FS7: Would You Buy A Canon C200

I won't go for one as my FS7 still is the better camera. The obvious being how well implemented codecs and features is on the FS7 but also how the FS7 is designed with cabling and the fact that no third party stuff is needed to shoot with it in almost all situations.

Looking at that LCD cable and XLR inputs which are pointed in all directions instead of how slimmed the FS7 is with the same connectors. Sure C200 have a few nice features the FS7 doesn't have but do they matter if compromises are to made in other areas? It would be more likely for me to get the new Panasonic AU-XX to be announced any day but my bets are towards the new FS5 mkII in August.
 
I probably can't afford to but..

- i think this and 18-80 make a very sensible little package

-the shortness is gimbal friendly

-the raw codec may be a major fidelity upgrade to the fs7

The question is if that combo is "must have"
 
Just looking at what I've done since getting my FS7 it's happy shooting and clients all the way. It's difficult to move beyond the FS7 and justify it.
 
Still ergonomically appalling.

It'll have those awful overly warm sickly Canon colours. 8bit or RAW? Worst of both worlds for a jobbing video producer.

Any sensible Sony FS7 user who has long paid off their camera and well into profit would be waiting for the eventual replacement of the F5/55 which will be next level compared to this Canon me too camera. Why side grade when you can go up?

I'm of the opinion that given the speed of work nowadays of the jobbing video producer that breaking down your main camera for the gimbal is an ungodly waste of time and you're better off having a small dedicated camera for a cheap gimbal. My former colleagues have DJI gimbal cams and Sony DSLRs on cheapo gimbals now and they all cut really well with the FS7.
 
I use A7SII on a gimbal that cuts nicely in with both FS7 and Canon cameras and I'd rather keep doing that as the thing is so light weight and small instead of rigging a larger cinecamera on a heavier gimbal.
 
Nirv said:
Still ergonomically appalling.

It'll have those awful overly warm sickly Canon colours. 8bit or RAW? Worst of both worlds for a jobbing video producer.

Any sensible Sony FS7 user who has long paid off their camera and well into profit would be waiting for the eventual replacement of the F5/55 which will be next level compared to this Canon me too camera. Why side grade when you can go up?

I'm of the opinion that given the speed of work nowadays of the jobbing video producer that breaking down your main camera for the gimbal is an ungodly waste of time and you're better off having a small dedicated camera for a cheap gimbal. My former colleagues have DJI gimbal cams and Sony DSLRs on cheapo gimbals now and they all cut really well with the FS7.
Click to expand...

8bit or RAW? Worst of both worlds for a jobbing video producer.

I think the 5:1 raw may be managable. I mean what is the data rate of that vs 10b4kProRes?

(I think Ursa raw is about half the pro res??)

Why side grade when you can go up?

Sony may introduce a blaster for sure :)

This appeals for image fidelity, better AF and better ipad control, those things can be of vale.

Still ergonomically appalling.


XLR in the body so bin the top handle.

The EVF has a nice protected wire and the front plug is better placed than the 7/5

A decent app would be ergonomically huge for the gimbal crowd.

16volts.. .. .. WTF?
 
But it still looks like a kettle ?.. top heavy.. totally useless EVF totally the wrong place.. if Canon are designing their cameras solely based on ease of gimbal use .. I think they are in trouble.. I mean really.. how did that design for a "video camera" ever ever get through the door.. design by consensus not always good .. its like a car with square wheels.. its crap.. someone had to say it..
Who could ever take that out of there camera bag and proudly set it up on the tripod.. never could i pay money for such a bad design..
 
morgan_moore said:
8bit or RAW? Worst of both worlds for a jobbing video producer.

I think the 5:1 raw may be managable. I mean what is the data rate of that vs 10b4kProRes?
Click to expand...

XAVC-I is a genius codec, bags of quality, lightweight and edits like DV footage on laptops. I could edit 5 streams of 4kXAVC-I on an iMac without dropping a single frame, lets see how the Canon RAW holds up in the real world of getting stuff done against the clock.

Canon RAW Light might offer better pixel peeping but if it's an arse to edit and you need proxies or thundering great workstations for the same performance as XAVC on a laptop then no thanks. I've become as much a fan of XAVC as the FS7 itself as one rather takes for granted how easy XAVC makes life so jumping record formats is as much a consideration as jumping to a new camera.
 
The main things I like about it are the small form factor (after taking off that ridiculous monitor and useless EVF) for gimbal use, and native EF mount.
 
The form of the C100 is okay and it's fast to screw that handle on top and get on with shooting but I've never liked the C300 poor design. Canon must love dangling cables.
 
I never need raw and I allways need 10bit 422 so this is a nonstarter, I don't care about ergonomics since I only see the camera as a "brain" replacement on my vct shoulder mount with grips battery pack and evf. If the new Panasonic hits the sweet spot Varicam LT color science in smaller body with a 10bit codec I could be swayed but for now the fs7 works great.
 
Today I want to peddle between 150HD (ideally 180) and 4k-50. The menu dig of the FS7 means that I wont have time and will have to stick with HD.

Also the lost cache record when you exit HFR is getting on my wick.. and Id really like sound in HFR.

Such a minor details are what makes or breaks a camera as a great tool.

Obviously our esteemed reviewing community do not touch on such matters although extrashot noted the boot time on the panny when they played.
 
The boot time for the Panasonic is dreadful especially since it needs reboot with every frame rate change etc. well know more tomorrow. One lesson learned from the fs7 experience don't buy a camera today whose issues will be addressed in future firmware updates.
 
FS7 is a pain to operate if one have to switch between recording format fast. I've done it a few times and it sucks. But as I mostly shoot either HD or 4k and seldom mix these it works fine.
 
There are compromises involved in brining in a camera with certain specs at a certain price point. There are reasons why Arris rule the high budget world it's speed ease of use besides image esthetics.
 
Liam Hall said:
I agree, 10bit internal to a user friendly codec is an absolute must these days.
Click to expand...

Coming from stills Im used to having 'crap ready now' and a 'good archive copy'

Todays job was Corbyn but he fooked off to go on the telly - but I wanted some facebook ready crap and some 'quality' too for the serious analysis later.

On that basis the raw+look in camera combo seems appealing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top