FS7: Would You Buy A Canon C200

Nirv said:
What evidence do you have that 4k RAW light is indeed manageable and editable? It might be a complete dog to work with. You're talking to the wrong person if you think you'll get anywhere wrt Canon DSLR lenses. Not my bag.
Click to expand...

My evidence is on the canon website. Look at the workflow chart. Then imagine you import raw dang files. I think you will understand.
 
Bern Caughey said:
Ever wonder why ARRI, RED, & even BM, offer ProRes as well as Raw?
Click to expand...

Let's keep things in context shall we. I was talking about the poster who had a Red Raven jumping ship for The C200. I'd try and find the post but there are 3 or 4 threads on the c200 and a ain't got time. In a nut shell the RR has a compressed raw format.
 
Bern Caughey said:
Ever wonder why ARRI, RED, & even BM, offer ProRes as well as Raw?
Click to expand...

Just a few things about this...

ARRI: 2010 was like 100 years ago. Very different time. No one was ready for ARRIRAW, but only the 1% in the business. They needed something else and nothing was better and made more sense than ProRes for the best camera in the world.

RED: They didn't start offering ProRes until the last 2 years or so, and it was limited to 2K on anything below $30,000. Only recently did the Scarlet-W get a firmware update to allow 4K/30p 422 and 422 LT (not HQ).

Blackmagic: This is a fact...Blackmagic was close to only offering CinemaDNG, and had to be convinced people would prefer ProRes and DNxHD formats as well.

Side note: Someone in the business once told me that the future is RAW and RAW-only, and we'll one day laugh at how we used to shoot relatively compressed images (kind of how we joke about tapes now).

Fun story from John Brawley when we talked about this a while ago and I asked why hasn't ProRes made it to all cameras sooner:

John Brawley said:
Apple mostly.

They make it really difficult. And if you complain publicly they will just refuse to liscense you from spite. I think JVC a few years ago announced a ProRes camera at NAB without sign off from Apple. So they just said nah.

Everyone thinks ProRes is easy, but if you're doing it in hardware like cameras or recorders there's a whole extra level of compliance.

For example Apple say you have to give them 10 versions of what ever you're making in each rev. So they want 10 Ursa mini pros which they then destructively test. They find a problem and you're back to square 1. You will never hear this publicly but it's easy to imagine a scenario where a camera shipping is delayed because of an issue like this.

So basically no one wants to deal with Apple. You have to pay and they make it really difficult to comply.

JB
Click to expand...
 
Maybe Apple just cares about how their ProRes is implemented and not about the final result of the picture quality.

Some BM issues...surely they wouldn't have passed if the cameras had to be perfect, ha.

- FPN
- Sun spot
- Bad audio
- Busted XLR inputs and SDI I/O
- Magenta
- Crosshatching
- Random screen errors
- CFast writing failures
- ND flaring (UMP)
 
Having worked now at two manufacturers making devices that record in ProRes, I can tell you that Apple is not nearly that draconian. Yes there are a number of hoops to jump through to qualify for Apple certification, but all the steps are logical and they are purely about making proper ProRes.
 
Ive never had a direct request for prores myself.. thanks to the success of the Fs7..XDCAM/ XAVC is now just as widely excepted .. if they want to transcode it themselves then I guess they do at the edit.. but never have a lost a job by not having a prores board in my F5.. if anything I think its an old, very out dated inefficient codec.. I would worry about buying a camera in 2017 that only recorded prores...
 
Donny 123 said:
Ive never had a direct request for prores myself.. thanks to the success of the Fs7..XDCAM/ XAVC is now just as widely excepted .. if they want to transcode it themselves then I guess they do at the edit.. but never have a lost a job by not having a prores board in my F5.. if anything I think its an old, very out dated inefficient codec.. I would worry about buying a camera in 2017 that only recorded prores...
Click to expand...

Out of interest, how is ProRes old, out dated and inefficient? Compared to what?
 
the initial question was: Would You Buy A Canon C200

The anser is no.
It records either 4K Cinema RAW Light, 1 Gbps VBR or MP4 150 Mbps. One is way too much for daily bred and butter and the other is too low to hit the standard even in daily bred and butter jobs.
 
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.
Click to expand...

I've never once heard the Canon colors referred to as sickly. Non cine-alta Sony on the other hand...

C-LOG 2/3 are truly beautiful log profiles that have that Alexa look with little to no color work.

The RAW/8 bit 4:2:0 is really really weird, but probably practical. I shoot with the C300ii a lot and I am forced to shoot interviews in 1080 and b roll in 4k because the 4k files are huge. I could totally see shooting interviews in 4k/420 and the b roll in RAW. You would get really really nice results, just depends if you can handle the workflow.
 
I will elaborate my no...probably will get Panasonic's new mystery cam, unless they really get it wrong, which for my use and taste, they are not doing...
 
This is just some stupid attempt by canon to somehow wedge in a camera for those who don't want to spend 12000 on the c300II without screwing over c300II users "look you can have rawish something that neither fs7 or c300 has but we disabled broadcast codecs so the c300 people don't complain" next a $7000 c700 that only comes with canon FD mount and only runs on an internal Battery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top