downsample should negate the increased noise to be expected when using smaller pixels).

There's no free lunch and you can't have it all, especially in the lower price brackets. Canon appears to have prioritized sensitivity, low noise, and dynamic range. Ain't nothing wrong with that and should make customers very happy. All I was responding to was a claim that seemed to be saying that people are expecting 4K @ 4:4:4 from this camera, and that's just not possible using a single 4K Bayer sensor.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your information Barry and everybody else. It is great to learn what makes up these devices and the root of great images.
 
Here is a nice explanation for those who still don't get it:


To repeat, for me it's perfect* for 2k, but it will probably be famous by being 'the perfect 4k wedding shooter camera'™.
 
But this reverts to the human perception AND the mathematics, aka the debayer/demosaic process. If one compares the 35mm film against 4K, does a human eye perceive 4K to have more detail regardless of whether it's "real" or, as Barry called it, "synthetic"?

PS. I am glad Geoff brought up the debayer process in post. If the post math with a given workstation is good enough, then the end result will be different than the in-camera real time number crunching (one of the reasons the Netflix accepts URSA 4.6 Raw but not ProRes).
 
It's easy to fool human eye, but you can't fool the algorithms for image analysis. (Or you think you can, with addition of some fuzzy logic, which then again produces errors to a certain degree, usually equivalent to the degree of approximation used at the first place.)

PS. Netflix was also mentioned in linked video.
 
combatentropy said:
Don't underestimate the power of an ASIC.
Click to expand...
But it's an ASIC in real time, whereas an editing suit can take its sweet time making multiple passes. Or change up types of the debayering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing

I'll quote from the RawTherapee page :
The following Bayer demosaicing algorithms are available: AMaZE, IGV, LMMSE, EAHD, HPHD, VNG4, DCB, AHD, fast or mono, as well as none.[8]. Raw files from X-Trans sensors have the 3-pass, 1-pass and fast demosaicing methods at their disposal.
Click to expand...

PS. Aren't ASIC's being replaced by the FPGA's?
 
morgan_moore said:
Tech waffle aside.

It is not pretty clear that this camera will bash similar priced cameras for pure image quality?
Click to expand...

Probably. Then, I'm not expecting the image quality of my Raven. I paid 10900+vat with 3 hours of Redcode, 1 year ago. Same 3 hours of Canon raw "lite" and a C200 will be 9724+vat (I've been given a quote from Canon dealer. With 3 512GB decent cards).
Sure, I expect higher portability (although after 1 hour hanging the camera with the lateral hand grip, while talking with Canon reps, my wrist was hurting), ND's, the great focus assists, etc..
 
Canon's probably not allowing it yet. Cinema5D said they would ask, but there hasn't been an update about it.

Two reviewers on YouTube said they weren't even allowed to post footage.
 
Getting back to the OP's original question.

The C200 is about as perfect as a camera can get for me.

It offers everything I love about my C100 and everything I wanted from a RED, in one camera for under $10K for a ready to shoot package.

My wishlist for my next camera looks something like this:

(In no particular order)

* 4K (minimum 60p)
* Improved DR
* Improved image quality
* HFR (120fps+)
* Log profile
* Internal Raw (not really a need but a want)
* Built in NDs
* Built in XLRs
* Small-ish form factor (for gimbal work)
* AF (for gimbal work)
* Long battery life
* Long format recording (the C200's 8Bit 4:2:0 MP4 is in my pro column rather than my con column)
* Reliability
* User-friendliness
* EF Mount
* S35 Sensor
* Good low light
* Non-proprietary media

And the C200 hit's all of those marks.

Sure I'd love for it to have 4K at 120fps, and higher DR and lower cost etc etc etc, but realistically, the C200 has it all.

The only thing that remains questionable for me is, will it have a similar demand that the C300 had/has.

If it does, then it is perfect, if not, then I'm still going to buy it, because it fits my needs better than anything else out there.
 
Last edited:
is there a 4k 8 bit 420 option on the C300 MK2 and has anyone used it? what is the quality like? I'm assuming this is what the C100 has, and people seem to love the quality on that camera?

Is 10 bit really that important if not doing high end / professional work?
 
No, it's not. People just get caught up in the specs.

Cameras offered much worse in the last 10 years and people managed and produced great pictures.

10-bit and RAW are the 'power' words for this year, so just have to bear with it. Per usual, no one ever notices the difference...especially if the overall work is good. Only need those certain specs for certain employers.
 
Fishflavour said:
is there a 4k 8 bit 420 option on the C300 MK2 and has anyone used it? what is the quality like? I'm assuming this is what the C100 has, and people seem to love the quality on that camera?

Is 10 bit really that important if not doing high end / professional work?
Click to expand...

The C300 Mk1 was 8bit and that thing sold and rented like crazy, not to mention it was used on tons of high-end broadcast productions.
So I think the whole, "If it's doesn't have 10bit, it's garbage" argument is BS.
 
Last edited:
Fishflavour said:
is there a 4k 8 bit 420 option on the C300 MK2 and has anyone used it? what is the quality like? I'm assuming this is what the C100 has, and people seem to love the quality on that camera?

Is 10 bit really that important if not doing high end / professional work?
Click to expand...

There is no low bit rate 4K option on the C300 II.
 
NorBro said:
10-bit and RAW are the 'power' words for this year, so just have to bear with it. Per usual, no one ever notices the difference...especially if the overall work is good. Only need those certain specs for certain employers.
Click to expand...

Sure quality of work trumps, however the visual difference in 8 and 10 bit 4k is easily discernible. The bigger question would be: should this be of any concern to people? If you're not delivering 4K then not at all.
 
I personally don't think it's easily discernible.

What I think is the world is moving too fast to care. People just want and need to be entertained and satisfied. Constantly onto the next thing.

I just think people - including myself - sometimes need a wake-up call...because if you're not making millions of dollars, who gives a...about 8-bit or 10-bit.

What's the big picture here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top