C300 Discussion

[Stephen Mick]

If the C300 hits the street at a sub-$12,000 price tag, I think they'll sell a good number of them, myself included. At closer to $9,000 I think they'd have a hard time keeping them in stock.

There are a lot of things that get me all excited about the C300. The price point is the only one that really doesn't.

[Mark David Williams]

Originally Posted by Thierry Humeau

Henry,

The C300 may be lacking some of the high-end features that are available to the F3 but it comes with some kind of LOG implementation and a slew of unique features. It may not be an attractive choice for film guys who need 4K output but I think the C300 offer a very compelling package for TV and Doco production. It sure does not record 4K but having an almost 4K sensor resolution can't hurt, even if your output is 1080. In carefully analyzing the hires pics (from the press kit) and the specs sheet, I think the C300 is actually a very well built and unique camera. As a TV pro, I think the EF version and the tight integration with Canon's lenses offering is going to be a tremendous asset. I also like the form factor, 422 50mbps, EVF quality, balance, power draw, etc... I feel this cam will work quite better than an F3 for TV and Doco work, and I own 2 F3s so, this is an unbiased opinion.

Thierry.

Thierry I'm not sure you're right my guess is the camera has been optimised to look like film and has ambitions to compete with cameras like the Alexa on only that basis. The Alexa is also great for Docu and TV drama because it can be made to look like anything. The documentary makers and TV may want to stick with the cameras more designed for that purpose.

We'll see!

[Brian Drysdale]

I know the Alexa has been used on documentaries, but it is a high end camera and most documentaries don't have the budget for the Arri camera. Camera people like it because it's good for shooting handheld.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Don Parrish

Chris, any indication as to the future of shoulder mounts for Canon ? There also seems to a gap left by the XF line. What is the future of the non cinema cameras ??

Don, it seems that Canon is relying heavily upon third-party vendors in the shoulder support / FrankenRig arena to accommodate XF owners wanting to put their camcorders on their shoulders.

The launch of Cinema EOS is a new road for Canon, but I don't think that takes anything away from the non-cinema camera line-up, for which there will always be a market. We just have to remember that Canon does not update their pro line as frequently as Sony or Panasonic. There may or may not be a new XF-series camcorder at the next NAB. If there isn't, I would not interpret that as any kind of indication that there never will be. After all, the XL series ran for a decade.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

The Alexa is a LOT more than just '1080p'.

I'm aware of that, Steve -- I was trying to demonstrate for James that if
you're looking at these camcorders *only* in terms of output resolution,
as he was, we find that $20,000 isn't nearly the high end for 1080p.

Once again, here was the context of that exchange:

Originally Posted by James Huenergardt

For 1080P video, $20K is a bit much, don't you thnk?

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

@James: Actually for 1080p video, I think $60,000 is a bit much -- and yet that's what the Arri Alexa costs (roughly), and it's one of the hottest cameras in Hollywood right now.

A poor choice of words on my part, perhaps. Instead of saying that
I think $60,000 is a bit much, I probably should have said that $20K
is about one-third of the price of the most popular 1080p camera in
Hollywood today.

My point being simply that you can pay a lot more than $20,000
for a camera that has "only" 1080p output.

And just to reiterate, I seriously doubt that the C300 is really going
to sell for $20,000. I'm betting it will go quite a bit lower than that.

[Jim Martin]

After spending all 3 days at the event, I can tell you a few things:

1) Seeing these films projected in the Paramount theater was flat out amazing. For those of you doing critical assessments based on what you saw on Vimeo is....not a basis for judging this camera. Canon was projecting the same films on 2 screens they had set up on the stages and they looked nowhere near as good as they did in the theater. One can't possibly make a true judgement from a computer screen.

2) Most all of the people in attendance realized that the camera really has a very good/special chip/picture taker. The colors, film grain, contrast, etc looked fantastic...all being recorded in camera with the XF codec...which is almost identical to the Alexa's codec.

3) Some of you are suffering from "spec" disease...."8 bit is soo terrible" .....its not...look at the picture properly, listen to the people who shot these films...who all stated how well this footage did in post.

4) Some of you are suffering from "price" disease....20K! (it will be less)...as I said before, wanting the holy grail camera for 5-6K isn't going to happen...the chip in this camera alone is worth a lot.

5) There was much talk of how well this camera is going to do as a B camera for the Alexa....which is one of the things that the DPs have been asking for....the body is small by comparison and when you put a nice cinema prime on, one can get to places for a shot that even the F3 can't. They used 2 small remote control helicopters for the traveling shots in Vincent's film.

6) The camera was designed to work now....with existing post facilities without having to upgrade or add equipment. Canon did not want to introduce the Cinema EOS line that would require post houses to have to add equipment to handle a cumbersome & difficult codec.

7) As I said before, Canon interviewed 150+ ASC DPs, all who basically stated "we love the look of the 5D, please make a functioning video camera we can work with.....which is exactly what Canon has delivered in these first cameras of the Cinema EOS lenses.

8) At NAB this year, Canon had me meet with the director in charge of the team making these cameras to confirm what had to be included to make them a success....functioning video camera, XF codec, incorporate both EF & PL lenses, allow existing 3rd party accessories to seamlessly work with the cameras, deliver in numbers, and don't make it too big if you can.....they nailed it!

Again,again....you had to see the footage in the theater....and you would understand why I'm so big on this camera. Specs are one thing, execution is another....and if these DPs who shot these films were unhappy with something, as DPs are, they would have not held back in their complaints if they had any.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[Daniel Browning]

Originally Posted by Jim Martin

...all being recorded in camera with the XF codec...which is almost identical to the Alexa's codec.

I must not correctly understand what you are saying here, because I think it would be very unusual to say that MPEG-2 4:2:2 8-bit 50 mbps is "almost identical" to ProRes 4:4:4 12-bit 330 Mbps.

[Chris Hurd]

He is referring to is the way the image looks onscreen, not tech specs. Canon was going after the F3 feature set and the Alexa look.

[Jim Martin]

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

I must not correctly understand what you are saying here, because I think it would be very unusual to say that MPEG-2 4:2:2 8-bit 50 mbps is "almost identical" to ProRes 4:4:4 12-bit 330 Mbps.

Almost all of the TV shows using the Alexa are using the 50mb 4-2-2 pro res codec.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Jim Martin

Almost all of the TV shows using the Alexa are using the 50mb 4-2-2 pro res codec.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

Source please? The F3's internal 35Mb/s is far better than PR at 50Mb.

[Daniel Browning]

Originally Posted by Jim Martin

Almost all of the TV shows using the Alexa are using the 50mb 4-2-2 pro res codec.

My understanding is that the only way to get 50 Mbps with 10-bit 4:2:2 prores is to shoot in standard definition. Most of the TV shows I see are in HD, which only goes down to an average of about 120 Mbps (for 24 fps, ~150 for 30 fps).

[Steve Kalle]

The lowest PR LT at 24p is 82Mb/s. According to the Apple whitepaper, there is no 50Mb/s for any HD version. Daniel is correct in that only 720x480 has a target rate of 50Mb/s.

[Steve Kimmel]

Even viewing on Vimeo, the footage from the C300 looks impressive.

But, they also were using some pretty nice glass and recording to external recorders as seen on some of the behind-the-scenes stuff. I suspect that have very good colorists as well.

As much as "average Joe" footage can be not helpful, I would like to see some of that as well, compared with, say the F3, under like with like situations.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Don Miller

The non bayer nature of the new sensor is important. It looks a lot more advanced than the apparently more standard CMOS on the cameras competitors.

It *IS* a standard Bayer sensor - but it's not being read in the "normal" way, it's not having the normal de-Bayering process applied.

They are able to do this because of the resolution - 4k - of which 3840x2160 pixels are active. You can treat that as 1920x1080 groups of photosites, each group being 2x2, with two green, one each red and blue photosites. Hence directly read R,G,B off each group and directly get an output sample.

It's simple, gives true 4:4:4 1080p, low power requirement, and no need for upscaling or downscaling - and the lack of need for downscaling can only be an advantage in many ways.

[Chris Hurd]

Correct, in other words, it is a standard Bayer pattern, but the readout is not de-Bayering.