My quick EVA1 mini review

[mercer]

37 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

You haven't seen the camera, not even on a printed ad, if you love it so much why you do not own it?

Only this year I have worked in more than 120 TV episodes in various programs, guess what, we couldn't use the C200 because it isn't broadcast ready. Maybe it is more suited for event videography than you think.

Sorry, of course I’ve seen the ad and I fully understand the specs of the camera. I shoot run and gun narratives. I need my set ups to be inconspicuous so a large cinema camera doesn’t really suit my needs. But in a year or two, I will definitely own or rent one and I’ll shoot Raw or I’ll export the Raw signal via the SDI for 10bit 2K ProRes.

Technically the camera meets the criteria for an in-house Netflix production, so I’m unsure why it wouldn’t be Broadcast acceptable?

[Kisaha]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Sorry, of course I’ve seen the ad and I fully understand the specs of the camera. I shoot run and gun narratives. I need my set ups to be inconspicuous so a large cinema camera doesn’t really suit my needs. But in a year or two, I will definitely own or rent one and I’ll shoot Raw or I’ll export the Raw signal via the SDI for 10bit 2K ProRes.

Technically the camera meets the criteria for an in-house Netflix production, so I’m unsure why it wouldn’t be Broadcast acceptable?

Because no one - I know - shoot raw in TV, at least not in my country. The market is dominated by Sony FS7ii cameras, and people shooting Canon C choose the C300mkII. EVA and Ursa mini pro make a dent in the market also, while a few years ago the C100 and original C300 dominated the market. Canon needs to re-position in the market, soon.

I have to admit that I am still waiting for my next Canon, and I am being dissapointed for every release I - they - miss.

I was waiting for a pro M camera, a full frame mirrorless, a C100mkIII, and they failed miserably in all of them.

The problem with this cam is that is very expensive for people like you, and very limited - for the money - for people like me. The ommision of that middle codec is biting the sales of this camera hard.

@Oliver Daniel's post was really spot on.

I am not sure a C200 is going to be a much better tool than the P4K for your projects. With a couple or 3 weeks rent for the C200, you can probably buy the pocket outright! And when Braw comes, it is going to be hard to resist that.

I wish you finish your film and your projects soon.

 

[Django]

A growing number of pros (perhaps even the majority these days) are oblivious to broadcast standards as they shoot solely for web/digital platforms.

For those types of shooters, especially one man bands.. the C200 is a very compelling solution. AF is still in stone age on cine cams so that alone can make the difference.

Internal 8-bit codec will be fine for corporate interviews with controlled lighting & minor grading. Slap on / rent an atomos for the times you really need that 10-bit 2K DCI.

Then when time/budget allows it go RAW for that uncompromised IQ/DR. Or just switch over to RAW for that quick money shot. That's how i used to do it during 5D3 ML days.

[Kisaha]

27 minutes ago, Django said:

A growing number of pros (perhaps even the majority these days) are oblivious to broadcast standards as they shoot solely for web/digital platforms.

For those types of shooters, especially one man bands.. the C200 is a very compelling solution. AF is still in stone age on cine cams so that alone can make the difference.

Internal 8-bit codec will be fine for corporate interviews with controlled lighting & minor grading. Slap on / rent an atomos for the times you really need that 10-bit 2K DCI.

Then when time/budget allows it go RAW for that uncompromised IQ/DR. Or just switch over to RAW for that quick money shot. That's how i used to do it during 5D3 ML days.

Obviously, I am not talking about everyone.

For my very low budgeted jobs (corporate, internet) almost any modern camera is perfectly fine. For such jobs usually there is very limited time for post anyway. A 9000€ camera is overkill, raw is not an option.

I wanted to love the C200, but I can't. Too many limitations in every possible way. Even the way you have to put everything together to go to work is worst than other cameras (including C100mkII). To put it as it is and ready to work you need a huge camera bag (in height), in EVA and other cameras there is a hot/cold shoe connection while Canon insists with extra external cables. It is a bit heavier than other competitors, and the touch screen de-stabilizes/moves the camera when on a tripod (while working, and if using the touch focus, is even worst than it sounds).

Also, for some reason, I have the impression that eats batteries more than other C cameras, but this is not based in scientific facts, I just have the impression that I change batteries more often per working day.

Great camera, but if I had the budget, professional speciality (my main budget goes to sound) and the will, I would choose between the Eva, Ursa mini pro, or stretch to the FS7mkII (it is only 1000€ more expensive than the C200 here).

Do you own the camera, by the way?

[mercer]

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

Because no one - I know - shoot raw in TV, at least not in my country. The market is dominated by Sony FS7ii cameras, and people shooting Canon C choose the C300mkII. EVA and Ursa mini pro make a dent in the market also, while a few years ago the C100 and original C300 dominated the market. Canon needs to re-position in the market, soon.

I have to admit that I am still waiting for my next Canon, and I am being dissapointed for every release I - they - miss.

I was waiting for a pro M camera, a full frame mirrorless, a C100mkIII, and they failed miserably in all of them.

The problem with this cam is that is very expensive for people like you, and very limited - for the money - for people like me. The ommision of that middle codec is biting the sales of this camera hard.

@Oliver Daniel's post was really spot on.

I am not sure a C200 is going to be a much better tool than the P4K for your projects. With a couple or 3 weeks rent for the C200, you can probably buy the pocket outright! And when Braw comes, it is going to be hard to resist that.

I wish you finish your film and your projects soon.

 

Well that’s my point, you are firmly stating the C200 is a failure but you don’t need or want what the camera was designed to do... shoot Raw. And then you are stating you’re waiting for the C100iii but you have it with the 8bit codec in the C200. Sorry, I’m just not following your logic.

Regarding my camera choice... I’m very happy shooting 1080p Raw with my 5D3. As far as the P4K... I’m just not feeling it. I’ve seen some great stuff shot with it, but overall, I don’t think the footage looks all that special. I’d rather shoot with the Micro for half the price if I ever need 60p Raw... or spend the same money on a rental of the C200 for 10 days. Storage is cheap, I’d rather have the DPAF, built in NDs and other benefits of the C200 over the P4K.

With that being said, I totally understand why Oliver chose the EVA1... it creates a beautiful image. Just from his grab alone we can see that... or any footage Zak has posted. If I shot anamorphic, the GH5/GH5s/EVA1 would be a go to choice. I even love the Raw out of the FS5 or the internal 10bit 1080p and could see myself going that route instead of the C200. The right camera is out there, it just depends on the needs of the project.

Thanks for the well wishes, I hope to have some teasers to show in the next month or so. I’m even starting another feature in February so hopefully a lot more to show in the coming months. 

[Django]

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

Obviously, I am not talking about everyone.

For my very low budgeted jobs (corporate, internet) almost any modern camera is perfectly fine. For such jobs usually there is very limited time for post anyway. A 9000€ camera is overkill, raw is not an option.

I wanted to love the C200, but I can't. Too many limitations in every possible way. Even the way you have to put everything together to go to work is worst than other cameras (including C100mkII). To put it as it is and ready to work you need a huge camera bag (in height), in EVA and other cameras there is a hot/cold shoe connection while Canon insists with extra external cables. It is a bit heavier than other competitors, and the touch screen de-stabilizes/moves the camera when on a tripod (while working, and if using the touch focus, is even worst than it sounds).

Also, for some reason, I have the impression that eats batteries more than other C cameras, but this is not based in scientific facts, I just have the impression that I change batteries more often per working day.

Great camera, but if I had the budget, professional speciality (my main budget goes to sound) and the will, I would choose between the Eva, Ursa mini pro, or stretch to the FS7mkII (it is only 1000€ more expensive than the C200 here).

Do you own the camera, by the way?

I regularly rent the cams you mention (especially FS7 & Ursa Mini) for jobs but ownership wise i'm on a EOS R + C100.

I was days away from buying C200 (even had a down payment) and postponed the purchase when the Canon mirrorless rumors heated up.

I can confidently say now I will definitely be upgrading to C200 (just waiting for the right time & deal).

BTW, here in EU they cost around 7000€, and you can find them for much less second hand when they pop up.

I plan on using the combo as such:

BTW, nothing wrong with going other routes (GH5+EVA1 / A73+FS5/FS7 / BMP4K+UMP) I'm just a sucker for Canon ergonomics, color science, lenses etc..

[DBounce]

5 hours ago, Django said:

I regularly rent the cams you mention (especially FS7 & Ursa Mini) for jobs but ownership wise i'm on a EOS R + C100.

I was days away from buying C200 (even had a down payment) and postponed the purchase when the Canon mirrorless rumors heated up.

I can confidently say now I will definitely be upgrading to C200 (just waiting for the right time & deal).

BTW, here in EU they cost around 7000€, and you can find them for much less second hand when they pop up.

I plan on using the combo as such:

BTW, nothing wrong with going other routes (GH5+EVA1 / A73+FS5/FS7 / BMP4K+UMP) I'm just a sucker for Canon ergonomics, color science, lenses etc..

If Canon had not made silly choice of an extreme crop in 4K, I would have bought the Eos R. It would have been the perfect B-cam. As it is I added a Nikon Z6... which can be made to match pretty darn well.

[Kisaha]

@Django

I am too, a sucker for Canon, that is why I am dissapointed.

C100mkII is my most used camera, perfectly fine for most projects. That is why I said "C200 is a glorified C100mkII", because for the dozen projects we used the C200, a C100mkII could be sufficient ,100%.

I live in EU and the price on the official retailer here is 8170€ (I missed a price cut, sorry).

It seems from your choices you are willing to miss some - important - things to go Canon, just in 2019/2020 I am not!

[Django]

@DBounce 

Z6 is surely one of the nicest featured FF mirrorless, but as a Canon shooter going that route would mean a whole new lens investment. And for an A/B cam setup, double the cumbersome in lens transport. It's just a lot easier having one lens bag, same log/color matrix profile & same great reliable AF system on both cams.

 

@Kisaha

I think as mercer said it's a question of perspective.. and needs. I understand that on some aspects Canon specs are disappointing, however I like to look at the glass half full and Dual Pixel AF & internal Raw are the important things that matter to me. Again if I want 10-bit 4:2:2 just slap on a recorder (on both C200/EOS R).

EOS R is like a mini C100/C200. Especially with the upcoming Vari-ND adapter. The internal ALL-I MP4 codec is actually more robust than on both C models. 

C100mkII can't shoot in 2K/4K(up to 60p), let alone Raw. Or 1080p at 120fps. Or has MF focus guides. The Dual Pixel is primitive compared to C200's implementation.

C200 sits just nicely in between C100mk2 & C300mk2 imo.

[GreekBeast]

I think it's right to say to make any of those entry level cinema cameras work to their full potential you need 10k euros. I'm considering EVA-1 but with the lack of EVF and the mirror LCD? it's going to be way more costly.

[Oliver Daniel]

26 minutes ago, GreekBeast said:

I think it's right to say to make any of those entry level cinema cameras work to their full potential you need 10k euros. I'm considering EVA-1 but with the lack of EVF and the mirror LCD? it's going to be way more costly.

I got the SWIT 55C and it’s working great. Just don’t drop it. ? Will be looking for EVF combos later in the year. 

I’ll share a bit more from the EVA soon, early days but looking good. 

P.s extra observation, the EIS is sorta ok. Crops a little bit. If you’re used to IBIS, it’s garbage. Tested it on some general shots, wobble wobble wobble (hello warp stabiliser, we meet again!!) 

Anyone know of an awesome monopod which isn’t a complete pain in the ass? 

 

[GreekBeast]

26 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said:

I got the SWIT 55C and it’s working great. Just don’t drop it. ? Will be looking for EVF combos later in the year. 

I’ll share a bit more from the EVA soon, early days but looking good. 

P.s extra observation, the EIS is sorta ok. Crops a little bit. If you’re used to IBIS, it’s garbage. Tested it on some general shots, wobble wobble wobble (hello warp stabiliser, we meet again!!) 

Anyone know of an awesome monopod which isn’t a complete pain in the ass? 

 

Nice, what lenses are you using? 

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

Anyone know of an awesome monopod which isn’t a complete pain in the ass? 

 

This one seems to be about as good of one you can get. Gets lots of likes. Never owned one though myself. Don't buy a Manfrotto one. They just seem to suck as of late.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1305532-REG/sirui_sup424sr_carbon_fiber_monopod.html

Or this one if you want to have the head with it.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1352784-REG/sirui_p426sr_vh10x_10x_carbon_fiber_6.html

[HockeyFan12]

23 hours ago, mercer said:

Sorry, of course I’ve seen the ad and I fully understand the specs of the camera. I shoot run and gun narratives. I need my set ups to be inconspicuous so a large cinema camera doesn’t really suit my needs. But in a year or two, I will definitely own or rent one and I’ll shoot Raw or I’ll export the Raw signal via the SDI for 10bit 2K ProRes.

Technically the camera meets the criteria for an in-house Netflix production, so I’m unsure why it wouldn’t be Broadcast acceptable?

Poor monitoring options (can't monitor in Canon Log 2, can't output HDMI and SDI at the same time), lack of timecode sync, unwieldy codec (that's debatable–it's no bigger than 3.2k XQ).

But that's silly, no one is buying a $7k camera for narrative tv. They're renting Alexas, maybe the occasional F55 or Epic for 4k. So it's a bizarre and arbitrary criterion to go by whether something is commonly used in tv, at least without getting into more detail, unless your goal is renting to tv productions. 

Though it's not a big deal for a colorist, I think I like the colors from the EVA1 more, but I haven't even worked with EVA1 footage yet. The c200 has a magenta bias in the skin tones and overall magenta tint and reverses some of the "magic" from the C300 or 1DC in favor of accuracy and a fake Alexa look, whereas the EVA1 seems to go for richer colors. ?

[mercer]

2 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Poor monitoring options (can't monitor in Canon Log 2, can't output HDMI and SDI at the same time), lack of timecode sync, unwieldy codec (that's debatable–it's no bigger than 3.2k XQ).

But that's silly, no one is buying a $7k camera for narrative tv. They're renting Alexas, maybe the occasional F55 or Epic for 4k. So it's a bizarre and arbitrary criterion to go by whether something is commonly used in tv, at least without getting into more detail, unless your goal is renting to tv productions. 

Though it's not a big deal for a colorist, I think I like the colors from the EVA1 more, but I haven't even worked with EVA1 footage yet. The c200 has a magenta bias in the skin tones and overall magenta tint and reverses some of the "magic" from the C300 or 1DC in favor of accuracy and a fake Alexa look, whereas the EVA1 seems to go for richer colors. ?

Well, my reply was based on Kisaha’s comment that the specs didn’t meet broadcast standards. I took that comment to mean the codec, bitrate and general IQ were not up to par... not if the features were conducive to norms of production for broadcast television. But he also did not say that he was shooting TV narratives... so I can’t really answer your statements.

I agree the color is slightly different compared to the C300, 1DC and even the C100 Mark I but I find it pleasing and it keeps with the notion that Canon has a superior color science... maybe not quite what we’re used to with the Alexa but good nonetheless. I also agree that I like the EVA1 color as well. It’s definitely more Varicam than GH. 

For me, if I were to choose one of these cams for a low budget narrative, I’d go the C200. Based on specs alone it seems like a camera that will get out of my way and fit better with my small but beloved EF lens set. 

But as I’ve said, I acknowledge the camera isn’t for everyone (what camera is?) so I totally understand why Oliver and others have chosen the EVA1 or Ursa Pro or whatever over it. And when it comes time for me to take that next step, via rental or purchase, I may do an about face and go with a different camera. I have been very fond of the Raw image from the FS5 and with the price coming down on used models, that may make more sense when the time comes. And by then, the Mark II with its Venice color may be an option with whatever project I am working on... most likely a container thriller where I am shooting with a more traditional set up and crew.

[HockeyFan12]

On 12/28/2018 at 4:09 PM, mercer said:

Well, my reply was based on Kisaha’s comment that the specs didn’t meet broadcast standards. I took that comment to mean the codec, bitrate and general IQ were not up to par... not if the features were conducive to norms of production for broadcast television. But he also did not say that he was shooting TV narratives... so I can’t really answer your statements.

I agree the color is slightly different compared to the C300, 1DC and even the C100 Mark I but I find it pleasing and it keeps with the notion that Canon has a superior color science... maybe not quite what we’re used to with the Alexa but good nonetheless. I also agree that I like the EVA1 color as well. It’s definitely more Varicam than GH. 

For me, if I were to choose one of these cams for a low budget narrative, I’d go the C200. Based on specs alone it seems like a camera that will get out of my way and fit better with my small but beloved EF lens set. 

But as I’ve said, I acknowledge the camera isn’t for everyone (what camera is?) so I totally understand why Oliver and others have chosen the EVA1 or Ursa Pro or whatever over it. And when it comes time for me to take that next step, via rental or purchase, I may do an about face and go with a different camera. I have been very fond of the Raw image from the FS5 and with the price coming down on used models, that may make more sense when the time comes. And by then, the Mark II with its Venice color may be an option with whatever project I am working on... most likely a container thriller where I am shooting with a more traditional set up and crew.

I'm sure they're both great, I just love the colors in this shootout on the Panasonic:

https://www.zacuto.com/canon-c200-vs-panasonic-eva1-camera-shootout-2018

Ironically, the Panasonci's resemble C300 colors and the C200 looks like a more sterile magenta-tinted Alexa to me? Fwiw I too am surprised to learn the EVA1 has more dynamic range, but maybe that's not counting RAW. The C200's dynamic range is outstanding. It doesn't have the great "look" of the earlier Canon cameras, though, and you need more talent as a colorist IMO. 

I think he just wrote not appropriate for broadcast, which is a fair criticism, if you're shooting tv. Then you're 95% of the time using an Alexa anyway. The flip side is, what's cooler than a C100-style body that shoots 60fps 4k raw internally with autofocus and that no longer needs to be built out (the XLRs and onboard mic are on the body and the EVF is useable, no need for the LCD) and that gains up to 102k ISO and has great battery life? For web videos or weddings that's pretty cool. Imagine trying to get that from an Alexa Mini, which eats batteries like crazy, needs a big EVF, lacks AF, can't gain up past 3200 ISO, doesn't shoot 4k, etc. etc. I mean you can use a C200 without any rig at all and it fits fine on a Ronin M with pancake lenses that AF great with it. The heavier body balances lenses better handheld, and it's really not much bigger than a C100 in the first place, so that's super cool. I like the Amira more than the Mini (ergonomically) but even that needs an assistant to operate properly.

So "not appropriate for broadcast" seems like an arbitrary distinction to me. For super low end reality tv or maybe just someone who wants a really small documentary-style camera, I get the complaint, though; an FS7 or C300 Mk II would be way more appropriate there. I think Vice uses a lot of those, but that's mostly web anyway. But "not appropriate for enthusiasts" I think is the more accurate description of most cameras that are appropriate for broadcast. Even if you can afford an Alexa or F65, who has the money to hire a camera crew every time they want to shoot something? So I just think if you know your needs you know your needs, and the C200 should meet or exceed them. 

I do love the EVA1's colors, though....

[Mark Romero 2]

On 12/26/2018 at 11:04 AM, mercer said:

I thought the C200 had comparable DR? Regardless, I think if you’re in the category of shooter where you are using an EVA1 or C200, you probably can make gorgeous images with either. 

Which is why I vote for owning BOTH!!!

[Oliver Daniel]

Some more observations....

1. The noise in 2.8k sensor mode for 2K 120fps in VLOG is crazy! Could be user error though as I didn’t black balance. Will test more. 

2. Footage feels much smoother and distinct compared to GH5. Colours suddenly look a lot more dull on GH5. Saying that, the GH5 holds its own. 

3. White balance temp response seems off. Different to GH5 results in same situation. Maybe user error. Test more. 

4. Think you must use the garbage LCD to operate playback. Hope I’m being dumb and there is a manual way. The LCD doesn’t deserve to be on this camera in any way. 

I’m knee deep editing the project and will share once released! 

[Oliver Daniel]

This is a tough video to start with the EVA1. Lots of my HFR footage is very noisy. Also noticed that shooting at native 2500 is very noisy too. 

Here’s a grab from a 4k scene:

 

[webrunner5]

Are you recording in camera or though a Atomos?