Canon C200 vs Panasonic GH5, a preview

[cpc]

35 minutes ago, mercer said:

@fuzzynormal you can process the color from the outset, but you don't have to. For CDNGs, once you bring the Raw files into Resolve, the only real necessity is to turn them into ProRes, unless you only use Resolve from ingest to export. 

It's probably smart to also fix your WB, if needed, before rendering as ProRes.

 Then open the ProRes files in your NLE, edit and color as you like. If you want more latitude you can send the project back to Resolve for color and then send it back to your NLE for delivery.

I usually just use the ProRes files in my NLE for edit, color and delivery and never go back to Resolve.

Some people use different Log profiles. For the 5D3 I use an app called MLRawViewer or a newer one called Footage that I can turn the MLV files directly into ProRes files as C-Log, sLog, Log C, etc. I highly doubt they are the exact curves but Log to Rec709 LUTS work well with them. It's a fairly simple process but it is time consuming. There are other processes that make ML even faster (MLVFS) With BlackMagic you can just ingest, edit, color, title, deliver using the native CDNGs.

With the C200, it seems like it will be possible to edit natively but either way it will be a lot simpler with the proxy workflow. 

The true power of raw shooting is that you don't need to fix anything in advance and you can raw develop, edit and color at the same time in a liquid, flexible and creative post workflow. At least in Resolve you can. Proxies shouldn't be necessary. I don't see how a proxy workflow can be simpler -- you add a step (possibly two steps, if you round trip).  

[mercer]

2 minutes ago, cpc said:

The true power of raw shooting is that you don't need to fix anything in advance and you can raw develop, edit and color at the same time in a liquid, flexible and creative post workflow. At least in Resolve you can. Proxies shouldn't be necessary. I don't see how a proxy workflow can be simpler -- you add a step (possibly two steps, if you round trip).  

Oh yeah I agree with you, I just don't like Resolve... or should I say my computer doesn't like Resolve. I like FCPX and the ProRes files cut like butter on it. 

So when the Canon Raw Lite plug ins start popping up for FCPX and Adobe, yeah editing natively shouldn't really be any different than editing native .264 files or native ProRes files. Who knows how traditional the Raw workflow will be, but I hope there will be some way to convert my MLV files to work within the new FCPX Canon Raw plug in.

[Asmundma]

I am getting used to the 1dx2 files size, so not too scared. The C-fast card offload quite fast (with a reader)  so that's not a big concern and a 20-30 terra raid stores quite much. The jury is still out how efficient the raw will be, or the new codec comming next year. For me the AF is very important, so I will defenitly look closer on this camera. 

[deezid]

3 hours ago, Superka said:

canon has more DR and less noise, no metabones needed. I don't trust Paasonic skin tones at all. Canons 150mbit/s is perfectly good for me. Canon is so much better, that's really no contest.

You never saw Varicam skintones I guess?

[Oliver Daniel]

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Technically, both shoot 10bit but the C200 is really going to be an 8bit camera for 95% of the people who use it.

Read the full article

 

It's an interesting comparison, that's for sure. 

There's 2 types of people who buy cameras : those who do it for a hobby, and those who do it as a job. 

You have to ask yourself one question when buying a camera:

Does it make my life easier? 

This of course can be broken down into the size, weight, features etc that will give you an incredible advantage over what you already have. A significant difference that will change things for the better, when you're making videos. 

I have an FS5 with RAW upgrade and Shogun Inferno. I've spent little bits of the past few days to try and convince myself that a C200, EVA1 or even a GH5 would overall and fundamentally make my life easier. For the better. For the art. For the long term bank balance. 

How do you measure that? 

(p.s I much, much prefer using GH5 sized cameras above all else. I LOVE the pictures from a Canon. I don't love using the Sony, but they have all the features I need). 

[Jimmy]

This is the 2nd time I've seen you mention the C200 having an old sensor and one that was in the C100 ii

This is the sensor in the C700 and C300 ii... Only a year old and their best sensor ever.

[Kisaha]

@Jimmy and all: Can we clarify this please? I heard this 2 conflicting views about the C200 sensor. In my mind, it is a big deal what sensor do they use. The first things I read about the camera the Canon reps said that it is the C700 sensor, but then I got confused!!

[Fritz Pierre]

@Mercer....actually no....compressed RAW is not RAW....it's a codec.

[Jimmy]

7 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Jimmy and all: Can we clarify this please? I heard this 2 conflicting views about the C200 sensor. In my mind, it is a big deal what sensor do they use. The first things I read about the camera the Canon reps said that it is the C700 sensor, but then I got confused!!

Canon are stating 15 stops DR... Same as C700 and C300 ii

On the C100 ii and C300... They state 12 stops.

It's the new sensor and that is a BIG deal

There are two things stopping this being a slam dunk .. 10 bit codec and 2K raw

Bloody Canon!

[Fritz Pierre]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

Canon are stating 15 stops DR... Same as C700 and C300 ii

On the C100 ii and C300... They state 12 stops.

It's the new sensor and that is a BIG deal

RED stated 13 stops on the RED One...DP's found it at least 31/2 to 4 stops below that...not suggesting it's the case here...however until these cameras are out in the world, they're just numbers on a piece of paper...that of course goes for the EVA1 as well!

[ade towell]

I thought the c700 sensor was bigger than the c300 mk2 sensor? Now I'm confused....

[mercer]

14 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

@Mercer....actually no....compressed RAW is not RAW....it's a codec.

I believe the pixels are compressed but the image isn't processed like it would be in .h264 or a jpeg. It's a container not a codec. But I'm probably wrong, this is where my knowledge starts to get fuzzy. ?

[Jimmy]

16 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

RED stated 13 stops on the RED One...DP's found it at least 31/2 to 4 stops below that...not suggesting it's the case here...however until these cameras are out in the world, they're just numbers on a piece of paper...that of course goes for the EVA1 as well!

That's not the point.... The point is that this is the new sensor tech.

If it was the same as the c300/100 they would claim 12 stops

18 minutes ago, ade towell said:

I thought the c700 sensor was bigger than the c300 mk2 sensor? Now I'm confused....

Sorry... Should have said sensor tech

The C700 is indeed bigger, but I think it's safe to assume that is the same tech

[tugela]

4 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Nobody complains when we compare the FS5 to an A7R II. People need to know what extra they are getting for their money.

Sure the market is a bit different and form factor different but there's overlap... You can't tell me not a single pro is using an A7R II or GH5, can you?

By that same token, not every pro videography or wedding guy is using the SDI on their C200, whose biggest selling point to many people is the lack of need to rig extras onto it like external recorders and monitors via SDI. Not every pro is using timecode to sync footage between 5 other cameras on a shoot and not every C200 user will even be using the XLRs, some will strip it down to the bare bones and put it on a gimbal, with sound done like it has always been done in the film days - a separate job for another man.

So shut up.

It is not necessary to be rude to people who don't agree with you.

[gt3rs]

I do not agree with the article and I believe this camera will bring RAW much more mainstream.

95% that will buy the C200 will use the MP4 seems very unrealistic, I bet most people that will buy this camera would use the RAW format a lot and RAW will become the mainstream like it is for photos for most photographer. Storage in 2 or 3 years would be cheaper and cheaper and there will be 8-10 TB SSD for 500-600 USD... 

I expect Resolve to be able to edit the Canon RAW lite soon and in real-time without any transcoding like it does for other RAW formats. Canon already states this so is just a mater of time. Btw at the beginning even the beloved GH5 format was an issue with most NLE.

1 Gbits it is a lot but I do a lot at 800 Mbits MJPG (that I edit in real-time without transcoding even from the CFast directly) and is perfectly manageable. Naturally if you are in long documentaries then maybe is not a camera for you but for the rest I bet it will be a super camera. I agree with the post above that when 1 year ago the 500 Mbits 1Dx II was labeled as insane and a year later everybody is eagerly awaiting the 400 Mbits GH5 firmware..... just fast forward one year and you will know that 1 GBits will not be that much of an issue.

Again not sure what is the point to compare a GH5 with a C200 that does 4k 60 RAW with 15 stops DR with ND filters and a great AF on CFast (super fast download to a pc because are basically SSDs). Then I could pint out that the best workflow would be an iPhone as it does 4k and you can edit directly in iMovie on the phone itself and delivery directly to the web:-) no downloading or transcoding needed.... why people use Arri or Red instead of iPhone is beyond any rationale:-)

I'm quite sure that the sensor is a new one from the C300 II or C700.

Can you do amazing stuff with the GH5? Absolutely.
Does it cost less that the C200? Absolutely.
But if people would have the budget to buy the C200 + CFast cards I'm sure nobody would hesitate one second to pick the C200 instead of the GH5. At the end is a budget problem and not a technology issue.

If the quality of the RAW is as good as I expect this camera will rival the much more expensive cinema camera out there and from canon it was not expected.....

[tugela]

3 hours ago, mercer said:

Compressed Raw is still Raw. 12bit 24fps is still 12bit 24fps even if transcoded to ProRes 4444.

And I was just addressing his previous post about Raw workflow in general. Since CDNG is more known at this point, I used that as an example. 

Btw @Andrew Reid have you had a chance to test the 3K Raw from the 5D3? If so, thoughts?

Sorry for OT. 

But RAW is not RAW anymore after it has been transcoded!

If you need to transcode it first before you can do anything with it, does that not defeat the purpose somewhat?

[mercer]

1 minute ago, tugela said:

But RAW is not RAW anymore after it has been transcoded!

If you need to transcode it first before you can do anything with it, does that not defeat the purpose somewhat?

But I'm unsure you'll need to. I just had a look at a screenshot of Canon Raw Development 2.0 and it looks like there are controls to process the Raw footage before you transcode it... but this is just a guess because the screenshot just showed WB and Sharpness. Also, I assume, the TBA plug ins will work like Resolve's Raw Tab works with CDNGs... but again too early to know for sure. 

[tugela]

2 hours ago, deezid said:

You never saw Varicam skintones I guess?

He just doesn't like Panasonic, hence their skin tones are "bad". I would say Trumpian logic, but most people do it to some extent.

[gt3rs]

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

But I'm unsure you'll need to. I just had a look at a screenshot of Canon Raw Development 2.0 and it looks like there are controls to process the Raw footage before you transcode it... but this is just a guess because the screenshot just showed WB and Sharpness. Also, I assume, the TBA plug ins will work like Resolve's Raw Tab works with CDNGs... but again too early to know for sure. 

I'm pretty sure that in Resolve it will be like it is for RED Raw or Cinema DNG so no need to transcode it.

[tugela]

1 minute ago, mercer said:

But I'm unsure you'll need to. I just had a look at a screenshot of Canon Raw Development 2.0 and it looks like there are controls to process the Raw footage before you transcode it... but this is just a guess because the screenshot just showed WB and Sharpness. Also, I assume, the TBA plug ins will work like Resolve's Raw Tab works with CDNGs... but again too early to know for sure. 

My experience with pretty much all of the supplied software with Canon cameras (and most other manufacturers as well, for that matter) does not give me confidence on that though. The software they supply with their cameras for doing that sort of thing is mostly pretty crappy and crude. They might do it better for these high end pro models however. At least one would hope so, considering how much you have to pay for them.