MattH Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 "argue on the forum". I like that. Very fitting. This is my argument. You state in the article that the rolling shutter will be the same because its reading out twice as many lines. But the C300 had a native 4k sensor not a HD one. It used 4 photosites for each output pixel, which would have been a 4k readout. So if the readout is twice as fast, is likely that it will actually make an observable difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Sensor readout is faster: resolution is irrelevant - RS is reduced per Canon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leo Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 You charge $1k weddings , other charge $5k and up. It's all about the market and what you can sell. If you are underpricing your work then of course it's hard to understand, but semi pros to professionals work/earn much more and this is where this camera is geared too. No different than people shooting free Music Videos or working with labels getting minimum 10k budgets, it's all about where/how you place yourself in the working industry. Personally there's NO way in the world I would shoot/edit a Wedding for 1k , when I can make that just editing a simple project....... Done with the off topic, problem is most people simply just don't understand......I'm not from US, 1000$ weddings from where i am is almost the highest you can go, it has nothing to do with quality or my understanding of the market, there is just no chance of getting more in a country where the average salary is about 300$ a month, unlles i move or advertise to richer parts of the world where i can charge 5k or more.Of course, if i would be in US i wouldn't do weddings for 1k, i would barelly survive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorman Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 so .. 422 4k with 30 fps .. in 16k !! .. How about 6k 12 bit raw 30fps and 4k 12bit raw 100 fps camera .. Which already exists " KINEMAX 6K " .. At a price of less than 10k .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Hughes Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 so .. 422 4k with 30 fps .. in 16k !! .. How about 6k 12 bit raw 30fps and 4k 12bit raw 100 fps camera .. Which already exists " KINEMAX 6K " .. At a price of less than 10k ..Not denying that the Kinemax looks like a great camera, but it's not the right tool for every situation. VICE shoots on C100 and C300 and they put those cameras through their paces over and over again. Try taking a Kinemax into a desert combat zone, or the jungle, or the antarctic, or any of the other places they visit and see how well it holds up for a week. Chroma channels and high frame rates become a lot less important in certain situations. The C series are seriously built cameras that can take whatever you throw at them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkn Soc of Cinematography Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 so .. 422 4k with 30 fps .. in 16k !! .. How about 6k 12 bit raw 30fps and 4k 12bit raw 100 fps camera .. Which already exists " KINEMAX 6K " .. At a price of less than 10k ..It is a bit of dilemma. For more narrative commercial style work the Kine seems a great fit but for high paced doc, broadcast, etc. the C300 ii wins it for me. But it also seems like it'd make a good commercial / narrative camera too as where the Kine without built ND's won't compete on the doc front.One thing they're both missing is 12volt accessory port. Kine has cheaper media per gig. But perhaps one area in favor of the Kine is flexibility with the lens mounts. PL style EF is awesome and being able to change to PL without sending it to a service center one ups Canon. And of course the frame rate situation.The other thing to consider is service, especially if you're making a living from it. Canon service centers all over the US. Kine, not so much if at all. Something to think about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtheory Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Low light, no rolling shutter, light 4K internal and raw 4K external...yeah, this camera is aimed squarely at practical purposes and ticks most boxes. Is there any point of C500 anymore? I suppose they could add internal 4K RAW, SSD drives and superfast fps for C500 Mark II in the future. Price-wise its meant for corporate users and rentals. I will definitely be renting this thing for commercial gigs.But as I mentioned before, for film work all the C cameras have been a disappointment for me, the motion still seems too videoish even though colors are great. I really hope they fixed it now, we will know soon I guess. Till then, 5D RAW and KineMINI are the best cinema tools in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lafilm Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 The C300 Mark ll is not going to let anyone down. 2015/2016 Camera of the Year.Book it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kedbear Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 The C300 Mark ll is not going to let anyone down. 2015/2016 Camera of the Year.Book it.Unfortunately it has let down anyone hoping it would have an image close to the alexa. The dynamic range is clearly exaggerated. Highlight roll off is nasty and the overall image is videoey judging by the recent video. Again, great cam for corporate and doco but cinematic? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 Unfortunately it has let down anyone hoping it would have an image close to the alexa. The dynamic range is clearly exaggerated. Highlight roll off is nasty and the overall image is videoey judging by the recent video. Again, great cam for corporate and doco but cinematic? No. I think these kinds of comments are wrong and just show how much the writer doesn't know what makes a cinematic image.Yes, the video was Not That Good but you completely forget that these cameras are tools. If you light a bit shitty and grade it with your left hand, it will look like it. An Alexa would not save you. Or it might if you like the milky image the Alexa gives you right away, but usually those are graded too and you can mess that. A contrasty, saturated look is "videoey" and if the makers don't know what aspects constitute a "cinematic" image then they won't achieve it.This doesn't just apply to the C300mkII but every single camera that comes out. There are shortfilms done with a t6i that look more "cinematic" than that video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtheory Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 Yep...the same video motion look in C300 Mark II...:( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kedbear Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 I think these kinds of comments are wrong and just show how much the writer doesn't know what makes a cinematic image.Yes, the video was Not That Good but you completely forget that these cameras are tools. If you light a bit shitty and grade it with your left hand, it will look like it. An Alexa would not save you. Or it might if you like the milky image the Alexa gives you right away, but usually those are graded too and you can mess that. A contrasty, saturated look is "videoey" and if the makers don't know what aspects constitute a "cinematic" image then they won't achieve it.This doesn't just apply to the C300mkII but every single camera that comes out. There are shortfilms done with a t6i that look more "cinematic" than that video.I am perfectly capable of assessing an image and deciding whether i like it or not irrespective of lighting. Gale clearly knows what a cinematic image is and that's not in question here. He didn't light it badly, i'm not judging the camera on that at all. There are plenty of saturated and contrasty films that look cinematic. The camera has a nasty highlight rolloff, that's plainly obvious from this video. It has a video feel like the C300 MK1. If you disagree fine. I'm assessing this camera with the Alexa as a benchmark and it isn't close, i was hoping it would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I'm assessing this camera with the Alexa as a benchmark and it isn't close, i was hoping it would be.No you are not because there are no straight comparison shots with Alexa right there. You are using a "mental image" of the perfect image of Alexa as a benchmark, not actual reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Worth a watch..... the latitude is clearly there, to say otherwise is just bizarre (watch the edit room section). They purposefully did a grade to fit the genre.... I would wait for a few more videos before making claims about highlight rolloff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtheory Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Vincent LaForet's original C300 launch film actually looked way better than this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Watching the film, there were many clipped highlights, but after watching the BTS wow, that DR is really something! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 The highlight recovery at 8:17 is madness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I wonder if the majority of highlights people are finding ugly are in the flashback shots, which are highly stylised? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 In the final piece there indeed is many clipped highlights and shadows, but after seeing the BTS, these were clipped intentionally for some artistic grading reason. It's a bad decision not to show the extremist amount of DR in a new camera ad, they should have brought down those highlights and brought up the shadows as they apparently can in the BTS, even if they see it un-fit for the motion picture, it's a camera showcase. BM 4.6K sensor video was graded to absolute flatness showing the entire DR in all the scenes. BTW the XC10 bit in the bts shows what Canon meant for that camera, a GoPro replacement for stunts/angles/pov shots that matches the 4K image, colour and codec of the C300 A cam instead of matching a GoPro, and having a zoom lens gives it a huge advantage over the gopro fish-eye-ish look that cuts horribly with cinema cameras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Yea, the XC10 is clearly meant as a high quality, 4K C/crash cam. When you think of the sort of shots that the GoPro tends to get used for in a production setting.... low light and shallow DOF are not really a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.