The Canon C200 is here and its a bomb!

[Jimmy]

And the c300 mk ii

For now, it is safe due to the codec... But once the c200 gets the full range of codecs... What next for the c300 mk ii... Gotta be worth $7k tops?

[tugela]

3 hours ago, sanveer said:

This may actually take away a lot of clients from the Black Magic cameras. The price point and RAW make it a formidable camera for low budget indies. Until the All-I codec is released it may have lesser use elsewhere.

I am guessing, this will also actually eat into the C300 's Market. 

Apparently you get RAW or 8 bit 100/150 mbps H.264 (30/60p), those being the only two options. It makes some sense since RAW has no hardware encoding while H.264 is limited by the thermal envelop of the Digic processor. But, IIRC the other Cx00 cameras can shoot H.264 at higher bit rates, suggesting that the camera the pre-reviewers have is not finished.

At the price they are charging unless you really need RAW footage, you would be better off with an alternative camera unless something changes before release.

6 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

When the C100 was introduced some 4 years ago it was 52 000 swedish to buy the body only. Today I see them go for as low as 12 000 on the used market.
So.. in 2021 a C200 for roughly $2-2500... or maybe even lower with the way the market is going and how saturated it gets.

Another effect might be a massive drop in the used prices of rivals like the Ursa, FS5, FS7, LS300, etc. 

Next gen pro video cameras from Panasonic/Sony will likely be hitting the market in the not too distant future, so this new camera will still be expensive for what you get.

[cpc]

5 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

And the c300 mk ii

For now, it is safe due to the codec... But once the c200 gets the full range of codecs... What next for the c300 mk ii... Gotta be worth $7k tops?

24-bit audio, time code, genlock. Possibly other niceties.

Also, c300II is priced at $12k, so it is $3K more, not 7k.

6 minutes ago, tugela said:

Apparently you get RAW or 8 bit 100/150 mbps H.264 (30/60p), those being the only two options. It makes some sense since RAW has no hardware encoding while H.264 is limited by the thermal envelop of the Digic processor. But, IIRC the other Cx00 cameras can shoot H.264 at higher bit rates, suggesting that the camera the pre-reviewers have is not finished.

At the price they are charging unless you really need RAW footage, you would be better off with an alternative camera unless something changes before release.

At 1 gbps their raw is less data than ProRes444. It is around 3:1 compressed. Withholding the XF-AVC codec for 2018 is actually kinda smart cause they buy some time to see what comes next from Pana/Sony, and at the same time don't kill the C300II immediately.

[ssrdd]

Now panasonic has no choice other than selling Awesome GH5's. they cant compete with Canon C200 anymore with any camera. They cant relese 12bit 4k camera! And they have no autofocus engineers. 

[ntblowz]

48 minutes ago, ssrdd said:

Now panasonic has no choice other than selling Awesome GH5's. they cant compete with Canon C200 anymore with any camera. They cant relese 12bit 4k camera! And they have no autofocus engineers. 

C200 only record 4:2:0 8bit in mp4 format which is a bummer, no flexible 4:2:2 10bit in reasonable space. 4K raw only can shot 15 minute with 128GB card

[Andrew Reid]

Wow a lot of hype in this thread. I am surprised at the specs (for Canon) as well, especially internal raw, but let's throw some cautions out there before somebody drops £7700 in a fit of excitement.

Main codec at 8bit 4:2:0 150Mbit for 4K is worse than the current £1500 mirrorless cameras.

Canon had no choice but to compete with the FS5 (which beats this on price) - but protecting C300 II came at a cost. The 1080p codec is even worse at 35Mbit, that doesn't compare favourably to the GH5 at all.

Unlike the FS5 you are stuck with the APS-C / Super 35 look. No Speed Booster. Dual Pixel AF is a good selling point though.

Of course you have internal ND filters (mechanical, not electronic like on the Sony rival) but no 5 axis in-body stabilisation... which is more important for production values, IMO.

It remains to be seen how good the 1080/120fps is... if it is moire hell and soft then the FS5 is going to win in a key area.

15 minutes of raw at 128GB is a problem. That will not move RED users over to Canon. No way. And you can only currently edit it in one NLE.

Does it only record 4K RAW or can you drop to 2K? RED raw compression is still streets ahead of everything else.

Same sensor as C100 II / C300 II, which is to be expected. But you'd think for 2017 they could have done an update.

Form factor is that of a work camera, I wouldn't get a kick of enjoyment from taking such a clunky camera out on the streets or on a shooting trip.

1 hour ago, ssrdd said:

Now panasonic has no choice other than selling Awesome GH5's. they cant compete with Canon C200 anymore with any camera. They cant relese 12bit 4k camera! And they have no autofocus engineers. 

The C200 is only 12bit in RAW. The normal codec is 8bit.

Unless you are happy shooting 15 minutes at 128GB and archiving a whole week's shoot at that kind of data rate, you will not be using the 12bit RAW.

RAW should be at least 14bit. At 12bit it starts to degrade. We know this from Magic Lantern's work.

It drops even more dynamic range at 10bit in 60fps raw mode... in that mode the file sizes will be borderline unworkable and the shadows will be scratchy as hell.

[hmcindie]

Did you just claim that the FS5 is a better camera? The FS5 is shiiiiite.

[jonpais]

1 minute ago, hmcindie said:

Did you just claim that the FS5 is a better camera? The FS5 is shiiiiite.

I haven't used either camera, both of you have far more experience than I've ever had, but just replying by saying a camera is no good is kind of, well, rude? Can you give some supporting info to back up your claims? Anyhoo, I didn't read anywhere in Andrew's post that the FS5 was 'better', just that it beats Canon on price and isn't stuck on APS-C mode, it's got built in ND filters and so on - it sounds to me like he's just trying to temper the excitement over Canon's camera a bit, not lording the Sony to the skies or anything.

[Oliver Daniel]

4 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Wow a lot of hype in this thread. I am surprised at the specs (for Canon) as well, especially internal raw, but let's throw some cautions out there before somebody drops £7700 in a fit of excitement.

Main codec at 8bit 4:2:0 150Mbit for 4K is worse than the current £1500 mirrorless cameras.

Canon had no choice but to compete with the FS5 (which beats this on price) - but protecting C300 II came at a cost. The 1080p codec is even worse at 35Mbit, that doesn't compare favourably to the GH5 at all.

Unlike the FS5 you are stuck with the APS-C / Super 35 look. No Speed Booster. Dual Pixel AF is a good selling point though.

Of course you have internal ND filters (mechanical, not electronic like on the Sony rival) but no 5 axis in-body stabilisation... which is more important for production values, IMO.

It remains to be seen how good the 1080/120fps is... if it is moire hell and soft then the FS5 is going to win in a key area.

15 minutes of raw at 128GB is a problem. That will not move RED users over to Canon. No way. And you can only currently edit it in one NLE.

Does it only record 4K RAW or can you drop to 2K? RED raw compression is still streets ahead of everything else.

Same sensor as C100 II / C300 II, which is to be expected. But you'd think for 2017 they could have done an update.

Form factor is that of a work camera, I wouldn't get a kick of enjoyment from taking such a clunky camera out on the streets or on a shooting trip.

 

Yep, this camera is a production workhorse... it's not designed for mirrorless camera street shooters, Vloggers, shoestring budget filmmaking.... 

As an FS5 owner with all the bells and whistles - I have 4k 100fps and 2k 200fps in ProRes or CDNG. Spoilt really. 

This C200 does peak my interest though. 

In my limited time with the rather boring C300 - it was an absolute pleasure to use that camera. 

The C300 II seems like a big misfire as seems like it needs to be heavily discounted. 

The C200 has some great features the FS5 doesn't:  

• Dual Pixel AF.
• Superior Colour.
• Internal RAW.
• 4k 50/60p internal.
• Easier to grade Log. 
• No need for bulky external recorder.
• Better focusing / peaking (going off previous C-series cameras). 

Those features are very, very worthy and actually very surprising. A big deal. 

However, there are a few reasons why I'd currently be in no rush to replace my FS5 with this: 

Critical reasons

• No broadcast "middle" codec until early 2018. 
• B camera for gimbals, 2nd camera etc for smooth matching. The 5D mk IV isn't exactly worthwhile whereas Sony has a gazillion options with tons of features. 
• 100/120fps mode uncertain. 

Moderate reasons

• Would lose 4k 100fps and 200/240fps modes. 
• Regular ND instead of electronic ND. 
• No Speedbooster. 
• Less lens adaptability. 

 

Good stuff at last by Canon though!

 

[cpc]

30 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

RAW should be at least 14bit. At 12bit it starts to degrade. We know this from Magic Lantern's work.

Canon cinema cameras raw is logarithmic like ARRIRAW and REDRAW (which are both 12-bit). 12-bit is plenty for log raw. 10 bits is still pretty good with a log curve.

[squig]

Isn't it just awful. You couldn't shoot cats with it.

[andrew berekdar]

6 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I haven't used either camera, both of you have far more experience than I've ever had, but just replying by saying a camera is no good is kind of, well, rude? Can you give some supporting info to back up your claims? Anyhoo, I didn't read anywhere in Andrew's post that the FS5 was 'better', just that it beats Canon on price and isn't stuck on APS-C mode, it's got built in ND filters and so on - it sounds to me like he's just trying to temper the excitement over Canon's camera a bit, not lording the Sony to the skies or anything.

I'm curious to know why the s35 sensor size is considered an issue? I'm not sure what 'APS-C look' is...I'm sure Andrew Reid is aware that he is referring to a sensor format based on size and aspect ratio. This doesn't constitute a look does it?

[IronFilm]

Just now, Jimmy said:

I imagine alot of RED's budget pre-orders are being cancelled today.

True, I could see a fair few Raven pre orders disappearing. Even though a Raven would probably have a total cost of ownership of close to double a C200!

[Philip Lipetz]

Don't forget that the 2018 internal 4K upgrade will be 8 bit only. The 1080 is only 35mps. All of these specs fall just a little short of what I am asked to deliver. RAW is nice but none of my jobs   ask for RAW, they hate it.

The C200 is an enthusiast camera.  Great for passsion projects and micro budget narratives, not for my niche, event and quick turn around docs Just so you don't think I am a Canon hater we have had several C100s at time, both models, but time moves on. We sold ours  

I hope the Panasonic Cinema cam fits our needs. 

[IronFilm]

Just now, Jimmy said:

And the c300 mk ii

For now, it is safe due to the codec... But once the c200 gets the full range of codecs... What next for the c300 mk ii... Gotta be worth $7k tops?

There are tonnes of little details that the C300 mk2 has which always will make it more worthwhile than the C200 for some small subsection of shooters, Features such as Time Code for instance. 

[Liszon]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

RAW should be at least 14bit. At 12bit it starts to degrade. We know this from Magic Lantern's work.

The Blackmagic Pocket & Micro writes 11bits into a 12bit cDNG "container" and I don't see any issues there. I have a feeling the Ursa Mini does the same, might be "true" 12bit though. Works very well.

I agree with the rest of it.

If I would need 10bit 4K 24p/60p I would get a GH5 with an external recorder and stick with ProRes. Flexible setup, all the benefits you mentioned above for 3 times less.

The C200 is a Sony competitor. They even offer a trade in discount if you have an FS5 & FS7. Cheeky.

[jpfilmz]

http://www.canonrumors.com/hands-on-with-the-canon-cinema-eos-c200-pricing/

As far as pricing goes, the new camera will be priced at £7,699 in the UK or $7,499 in US and is scheduled to begin shipping in July.

Definitely adding this to my kit. 
 

[Philip Lipetz]

3 minutes ago, Liszon said:

 

If I would need 10bit 4K 24p/60p I would get a GH5 with and external recorder and stick with ProRes. Flexible setup, all the benefits you mentioned above for 3 times less.

 

Exactly. 

[mercer]

1 hour ago, squig said:

Isn't it just awful. You couldn't shoot cats with it.

Give me the chance, I could.

10 minutes ago, jpfilmz said:

http://www.canonrumors.com/hands-on-with-the-canon-cinema-eos-c200-pricing/

As far as pricing goes, the new camera will be priced at £7,699 in the UK or $7,499 in US and is scheduled to begin shipping in July.

Definitely adding this to my kit. 
 

Damn at $9000 this was a great camera, at $7500... shit. Maybe Canon can no longer fit any more of their heads up their asses. It almost seems to good to be true. 

[Jimmy]

35 minutes ago, Philip Lipetz said:

Don't forget that the 2018 internal 4K upgrade will be 8 bit only. 

Is that from canon sources? Hard to keep track of all this