SlashCAM conclude Blackmagic Cinema Camera review, compares to Canon C300

[Paul Watt]

Why woud Arriflex buy anything that RED owns? Alexa is the RED beater, I don't get it? When the 'Big 3' were wondering how the chips would fall in the Global economic downturn, RED was using it's own capital along with that of private investors to launch a daring move into a proprietary CODEC and HW. I wrote in 2008 that the Big3 would quitely watch and then gradually move into RED delivery territory. They have done just that. Meanwhile, Arriflex seemingly avoided the hype machine and simply focused on one camera for the Pros.
IF RED had delivered Scarlet on time, and rather than mixing things up by confusing its customers with too broad a product mix, also focused on just one direction, things might have been different.
As it is, RED is having a fire sale.

There are no cameras out there that do what the Epic does.  Internal S35 highspeed raw.  REDraw is amazing, as has been stated above.  It fires right into Premiere, and REDCineX is a great tool for colouring.  And there's a long ass waiting list to get one now that the price has dropped.  

 

Red's also delivering RedRay players and soon, projectors.  And they're putting together a 4K digital distribution network for theatres and individuals.  As far as I can tell, they're crushing it, and they're not going anywhere.

 

I think that it's more likely Canon will be in trouble.  C300s and especially C500s are going to be very hard sells at their current prices.  The HDSLRs are crippled and over priced, and the lens business is getting more competitive every year.

[noa]

Somehow I don't feel compelled to spend double the price on a C100 for a worse image. No idea why!?? :)

 

No doubt the BMC can resolve much better looking images but before the BMC is production ready it will cost you much more then 3000, people tend to forget that and only stare at the start prize. At 3000 the BMC is basically a shoebox with a screen, but the concept is quite good actually as you can build on top of the camera so it fit's your needs. But like I said, it will cost you and before you know it your at the c100 prize. So, it's not really half the prize.

[Ernesto Mantaras]

No doubt the BMC can resolve much better looking images but before the BMC is production ready it will cost you much more then 3000, people tend to forget that and only stare at the start prize. At 3000 the BMC is basically a shoebox with a screen, but the concept is quite good actually as you can build on top of the camera so it fit's your needs. But like I said, it will cost you and before you know it your at the c100 prize. So, it's not really half the prize.

 

If you need a basic shooting setup you won't spend more than $4000 with an extra battery (perhaps you should buy two to be safe, though it's not an obligation) and two 240gb SSD Sandisk Extreme. Then you could or couldn't buy a monitor, some kind of rig (both of which you might just already have if you're working on this), external audio solution, etc.
 

You need $3500 to reach the cost of a basic C100, and that kind of money can get you a lot of extras if you spend them wisely. Still, you're not forced to do so if you don't have the money (yet). And you can always rent what you're missing, depending on the job.

[Bruno]

You need $3500 to reach the cost of a basic C100...

Agreed, and it's not like the C100 comes with CF cards or extra batteries.

[noa]

Agreed, and it's not like the C100 comes with CF cards or extra batteries.

Sure but you need to take into account that on a bmc it is much more expensive per hour to shoot then on a c100 if you shoot raw with it, a lot depends on your type of work you plan to do with the BMC, you can start at a real low prize, with just the basics, that's true and I think for a filmmaker on a budget that's terrific, but in most other cases costs will add quickly. I"m not saying that's a bad thing, even if you accessorize it up to the prize of the c100 it still will be a great prize for what you get in return. But I think a 5 or 6k prize tag for a production ready BMC included adapted workstation is more realistic.

[Bruno]

But you're comparing BMCC's raw with C100's compressed video, that's apples and oranges.

BMCC doesn't only shoot raw, and if you compare the prores file sizes with the C100, the difference is not that big anymore.

 

Also, a 240gb SSD for the BMCC costs $170 USD, while 240gb worth of CF Cards would set you back $750 USD (rough prices from a quick amazon search).

 

But even if you had it going up to the price of a C100, the BMCC shoots prores and raw, and the C100 only shoots compressed video, so it would still be a better option, except for ergonomics of course.

 

In the end it's about using the right tool for the right job, but Canon's C series needs to see some serious price drops pretty soon.

[noa]

I"m not comparing anything, I"m just trying to say the BMC will cost you a lot more then 3K if you want to have it production ready and I mean for serious production, not for taking it on a field trip to shoot until your internal battery dies or untill your one ssd you have bought for it is full. 

[Bruno]

...but you need to take into account that on a bmc it is much more expensive per hour to shoot then on a c100 if you shoot raw with it...

Sorry, it really looked like you were making a comparison. :)

 

The internal battery will die even on a C100, and you need a lot of CF cards on a C100 so you don't run out before a 240gb SSD on a BMCC will, if you're shooting prores.

 

I'm not saying you'll only ever need the internal battery and one card/drive and that's it. The point here is you also need to spend that money with the C100.

[noa]

In the end it's about using the right tool for the right job, but Canon's C series needs to see some serious price drops pretty soon.

They might drop the prize on their overprized c300/500 somewhat but I"m pretty sure not on their c100, why would they, it's not a camera that is competing with the bmc, it has a much different and easier workflow and is more directed to eng type of work. 

[noa]

Sorry, it really looked like you were making a comparison. :)

 

The comparing part started right after my first comment and I reacted to that but at first I was not comparing at all, just saying that most stare at the 3K price tag but there is much more to it to have it up to standards. 3K is just for the bare essentials.

[Bruno]

They might drop the prize on their overprized c300/500 somewhat but I"m pretty sure not on their c100, why would they, it's not a camera that is competing with the bmc, it has a much different and easier workflow and is more directed to eng type of work. 

I would agree with you if it came with a motorized zoom lens and auto focus capabilities, this way I don't really see it as an eng camera.

It does have better ergonomics and form factor than the BMCC, but the way I see it it's in the same market as the BMCC really, there's pros and cons on both, but the C100 doesn't justify paying 2x more. Honestly, I don't even think the C300 should cost 2x more than the BMCC, let alone 5x!

 

IMO, the C100 should cost the same as the BMCC, and the C300 could be more expensive as long as it did at least 60fps.

[Bruno]

3K is just for the bare essentials.

You could say the same regarding C100's 6.5k, that's all I'm saying.

[noa]

You could say the same regarding C100's 6.5k, that's all I'm saying.

Now you are comparing apples and oranges. :)

[Bruno]

Now you are comparing apples and oranges. :)

Why is that? Both cameras need storage and extra batteries when you buy them, one costs 3k, the other 6.5k, that was the whole point.

You keep saying how it would make the BMCC more expensive but you can't understand that it would also increase the C100's price?

[markm]

, but the way I see it it's in the same market as the BMCC really, there's pros and cons on both, but the C100 doesn't justify paying 2x more. Honestly, I don't even think the C300 should cost 2x more than the BMCC, let alone 5x!

 

The BMC and Canon C100 are completely different markets.

[Andrew Reid]

No doubt the BMC can resolve much better looking images but before the BMC is production ready it will cost you much more then 3000, people tend to forget that and only stare at the start prize. At 3000 the BMC is basically a shoebox with a screen, but the concept is quite good actually as you can build on top of the camera so it fit's your needs. But like I said, it will cost you and before you know it your at the c100 prize. So, it's not really half the prize.

 

Price!! Minimum shooting price is $3000 + $299 battery + $200 SSD + $100 vari-ND. Stick it on your tripod, shoot ProRes and you don't need to upgrade your editing rig. So a long way off $6500 C100 price for a better image. Same Canon lenses.

[noa]

shoot ProRes and you don't need to upgrade your editing rig.

That's like shooting 720p on a dslr, the bmc is only made for one reason; to shoot raw. Why go for less if you can have it all? If you do that it's a different story. 

[HurtinMinorKey]

BMC (min setup) + (HP Z820 editing station) =(price of c100) + (another league of IQ).

 

Andrew, why haven't you flooded us with footage yet?

[Andrew Reid]

That's like shooting 720p on a dslr, the bmc is only made for one reason; to shoot raw. Why go for less if you can have it all? If you do that it's a different story. 

 

So shoot raw and convert it to 2.5K ProRes or H.264 after grading. This is what I am doing. Right now.

[Andrew Reid]

BMC (min setup) + (HP Z820 editing station) =(price of c100) + (another league of IQ).

 

Andrew, why haven't you flooded us with footage yet?

You're talking crap.

 

Reason I haven't 'flooded you with footage' yet is that quality takes time. Maybe your posts would benefit from more thinking time.