Canon C300 Mark II - $15,999 4K camera

[Jimmy]

You realise the Alexa has dual readout to get their DR too, right?

[Jimmy]

Mitch Gross (Convergent Design) just wrote this on the DVXuser thread:

"The C300 Mark 2 will output RAW data in 4K and UHD up to 60p."

[jcs]

Looks like a great camera feature wise.

 

What camera was used to shoot this? Watching on an iPhone 5S (Retina- generally excellent color), the face skintones look too green. Don't tell me he's an alien and the color is accurate. Everyone knows the green aliens top out around 4'.

[leo]

 

This is almost everything you would want in a 4k camera, right now, just amazing specs, except the price.

At almost 16k $ this puts the camera in a different category, at least for me, i shoot weddings and it's impossible to justify this kind of camera for the prices i have.

I might be wrong, but, in the long run this camera might lose it's resale value very very fast, with companies like samsung and panasonic that have nothing to lose ( they have no serious market share in any category, proffesional or consumer), anytime they could launch a little hybrid still/video GH or NX camera that does almost all of what c300 mk2 does and more, like 4k 60p.

I hope i'm wrong and c300 mk2 has a long life, hardly the chance when samsung is serious about this and panasonic keeps pushing for more, right now nx1 is 1300$ body only on B&H.

Still, amazing camera, right now this would be almost everything i would want for what i shoot, if someone here can justify the purchase, do it, it really is a very good camera.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[j.f.r.]

 

This is almost everything you would want in a 4k camera, right now, just amazing specs, except the price.

At almost 16k $ this puts the camera in a different category, at least for me, i shoot weddings and it's impossible to justify this kind of camera for the prices i have.

I might be wrong, but, in the long run this camera might lose it's resale value very very fast, with companies like samsung and panasonic that have nothing to lose ( they have no serious market share in any category, proffesional or consumer), anytime they could launch a little hybrid still/video GH or NX camera that does almost all of what c300 mk2 does and more, like 4k 60p.

I hope i'm wrong and c300 mk2 has a long life, hardly the chance when samsung is serious about this and panasonic keeps pushing for more, right now nx1 is 1300$ body only on B&H.

Still, amazing camera, right now this would be almost everything i would want for what i shoot, if someone here can justify the purchase, do it, it really is a very good camera.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​The problem is the "prices" you have........  Also your bigger problem is thinking you can even begin to compare something like an NX1/ GH to this camera. Based on dynamic range, color and iso those consumer camera's are not even close, nowhere close. If you're doing $500 weddings I get it, but if you're doing $1500+ every weekend then this caters to a different market.

[noa]

If you're doing $500 weddings I get it, but if you're doing $1500+ every weekend then this caters to a different market.

​Ray Roman charges 9K + for a wedding and still prefers to shoot with a soft looking 5DIII and his main camera, a 1Dc and he still shoots everything in 1080p, he had a c300 but didn't like to use it and returned it, for wedding work the c300II is overkill, even for very high end ones.

[j.f.r.]

​Ray Roman charges 9K + for a wedding and still prefers to shoot with a soft looking 5DIII and his main camera, a 1Dc and he still shoots everything in 1080p, he had a c300 but didn't like to use it and returned it, for wedding work the c300II is overkill, even for very high end ones.

I've used both cameras as a professional working in the industry, 5D is still used plenty, but no question at all the C300 is a much better video camera. Now 5D hack is a different story, I think we should get back on topic though....

 

My point being the GH4 / NX1 are good consumer cameras, but the poor dynamic range, iso and colors is the reason you simply cannot compare them to more pro cameras.

[Ed_David]

Dynamic range unfortuately is in the shadows - which is a region I usually just throw out in post.  I care about how it handles highlights - I am curious to see if it's an improvement in that front.  Very curious about this camera.

[dan]

i know this thread is mostly preoccupied by the c300ii but i think the form factor of the XC-10 is really good and could/should be a template for cameras to come. not unlike a hasselblad or pentax 645. no evf could be a mistake but there is an eyepiece for the camera. 

[Clayton Moore]

I'm no expert like some of you are but the way I see it, what could make this camera an earthquake in the market would be if the images it makes are at least as good as an Alexa...at a fraction of an ARRI price point.  Enthusiast wise of course its just a dream, but if it can really go head to head with ARRI ..... THATS going to be an important competitive force.  Thats going to make people who just about have enough money, work harder to get one.  

[FilmMan]

What camera was used to shoot this? Watching on an iPhone 5S (Retina- generally excellent color), the face skintones look too green. Don't tell me he's an alien and the color is accurate. Everyone knows the green aliens top out around 4'.

​Good one.  Or maybe the skin tones need more blue with a touch of red.  Cheers.

[lafilm]

Leo, this cam will not lose re-sale value anytime soon.

The C300 Mark ll is for FILMMAKERS. People who shoot movies for a living. 

Period. 

Anything else, use the original C300.

If you're not going to the BIG SCREEN, why shoot on anything this powerful? Overkill.

I predict their will be films shot on this that will be nominated for Cinematography/? at the Academy Awards within the next 2 years -

This is a bad-ass pice of machinery and pro DP's will respond.

16K is peanuts for what this thing can do.

I also predict you will Not see any films shot on the FS7 that will be nominated at the Academy. Just a hunch

[Bkn Soc of Cinematography]

I'm pretty excited about this camera. It definitely puts me in a dilemma. I buy cameras for work and personal projects. I almost pulled the trigger on the FS7 but just couldn't get over the skin tones of the S Log2. I've always loved the skin tone on the C300 even more so than Red. But it's DR had its limitations. So now this C300 2 has me seriously considering finding the scratch to make it happen. The convenience of the C series is great. The price isn't. But if it's half the hit of the original C300 it'll pay itself off quite quickly. 

So here are my biggest criticisms:

- Swapping EF to PL involves having a Canon tech perform it. WTF? It should be tool less and involve no more than myself or the AC. Bad Canon.

- I do wish they changed the overall design from the top heavy  monitor / handle thing to something with a proper EVF out of the side.

- Looks like they still have the non-standard lens height so using rods will involve some odd ball non-standard plates

I can overlook the last two but this lens mount hassle truly bites. But something tells me that this will be in such huge demand because producers still love the C300 and any improvement on that is likely to get them salivating. At 16k you're probably looking at 400/day rental for the first year. Twenty and your paid off (assuming you already have all the glass /accessories from your last rig). After that it's covering rent and then some.

[leo]

​The problem is the "prices" you have........  Also your bigger problem is thinking you can even begin to compare something like an NX1/ GH to this camera. Based on dynamic range, color and iso those consumer camera's are not even close, nowhere close. If you're doing $500 weddings I get it, but if you're doing $1500+ every weekend then this caters to a different market.

​I do 1000$ weddings and can only take 20-25 a year, so i can't ever justify buying even one c300 mk2, let alone 2 or  3 as ideal for my needs.

For US top weddings, something like ray roman does as someone mentioned him here, i think he can afford these cameras, so i see wedding videography using this but only at the highest level of work for this kind of bussines.

Sure, features like raw and 400mb  bit rate are overkill for wedding, but it's not like it can only shoot like that, the headline here is 4k on a 1.5 crop with great ISO and DR, this sounds exceptional for events.

I don't see the filmakers market as an atractive one for canon and i don't think they targeted one specific market, seriously, filmakers rent, videographers buy it for good and are way more than filmakers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Zach Ashcraft]

I'm just mad because I want one. 

[jcs]

​Good one.  Or maybe the skin tones need more blue with a touch of red.  Cheers.

​Thanks :). Yea a little more red & blue (magenta) would help. Interestingly, while the face has a bit too much green, other areas have too little green (pinkish/magenta). If short on time (though with Premiere Pro masking, it's pretty fast, especially if the camera/actor aren't moving much), it's best to correct for the face (and let other skintones go more magenta (this case)). The 5D3 seems to do a good job keeping skin out of the less-pleasing green/pink zones. Figured it was part of Canon's color science.

[IronFilm]

Ed David, you want the F35 chip in new cameras.....   but why?

[IronFilm]

​Ray Roman charges 9K + for a wedding and still prefers to shoot with a soft looking 5DIII and his main camera, a 1Dc and he still shoots everything in 1080p, he had a c300 but didn't like to use it and returned it, for wedding work the c300II is overkill, even for very high end ones.

Heh, I recently worked on a two day wedding where we used 3x C300 + 2x BMPCC + 2x 5D

[Joachim Heden]

Here is what they forgot to add to the camera:

12v Power OUT

I would say this is really a shame... with power out it would be close to the perfect camera for small footprint shoots with minimal rigging.

As it stands, you still have to rig on an extra battery to drive FF and Wireless video...

 

[j.f.r.]

​I do 1000$ weddings and can only take 20-25 a year, so i can't ever justify buying even one c300 mk2, let alone 2 or  3 as ideal for my needs.

For US top weddings, something like ray roman does as someone mentioned him here, i think he can afford these cameras, so i see wedding videography using this but only at the highest level of work for this kind of bussines.

Sure, features like raw and 400mb  bit rate are overkill for wedding, but it's not like it can only shoot like that, the headline here is 4k on a 1.5 crop with great ISO and DR, this sounds exceptional for events.

I don't see the filmakers market as an atractive one for canon and i don't think they targeted one specific market, seriously, filmakers rent, videographers buy it for good and are way more than filmakers.

​You charge $1k weddings , other charge $5k and up. It's all about the market and what you can sell. If you are underpricing your work then of course it's hard to understand, but semi pros to professionals work/earn much more and this is where this camera is geared too. No different than people shooting free Music Videos or working with labels getting minimum 10k budgets, it's all about where/how you place yourself in the working industry. Personally there's NO way in the world I would shoot/edit a Wedding for 1k , when I can make that just editing a simple project.......

 

Done with the off topic, problem is most people simply just don't understand.......