NO 4K HDMI out on C300MKII?

[Jacques Mersereau]

Last summer Canon was great and brought out a C300MKII for us to test in our UofM studio.

It is an amazing camera, and after months of haggling with my colleagues and the bean counters,
we are about to buy FOUR of them.

Alas, we want to eventually run the (four) camera's 4K output into a switcher for live editing (hot mix).

Last summer we found the HDMI out did NOT do 4K(?!!!)
This is strange because even the low priced HC10 does have 4K out over HDMI.

The Canon rep said this would be fixed in a firmware update, but so far it has not been added.

This is nearly a deal breaker. 4K out RAW, though wonderful, is not what we need and works with almost nothing other than a few external recorders.

Canon, can you please make your HDMI out - like almost every other camera on the market -
do 4K? That, or give us either a way to turn 4K RAW into 12G SDI or IP? Something to help the C300 be a studio 'multi cam' camera?

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Jacques Mersereau

The Canon rep said this would be fixed in a firmware update, but so far it has not been added.

First rule of any camera manufacture rep is to not take their sole word on things until an official announcement.

You should be able to use a Shogun to take the 4K bayered signal and output it over HDMI.

[Jacques Mersereau]

And AJA makes a recorder box that will do the same.

The point is this is an expensive camera.
Canon has 4K HDMI out on their $1200 model.
WHY can't they do as they should be able to do and deliver this update?

My department wants to invest almost $90,000.00 in Canon, yet the lack of this 'no brainer' feature threatens to kill this deal that we all want.

Maybe we have to go Sony - a shame imho.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Jacques Mersereau

Maybe we have to go Sony - a shame imho.

You should just go with Sony then.

[Jacques Mersereau]

And we probably will have to - again, this because a $16,000 body can't do what a $1200 dinky does already.

[Noa Put]

Just curious, is there a reason why a fs7 was not considered? For your kind of work, what does the c300II do so much better then the fs7 that your department is willing to spend double the amount for it (considering the fs7 is half the price)?

[Jacques Mersereau]

Oh, but we were close to going with the Sony FS7 - and still might (argh!).
For the price, it is imo a great value and Sony is selling tons of them.

In our testing, The FS7 was not as good/clean in low light as the C300MKII.
I don't like the SONY E mount as it then requires lens adapters for Canon or PL.
Those adapters usually come with functions being disabled.


What I like about the C300 is the look - it is more 'cinematic' imo than the FS7.
The low light handling is excellent, pro-res 4:4:4 recording is awesome for green screen,
and the terrific auto focus will allow for more sharp in-focus shots, this because we many times use
inexperience student cam ops who have trouble getting focus on our Sony EX3 camcorders.
I also like the C300 menu structure and the plethora of assignable buttons.

I think if you were to ask most seasoned professionals which camera they would rather own,
the Canon would easily be the winner.

What I don't like about the C300MKII is:
1) No 4K HDMI out (???!)
2) The non-industry standard use of 2 BNC jacks to get 4K HDSDI out
( I would much prefer 12G out ala Black Magic or 'TICO 4K' out on a single BNC).
3) The 'top heavy' design of the camera body - I'd prefer a more standard shape like the F55 = longer/lower.
4) Price - it is still more money than I feel it should be. I think Canon would sell many more if priced at $12K.

[Gary Huff]

The C300 Mark II uses a single 3G-SDI connection to output a bayered 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 signal. Not two HD-SDI connections.

Both the XC10 and the FS7 output 8-bit UHD, while the C300 Mark II is a fully 10-bit camera with all of its internal recording options and outputs.

[Jacques Mersereau]

Thanks Gary. I stand corrected. I either I heard the Canon rep wrong or was given the wrong info.
Strange, because I would not come up with quadHD out on two bncs on my own - but no matter.
And, I forgot to add that the C300 is fully 10 bit, and even better, 12bit for pro-res @ 2K (I believe?)

RAW 4K out is nice for external recorders, but it is too bad it to is not switchable to 12G SDI
( 12G is a Black Magic thing, but it does look like other manufacturers are looking into it = Grass Valley.)

OTOH, in a couple of years when IP 4K becomes the thing, perhaps AJA will make a 4K RAW to IP converter box and 'multi cam 4K out' will not be a problem.

I still want to buy the C300MKIIs :-)

[Jacques Mersereau]

It looks like we are going to reluctantly go with the Sony FS7.
After surfing around, it turns out that the FS7 does output 10bit 4:2:2 over SDI and HDMI.

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but It is a shame that despite all the processing horsepower the C300 has available, that Canon engineers have been unable to provide a software upgrade to send out 4K over HDMI or SDI. Too bad, I was really looking forward to working with the C300MkII.

[Gabe Strong]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

The C300 Mark II uses a single 3G-SDI connection to output a bayered 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 signal. Not two HD-SDI connections.

Both the XC10 and the FS7 output 8-bit UHD, while the C300 Mark II is a fully 10-bit camera with all of its internal recording options and outputs.

Actually the FS7 outputs 10-bit

[Glen Elliott]

Originally Posted by Jacques Mersereau

I think Canon would sell many more if priced at $12K.

Prophetic.

[Marcello Mazzilli]

This HDMI output seems to be a big secret
This is what I have discovered but I have no real tangible proof and no official docs

C300 Mi 8bit
C300 Mii 10bit
XC10 8bit
XC15 10bit
FS7 10bit
LS300 8bit

it's a nightmare to get a 100% confirmation. I don't really believe the XC15 statement my Canon dealer gave me.. until I see it really.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Marcello Mazzilli

I don't really believe the XC15 statement my Canon dealer gave me.. until I see it really.

You shouldn't, because it's 8-bit.