C300: whoa, how did I miss this... is C300 mkII nearly the perfect camera?

The only time I would ever use CLOG2 is when I'm using my 7q+ and sending it a RAW signal. I don't rate it over 250 ISO. I've found the internal codec across the board to be noticeably soft compared to an externally recorded image. Shoot clog1 for internal stuff and rate it at the new native ISO of 400
 
Do you think these footages are unusable?

https://vimeo.com/158964425

If you think so maybe it is just because you don't like noise. It is very subjective. In the beginning of digital camera I was accustomed to macro blocking and no noise due to low bitrate. Now it is the contrary due to high bitrate.
 
Mburkefilms, If you're finding 800iso unusable in log2 it's user error. You can't expose it like log1. I've been shooting exteriors and interiors in log 2 for the past several months. I'm finding if you keep shadow detail above 15-20IRE you're golden.

Mraaron895 - I'm surprised that you find the image so soft. I'm using filtration to soften and take the edge off the image. It's sharper than the Amira at matching resolutions. What glass are you using? And what type of work are you doing?
 
Just to echo what jm.gardiner said, I've been shooting day and night ints and exts in clog 2 and found it incredibly clean at iso 400 and very clean at iso 800. Clog 2 ungraded is naturally noisier in the blacks than Clog 1, but it disappears once its graded properly. How have you got the gamma and colour matrix setup? The only time I thought the camera was noisy was after my first shoot, where the camera was set to rec 709 colour space.

I've also found it to produce a pleasingly sharp image, and like jm.gardiner am looking into filtration to take some of the edge off the sharpness. This is with Sigma Art lenses, which are notoriously sharp mind. One thing I have found is that accurate focus is critical in 4K. The few shots I've produced that have looked a bit soft have been just off focus, and definitely not codec based issues. I think the focus assist functions are a very overlooked feature, especially when shooting 4K.
 
filmguy123 said:
This seems to check all my boxes... correct me if I am wrong... and fill me in on any caveats I'm missing?

High Dynamic Range (15-stops - is this for real, or exaggerated claim?)
Variable Frame Rate (love Sony offerings but no VFR is a deal breaker for me. I need and want the interim 36fps, 44, etc.)
Great internal codec? (with options for even better to external recorded if needed)?
Excellent Ergos for Run'n'gun & 1 man band
Click to expand...

Varicam LT appears to give you all that, With the bonus of 60fps 4K and great lowlight too with dual ISO. And a swappable mount! (can't do that with the C300 without sending it into Canon)

Plus of course at a heaps cheaper price the Sony F5 and FS7 also tick all these boxes as well.
 
Last edited:
jm.gardiner said:
Mburkefilms, If you're finding 800iso unusable in log2 it's user error. You can't expose it like log1. I've been shooting exteriors and interiors in log 2 for the past several months. I'm finding if you keep shadow detail above 15-20IRE you're golden.

Mraaron895 - I'm surprised that you find the image so soft. I'm using filtration to soften and take the edge off the image. It's sharper than the Amira at matching resolutions. What glass are you using? And what type of work are you doing?
Click to expand...

I shot a control yesterday to compare internal and external signals. When I zoomed in 500 percent on an Amazon box I could read the letters on the externally recorded version only.
 
I believe you. An image with less compression will always be better, but I wouldn't consider the internal image soft by any means.
 
Varicam LT is very nice. It's in consideration for sure.
However it's significantly heavier by the time you factor in 3rd part monitor and v-lock batteries.
C300 seems better suited to non-shoulder mounted run'n'gun.

Will have to play with both!
 
mraaron895 said:
I shot a control yesterday to compare internal and external signals. When I zoomed in 500 percent on an Amazon box I could read the letters on the externally recorded version only.
Click to expand...

That just sounds weird. You sure you weren't accidentally deinterlacing the internal image or something?
 
any of you c300mk2 users shoot the 2k/12bit?

i'm less interested in hfr or even 4k but am very intrigued with the idea of 12bit latitude.

care to share your thoughts on 2k/12bit?

thanks in advance.

be well.

rob
smalltalk.productions
 
The 12bit 4444 combined with cinema gamut is very flexible. It's the first thing I tested against the Amira and it holds up very well.

Arri beats the mk2 when it comes to pushing shadows though.
 
Here's a quick example of a one light grade i did in premiere of a C-Log2 12bit 4444 file. I almost had too many options I could take it. And there was so much nuance I could add at the various tonal levels. I was very impressed.
BING.jpg
pancake_test3.jpg
 
From what I've seen 2k 12 bit both from the Mk2 and the c500 is pretty amazing stuff. I shot some material a while back and did a couple of quick color charts at various exposures just for laughs. There is some much room to maneuver witching those images in terms of the grade, it's crazy. Even with shots that were over exposed a 2 -3 stops Colors held up and were easily dialed back without any clipping or distortion. If one were to shoot a feature in 2k 12 bit 444, you would not be disappointed with your post color options as far as I can tell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top