Canon sparked a revolution in digital cinematography when professionals started using its EOS 5D Mark II DSLR camera for filmmaking, using its surprisingly good 1080p video mode for projects like commercial and television production. Despite its superior imaging capabilities, Canon knew it had much more to offer the demanding world of digital cinematography. The new EOS C300 camcorder represents a giant leap forward for cinematic HD video production. To devise the EOS C300, Canon leveraged and developed cutting-edge technology from several of its areas of expertise: sensors, image processors, professional video cameras—and of course, optics. The experts at B&H hereby present a hands-on review of the EOS C300, including field and studio tests that put the camera through its paces.
For full specifications of both configurations of the EOS C300 cameras and the Cinema EOS zoom lenses, please see the spec tables
Camera Specs
| Image Sensor | 1x CMOS sensor, equivalent to 3-perf Super 35mm - 24.6 x 13.8mm effective size (6.4 x 6.4µm pixel pitch) |
| Effective Pixels | Approx. 8.29 Mp (3840 x 2160) |
| Total Pixels | Approx. 9.84 Mp (4206 x 2340) |
| Scanning System | Progressive |
| Filter | RGB primary color filter (Bayer array) |
| DSP | DIGIC DV III |
| Lens Mount | EF or PL, depending on model |
| LCD Screen | 4" diagonal, 1.23 megapixel color 16:9 rotatable LCD, 100% field of view |
| Viewfinder | 0.52" diagonal, color 16:9 LCD, 1,555,000 dots, +2.0 to -5.5 diopter eye adjustment, 100% field of view |
| Signal System | NTSC/PAL |
| Compression | 8-bit MPEG-2 Long GOP (Canon XF codec) |
| Color Space | 4:2:2 at 50 Mb/s recording |
| File Format | MXF (OP-1a) |
| Recording Formats - 50 MBPS | (CBR) 4:2:2 422P@HL - 1920 x 1080 59.94i / 29.97p / 23.98p 50i / 25p True 24 (24.00) - 1280 x 720 59.94p / 29.97p / 23.98p 50p / 25p True 24 (24.00) |
| Recording Formats - 35 MBPS | (VBR) 4:2:0 MP@HL 1920 x 1080 59.94i / 29.97 p /23.98p 50i/25p - 1280 x 720 59.94p / 29.97p / 23.98p 50p / 25p) |
| Recording Formats - 25MBPS | (CBR) 4:2:0 MP@H14 - 1440 x 1080 59.94i / 29.97p / 23.98p 50i / 25p |
| Recording Media | CF & SD |
| Recording Time | With (1) 64 GB CompactFlash (CF) card: 310 min @ 25 mbps; 225 min @ 35 mbps; 160 min @ 50 mbps |
| Audio Recording | Linear PCM; 2-channel; 16-bit; 48 kHz |
| Built-In Microphone | None |
| Audio Inputs | 2x XLR inputs, switchable between mic/line, -12, -6, 0, or +12 dB XLR trimming |
| Channel Selection | 2-channel recording |
| Recording Levels | -∞ to +18dB |
| Phantom Power | Available: +48V |
| Headphone Output Level | 16 settings; volume is muted at lowest setting |
| Tone | 1 KHz tone available; -12, -18, or -20 dB |
| Focusing System | Manual; autofocus system not available |
| Iris Control | Iris dial located on camera body for use with EOS EF lenses with electronic iris control |
| Exposure Modes | Manual |
| Gain | Manual: Normal setting -6 dB to 30 dB |
| Shutter Modes | OFF, Speed, Angle, Slow Shutter, Clear Scan |
| Shutter Speed | Max 1/2000 |
| ISO Range | 320 to 20,000, 1-stop or 1/3-stop |
| Built-in ND Filter | Mechanical ND filter system with option of clear or 2, 4 or 6 stops |
| White Balance | Auto, manual, 2 custom (2000-15,000K in 100K increments), daylight (5400K), tungsten (3200K) |
| Frame Rates - 50 mbps | 1920 x 1080 - Record Rate: 1-30 fps (Playback Rate: 29.97p/23.98p/24.00p) - Record Rate: 1-25 fps (Playback Rate: 50i/25p); 1280 x 720 - Record Rate: 1-60 fps (Playback Rate: 59.94p/29.97p/23.98p/24.00p) - Record Rate: 1-50 fps (Playback Rate: 50p/25p) |
| Frame Rates - 35 mbps | 1920 x 1080 - Record Rate: 1-30 fps (Playback Rate: 29.97p/23.98p/24.00p) - Record Rate: 1-25 fps (Playback Rate: 50i/25p); 1280 x 720 - Record Rate: 1-60 fps (Playback Rate: 59.94p/29.97p/23.98p/24.00p) - Record Rate: 1-50 fps (Playback Rate: 50p/25p) |
| Frame Rates - 25 mbps | 1440 x 1080 - Record Rate: 1-30 fps (Playback Rate: 29.97p/23.98p) |
| Interval Recording | Interval can be set in 25 levels ranging from 1 second to 10 minutes |
| Frame Record | NTSC 59.94i/23.98p/24.00p: Selectable between 1, 3, 6, 9 frames; NTSC 59.94p: Selectable between 2, 6, 12 frames; PAL 50i/25p/50p: Selectable between 2, 6, 12 frames |
| Pre-Record Buffer | 3 sec. cache (video & audio) |
| Still Capture | 1920 x 1080 images captured to SD card |
| Custom Function | 9 total functions available |
| Assignable Buttons | 15; can be assigned from among 30 functions |
| Color Bars | Color bars compliant with SMPTE, EBU or ARIB standards can be selected |
| Dynamic Range | Up to 800% with Canon Log Gamma and ISO 850 (+2.5 dB) and above |
| Video Outputs | HD/SD-SDI: 1x BNC (output only) - Composite: 1x BNC - HDMI: 1x Type A |
| Headphone Connector | 3.5mm stereo mini-jack |
| Genlock | BNC (input only) |
| Timecode | BNC (input/output) |
| Sync | BNC connector (output) |
| Remote | LANC-compatible terminal |
| Wi-Fi | WFT terminal for compatible Wi-Fi accessory |
| Power Supply | 7.4V DC (battery pack), 8.4V DC (DC input) |
| Dimensions (WxHxD) | EOS C300 + Thumb Rest: 5.2 x 7.0 x 6.7" (133 x 179 x 171mm) |
| EOS C300 PL + Thumb Rest: 5.2 x 7.0 x 7.0" (133 x 179 x 179mm) | |
| Camera + Handle + Monitor: 7.3 x 11.2 x 11.9" (185 x 284 x 301mm) | |
| Weight (without Lens) | EOS C300: 3.2 lb (1.43 kg) |
| EOS C300 PL: 3.6 lb (1.63 kg) | |
| EOS C300 with Grip, Monitor, Handle, BP-955 & 2x CF Cards: 6.0 lb (2.70 kg) | |
| EOS C300 PL with Grip, Monitor, Handle, BP-955 & 2x CF Cards: 6.4 lb (2.90 kg) |
Lenses Specs
| CN-E 14.5-60mm T2.6 L SP | CN-E 14.5-60mm T2.6 L S | CN-E 30-300mm T2.95-3.7 L SP | CN-E 30-300mm T2.95-3.7 L S | |
| Mount Type | PL | EF | PL | EF |
| Focal Length | 14.5-60mm | 14.5-60mm | 30-300mm | 30-300mm |
| Zoom Ratio | 4.1x | 4.1x | 10x | 10x |
| Maximum Relative Aperture | T 1:2.6 at 14.5-60mm | T 1:2.6 at 14.5-60mm | T 1:2.95 at 30-240mm. T 1:3.7 at 300mm | T 1:2.95 at 30-240mm, T 1:3.7 at 300mm |
| Number of Aperture Blades | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 |
| Angle of View | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 79.2 x 49.9° at 14.5mm - 22.6 x 12.8° at 60mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 74.2 x 57.8° at 14.5mm - 20.7 x 15.2° at 60mm | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 79.2 x 49.9° at 14.5mm - 22.6 x 12.8° at 60mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 74.2 x 57.8° at 14.5mm - 20.7 x 15.2° at 60mm | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 43.6 x 25.4° at 30mm - 4.6 x 2.6° at 300mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 44.6 x 25.9° at 30mm 4.7 x 2.6° at 300mm | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 43.6 x 25.4° at 30mm - 4.6 x 2.6° at 300mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 44.6 x 25.9° at 30mm - 4.7 x 2.6° at 300mm |
| Minimum Object Distance (M.O.D.) | 28" (70 cm) | 28" (70 cm) | 5' (1.5 m) | 5' (1.5 m) |
| Object Dimensions at M.O.D. | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 25.7 x 14.4" (65.2 x 36.7 cm) at 14.5mm - 5.9 x 3.3" (15.0 x 8.4 cm) at 60mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 26.3 x 14.8" (66.9 x 37.5 cm) at 14.5mm - 6.1 x 3.4" (15.4 x 8.6 cm) at 60mm | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 25.7 x 14.4" (65.2 x 36.7 cm) at 14.5mm - 5.9 x 3.3" (15.0 x 8.4 cm) at 60mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 26.3 x 14.8" (66.9 x 37.5 cm) at 14.5mm - 6.1 x 3.4" (15.4 x 8.6 cm) at 60mm | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 38.9 x 21.9" (98.8 x 55.6 cm) at 30mm - 3.8 x 2.1" (9.6 x 5.4 cm) at 300mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 39.9 x 22.4" (101.3 x 56.8 cm) at 30mm - 3.9 x 2.2" (9.9 x 5.6 cm) at 300mm | For 24.0 x 13.5mm (3-perf Super 35mm film frame): 38.9 x 21.9" (98.8 x 55.6 cm) at 30mm - 3.8 x 2.1" (9.6 x 5.4 cm) at 300mm / For 24.6 x 13.8mm (Canon Super 35 sensor): 39.9 x 22.4" (101.3 x 56.8 cm) at 30mm - 3.9 x 2.2" (9.9 x 5.6 cm) at 300mm |
| Front Lens Diameter | 136mm | 136mm | 136mm | 136mm |
| Dimensions (WxHxD) | 5.35 x 6.42 x 12.52" (136.0 x 163.1 x 318.0mm) | 5.35 x 6.42 x 12.83" (136.0 x 163.1 x 326.0mm) | 5.67 x 6.58 x 13.47" (144.0 x 167.1 x 342.1mm) | 5.67 x 6.58 x 13.78" (144.0 x 167.1 x 350.1mm) |
| Weight (Approx.) | 9.9 lb (4.5 kg) | 9.9 lb (4.5 kg) | 12.79 lb (5.8 kg) | 12.79 lb (5.8 kg) |
Comments
Boy, am I glad i bought a G10. after making photography un-affordable now we are going to make video the same way. money grows on trees.
Greg, don't blow a gasket staring at the ticket price, this isn't a "video" camera in any traditional sense of the term. The C300 is peice of motion picture studio equiptment. It's a whole different catagory of creative tools. Cinema is art, like photography. Video is a practical, commercial/industrial tool.
In fact, my college professor affectionately called cinema "the cocaine of artforms." If you can't afford a coke habit, dont start.
Seriously Greg, if you want HD "video" buy a HVX200. If you want to make movies, you have two digital options priced below $50k, the Red and this beauty by Canon.
Theater is life, film is art and television is furniture....
Very well stated Ralph.
The only other camera I can think of that falls into the same peformance / price range as the C300 is the Sony F3. The main thing the C300 has going for it is it shoots a broadcast acceptable bit rate and codec in camera. It's the only Super 35mm sensor camera on earth that does this for cheaper than the Alexa. The 2nd biggest thing is that it has exceptional low light performance. Check out Philip Blooms low light test or Jon Yi's C300 test.
As much as Canon is hyping this as a Cinema Camera it's really an exceptional broadcast camera for documentary work for Producers, Directors, and Cinematographers looking for a cinematic 35mm look for their productions. I direct and shoot for broadcast and I'm very excited to have a morie and aliasing free super 35mm camera that records to compact flash at broadcast specs.
Compairing this to the Scarlet makes little sense as the Scarlet is for people who need 4K. It's the cheapest way (besides a used red one mx) to record in 4K. It's also insane to me that people refer to the Scarlet as a $10K camera. The cheapest setup that would be sutitable for recording in the field would be around $20K. Everyone saying it's a $16K camera seem to forgoet that you only get 2 batteries and 2x 64GB SSD. That means you'd only have around 1 hour and 15 mins of battery supply and 40 mins of recording time. I can't imagine shooting in the field with a scarlet with out at least 5 -6 red volt batteies and 2-3 128GB SSD's. People argue that you can have an assistant downloading SSD's but that costs money and drives your whole production cost upwards.
I've shot on Red, I love Red, they've changed the whole camera industry for the better. But people compairing the Scarlet to the C300 blindly are compairing apples to oranges. The C300 is a broadcast firendly camera that records to compact flash cards in a easy to use codec for less than $18K without glass (including extra batteries and CF cards) that can be operated in the field without an assistant. The Scarlet is at least a $20K 4K camera that requires heavy post production work to make it boradcast friendly but your rewarded with Red Code Raw and the highest resolution possible (besides the 5K epic).
If your goal is to have your footage shot, edited, and distributed as fast and possible and with minimal post production costs the C300 is a great option.
If your goal is to have your footage shot, edited, and delivered with the highest possible resolution and color space, and you have the time and money for a longer post production schedule, than the scarlet is a good option (as long as you don't need off speed shooting at 4K)
My gripes with the C300 are that it doesn't let you record clean to an external recorder, that it doesn't give you the ablity to do a quick autofocus grab (something I use ALL the time with the 5D), and that the XLR's are on the top handle so if you remove the handle you don't have XLR's anymore. Also no 1080 60P slo mo is VERY annoying and the fact that there is not a dedicated ISO button (like on the 5D).... Why canon?
My gripes with the scarlet is that it has the same sensor as the Red One MX (which is nearly 3 years old). That it doesn't have have off speed shooting in 4K. That it records onto insanely expensive SSD drives and it you either need a super fast computer and an expensive red graphics card you need to encode all the footage to be able to edit the files.
Personally If I was shooting on a tight budget with a small crew in either a documentary or "doc" style narrative situatuon for broadcast I would chose the C300 hands down.
I don't know if I'd ever shoot with the Scarlet. If I needed RAW and 4K I'd probably go with the epic or even the red one mx. I don't shoot 4K enough to buy a red and I don't imagine the rental price would be that much more for an epic than a scarlet. The only way I could see using a scarlet would be if I HAD to have 4K and I simply didn't have the money for renting an epic. Or If I was in a situation where I didn't need off speed and the camera was at risk of getting damaged. I'd rather have an insurance claim for a 20K camera than a 50K camera.
I think the C300 is going to be wildly popular for boradcast production and canon will sell a ton of them to that market. Also as others have pointed out the C300 has an image that shares a lot of qualities with the Alexa so I imagine it could be a great B cam, crash cam, or tight spaces camera for use with A cam Alexa shows.
I'm waiting for canon to annouce the 5D Mark III ( 5DX?) before i buy anything. Also the Sony
Cripes, if you need 4k, you're probably still better off shooting on an Arri. I've worked with the Genisis and the Red and the HVX200 and from what Im reading, this C300 really changes things forever. In fact, for all the trouble that goes into editing RED footage, I still wonder why people choose that format over 35mm with a video workprint.
I agree about the dedicated ISO button. I haven't handled the C300 personally, but I do also love that feature on my 550D. With magic lantern I've stopped using the HVX200 for anything static or limited in motion. The 550D w/ magic lantern outperforms the HVX200 in most static low light situations.
As a young jr. operator based in lovely Southern Arizona, where work is rare and often cheap, I can barely afford the pricetag on the C-300 if I had a financing option like BHP offers. 220$/mo isn't horrible, even if it means I cancel all other monthly joys for 16 months. I work primarily in Cinema for Drama, filling in the gaps with commercials, documentaries, reality tv, and the occasional indoor sports event for broadcast cable. My work is my life, so I don't mind the sacrifice.
That said, I need an extremely versatile camera that fits my company ledger of having a broadcast quality camera body with cinematic aesthetics - deep colour intoned blacks, micro contrast control, and low to zero visible noise. Then I need to be able to switch my Cine-mod Zeiss EF Primes out for a longer lens without much hassle. It needs to fit into either my shoulder carriage, or a lightweight Manfrotto 504 head. I love heavy cameras - it's my #1 kvetch when using a DSLR, but the C-300 at least LOOKs, like a cinema camera, so i won't be annoyed when a client says it appears to be a still camera. It sounds contrite, but it's a big deal to first time clients who base their assumptions on appearances, and in S.Az, that's a reality you must live with.
I need to be able to manage the footage for a very fast turn around, either on my laptop or my system rig, which has 8GB ram, an SSD, and dual graphics cards for colour correction & composite work -> which means good 1080p. The stabilized footage on the C-300 is very, very even, and doesn't shake, jello, or deal with rolling shutter. It beats out my 7D and the GH2 every time for stability, which means I don't have to burn an extra half hour on image stabilization if I had to walk the camera on a shoulder rig or improvise a fluid motion when a jib/crane wasn't available.
RHX specializes in CGI & composite effects via chroma-key & matte, so I need the camera to focus on edge resolution/acuity. The 7D has a bad habit of blending green around the fine edges of any clothing not solid black, even when contrast/saturation is under played and properly white balanced. I haven’t tested the C-300 there yet, but I’m told by a DP friend that he tried it and recognized no major problems. I'd like to see how it performs myself. I can't afford to run multiple cameras on a regular basis, as much of the composite work we do must be done with my own rig, not rented or borrowed.
I have cinema clients with the budget capacity to request 4k footage. It comes up often enough that I've gotten used to the reality of it. When that happens, I have the luck and grace to have connections to friends that own RED OneMX cameras, and the giant O'Connar heads & sticks that go with them. I can supply Zeiss CP2s, aging Fresnels and kinos, then populate the set around that. The C-300 can handle low, natural light very, very well, and loves the minimal lighting requirements of specific clients. The RED does not. Supplying my own lights keeps costs down & keeps me hirable, but it is impossible to manage a 60 day engagement without a serious budget on RED One. For that, the Scarlet would be a cost effective solution and pay for itself.
I don't NEED 4k RAW footage day to day. I don't have much vested faith in my insurance to cover 60k$ worth of kit in the roughty tuffty life of a 20 something camera operator. I own a set of 7Ds, and would like that battle tested zacuto & red-rock micro kit to transfer over to my next rig. I love my ZeissEF 35mm f1.4 - It's my first lens I bought with my own money, and my favourite piece of gear. I built my own rig and carriage at a friend's machine shop. I'd like that to come with me.
The Scarlet, as i see it, is out of my universe. I wish it wasn't true, but with the attachments it needs makes it really is a 60k$ camera. It won't fit my company budget. The C-300 though? That fits. I'd like to get onto more sets as the B-cam for an Alexa, as that look is more in line with my long term plans for my company aesthetics. So, for my first major cinematic investment, I'm aiming at the C-300.
I've tested it myself on set thanks to gracious DP friends, I've had time to get accustomed to the controls... (no dedicated iso control? -_- What the hell is a mini XLR? I'm using a monitor tethered to the rig anyway, why do I even need that worthless handle? Cut the price to 14k$ and get rid of that thing. It's what i have an audio department and clappers for.) SO, I enjoy working with the device. I've studied it to death, and I'm ready to make that jump.
-B
This will be the biggest flop in cinema History. Canon has lost touch with there market. Their marketing team and production advisors should all be fired.
Yep. That's why numerous major network shows have bought the unit in bulk for use as both back up and MAIN camera. The camera has a better lattitude than almost anything out there. yes it has it's limitations, but a phantom does as well.
dude with a quick price adjustment we all know that 90% of the 5D mark ii users including my self would purchase one of these units. the highest i'm prepared to pay is between $6000 - $6500 the biggest draw back is that with this unit you're stuck in HD, If the c300 did 3K/4K then the current price would have been justified. as of now my mind set is to wait and see... if i need a camera badly rent one. i am sick and tired with dropping car money on cameras and less then two years you cant even give away.
Amen.
So, hear its great in low light...but no 24 or 23.98 out of SDI. Really? No external recording...Take any graphics heavy project out of the mix. Ill buy an AF100 plus an FS100 and an external recorder...get 422 color space and 1080 60pslow mo....for the same price. Not enough of an improvement over the 5000 dollar cameras.
Pretty sweet set-up. Where can I get 16K for it is the question....hmmmmmmm
Will be interesting to do a comparrison with the new Nikon D4. Not cheap either but about a third of the price and to me more functional as video or still camera.
The Canon is good attempt at a hybrid design between still and video but was surprised when the review said its manufactured purely for video. I think there are better spec video cameras out here in this price bracket.
One word would sum up this camera....Lame. The whole reason the 5d ii was appealing was its price to performance ratio. This camera makes me sad, a lot of the limitations for the 5d ii is firmware. This camera will kill any hope of descent firmware for any DSLR from Canon..... (looks at Nikon to not make the same mistake)
As ususal the people complaining the most are the ones that would never buy a professional Video camera anyway.
You people are a real hoot. I see you on every board making the same comments and arm chair quaterbacking every camera announced.
You were the people back in the day that we refered to as "bench racers" you knew all the supposed specs to build a hot car but drove a bicycle.
Nice to see you all have found your way to the camera world, with a short stop in the computer world of the 90's.
I am just as happy with my Canon Xa10...at such a much lower price...I get really good results...the only real advantage I see to the new Canon EOS C300 are the Lenses.
Hah, good comment mate, too true!
I don't think so my friend. My company owns two Epic's and three Red One's. For the price of one C300 with lens I could buy a used Red One that would produce an image far superior to this over priced failure from Canon. Go ahead, put up the money and buy a C300 for yourself and let me know if you think it's worth it!
Your a funny guy! so what sort of car do you race?
you cant polish a turd
The camera looks good and seems to be the next iteration of the EOS line. However, it has some shortcomings that are immediately evident, which would prevent me from jumping in to place an order.
~ PRICE doesn't seem competitive compared with the value demonstrated/promised in the sales video.
~ If I understand correctly, you can't easily add a 3rd party external monitor. I get that such a monitor wouldn't provide all the graphs and grams that come with Canon's monitor, but still, what if I just want to see my shot in a bigger format, say 7" instead of Canon's 4" monitor size? Am I just out of luck? It wasn't clear to me if other external monitors are even connectible to the C300.
~ Since many Canon or 3rd party lenses are designed for auto-focus and auto-exposure, is it truly a function of the C300 to disable these functions? I've found that it is simpler to buy Zeiss glass or other lenses that are completely manual from the get-go (when using my 7D). To be able to have 100% control of all exposure settings would be wonderful (!) but I have some doubts about the existing line of EOS glass being able to do that. I know, it's in the camera not the lens...but that's not entirely true.
~ The sales guy said the output was compatible with Adobe and other editing systems, but what about FC Pro X, or older versions of Final Cut? Would I be expected to invest in new editing software?
~ Saying the body is "hefty" is too vague for me. Is it made as well as the DSLR bodies? At that price, the C300 ought to be made of hand-fitted aluminum or a strong alloy, at the very least.
~ The comments in the sales video about chip size were a litle confusing. Is the chip truly the size as regular 35mm cinema film, or merely "about" the same size? Does the chip record 100% of its surface? I assume that video is handled directly to the memory card, otherwise, as in the 7D, you've got a chip that nearly approaches standard cinema film, but not quite. At this price, "not quite" cannot be part of the conversation.
~ I've been waiting, hoping, and reading a lot of dribble about a next generation EOS 5. I've heard it will have auto-focus even in video mode, and many other good or dubious specs (depending on your preferences). The introduction of the C300 does not answer the question, "Will there be an EOS 5D III?" If there is such a camera on the way, I might wait 6 months or more to buy it. But if the C300 is all we're getting from Canon this year, I might -- might -- groan and stretch to see if I could afford it. On the other hand, as some reviewers said, there are perhaps better or slightly less expensive alternatives right now. I wish there was a true authorative comparison and true availability / price information. Keeping buyers in the dark really is a dumb idea. My money ought to bring all this stuff into the light - let me see what I'm investing in. No hype please, just hard facts.
Thanks!
The Cinema DSLR is going to be Canon's answer for 5DII/7D video shooters, this is clearly geared towards professionals. Canon created the Cinema EOS division and wanted to create a splash and get credibility with the tv/film industry. No one in Hollywood would have taken them seriously if they had announced a brand new division and debuted a prosumer camera. They previewd the Cinema DSLR to give the 7D/5DII video world something to look forward to, as I'm sure they knew there would be plenty of disappointed people when they saw the $16k pricetag of the C300.
I think you'll see a 5DIII this year, but the 5D series is a still camera at it's core, Canon never anticipated it exploding in the video world like it did. Not saying the 5DIII won't have improved video, but it's clear that Canon is trying to keep the two separate.
For the people complaining about the downsampling to 1080p, do you have a 4k tv to watch footage on? No. 1080p is just the standard, Canon isn't stupid and they wouldn't put all this work into a junk camera.
It's funny how people like Vincent Laforet and Philip Bloom absolutely LOVE this camera but it's somehow not good enough for all the hobbyists out there...It just seems like they are more angry about Canon not releasing something FOR THEM than the camera itself.
Pros only for this one. If you're in the wedding video business, maybe. I'll bet you will be able to rent these for your next production...
This camera is a major fail for canon. Im buying a Red!
Please do buy a RED. The lack of demand will drive this ludicrous price down to about 8K (which is it's true new value).
Agreed with the comments others are making. The price point for this camera is simply rediculous. Perhaps the radation has found its way into the Canon product marketing team?
Makes no sense why the image take in via the large sensor sees 4K, but only records out in 1080p. Why pay all that money for 1080p with 8bit out when a Sony PMW-EX1 can go 10bit out and 1080p at half the cost. It is a bit misleading to see 4K in the specifications while it only records at 1080p.
And it's not just a difference of 2bit recording in comparing the EX1 to the C300...it's four times the color space about 8bit. Compare and this camera makes no sense to purchase.
Go EX1 or RED and get more camera for less money.
A 550D with Magic Lantern is a similar Quality. What are you thinking Mr Canon???
No auto focus option. Too bad.
I would like to hear how this, at $15k+ at 2k is a better option than a RED Scarlett, which shoots 4k and will be under $10k?
RED Scarlet for $10K? That's an expensive door stop. A fully fucntional Scarlet comes to about $20,000. Even then you better have a crew and IT to back it up or pray it will work in the field. Why even compare the two cameras? The C300 doesn't compete against the Scarlet. Its competittion is the F3.
We just ordered a scarlet from Red, its got all the low light performance on a big sensor with big pixells.
It will take all of our existing Canon L series lenses & it cost us $14K Aud. with all bits that we need to start rolling.
Sorry Canon, I guess my next peice of gear from you will be the 1Dx.
M.
It doesn't even shoot 2K only 1080p, the RED products at 2K-5K are cheaper and are REAL Cinema cams.
1920x1080 = 2,073,600 or 2K, isn't that correct? What I am trying to figure is precisely what my gains are over a DSLR. We all know that many of the "cinema" things that have been crucial for years are being rendered obsolete with digital tech. Timecode is one of those things. There are LOTS of ways to precisely sync now, so embedded time code is not all that crucial. Saying an SDI connector was a surprise seemed strange, since many believe that to be the most forward compatible option out there. 4k is not that big a deal to me yet. 95% of the media in the world is viewed on a screen 30" or smaller and the pad and smart phone movement is only making that number go higher. 4k on a 9 inch field is a COMPLETE waste of time. If you are doing feature work that might actually be seen on a 4k projector in ten years or so, sure, bet on the future. But most of us just want optimal 1080p.... So, again, what am I getting over a 7D that makes this worth 8 of those cams? And that without a lens, auto exposure (I think) or auto focus still as well. The tech should be moving us forward, not trying to emulate tech from the past. I am surprised by this move from Canon. They have made their bread and butter doing prosumer gear to great effect. Expending this much effort for so little gain in such a NARROW market segment just does not seem wise. Bummer.
2K is 2048 X 1556 (does not refer to the megapixels. Refers to the horizontal resolution)
This is going to be among the all-time greatest product flops in cinema history. Way to go Canon! *facepalm*
I agree 200% It will be the all-time greatest production flop in cinema history. Canon you have no clue, and have completely lost touch with the market you sell to. And in this economy, wow! in any economy for that matter. Your marketing team and production advisors should all be fired!
I agree 100%.
I must say that $44K for a lens is impressive. In this economy it's sheer Siegfried & Roy corporate magic.
Yes, the lenses seem reasonably priced for real cine lenses... Supposedly the Angenieux Optimo 24-290 comes in around $70K...
Could someone please buy/donate this item to me? Thanks!
As soon as someone donates 2 to me, I'll send you the other. Looks amazing.
In your wildest dreams.
Hi and thanks for the review. Unfortunately it does very little to speak about picture quality and (my main concern) low light noise levels. A comparison with noise from a DSLR would've been great.
In any case, please remove the reference to 'checking out low light performance' in this, and it's clearly not referenced at all.
Otherwise, price would be interesting, too!
There is this thing on the internet, it's called "google." Type in C300 and youll find everything you need to know. Watch some sample footage. It does amazingly well in low light and it's $16k but it's NOT supposed to be geared towards prosumers, they announced this camera in Hollywood for a reason.
Did just that and saw footage that didn't even come up to the quality of the 5D and professional post processing they used to do an episode of "House" a couple seasons ago. --- I think most people who seem to love this Canon entry are seeing what they want to see in this equipment for reasons only their evangelical Canon-love can explain....
What is the price for body and lense?
Hello -
The current price of the camera body can be seen by clicking here:
There are many compatible Canon EF lenses available, but this lens is designed expressly for digital cinematography with cameras that have an APS-C or Super 35-equivalent sensor and an EF mount, including Canon's new EOS C300
A 550D with Magic Lantern is similar. Thanks Canon.
The body is $16k, the big zoom is $44k. I'llbe you can't tweet videos with it. We need a comparison review with the iPhone 4s
Yippee, I think I will pre order 2 +2...not. What were they thinking and who is their target market?
Buy an EOS what ever... with the $$$ you save go on safari, get some good footage, sell it for stock... I mean come on who has that kind of cash in this economy. The ROI will be for - - - p and this camera will be upstaged in a couple of months by something new. I agree that RED is a better option.
What a joke! -- This is a camcorder for people who have way more money than sense.
I guarantee: if the company doesn't brag about it's low-light capabilities - that means those specs are awful. Any camcorder can do quite well in daylight and well-lit indoors. What separates the average from the superior in photography and videography is how low can the equipment can go in the lux category and still produce a usable image. -- I don't know why manufacturers don't understand this, but they just don't get it.
For the money they're asking for this mantle piece and one lens, it should create light for you. - It's a joke!
Looks like the iso range is fairly broad.
ISO Range320 to 20,000, 1-stop or 1/3-stop
The listed ISO specs of camera don't mean much.
There are cameras selling below $2000 which have the ability to be pushed to ISO 128,000, but the image produced at that ISO point is totally useless. So, even though the cameras has that ISO capability in its specs, it's a totally useless function on the camera, which equals it being a totally meaningless spec for that camera. -- Specs don't make good photography - execution of those specs is what counts - and it's the only thing that counts in photography and videography.
I've owned several Canon products and several other brands as well. I've never owned a Nikon product, but when I saw the results of what a Nikon D3X could produce, put up against the competing Canon in the same price range - up close in real time by two photographer friends, there was no denying - no fudging - no excuses - no product evangelism - the Nikon D3X put the Canon to shame in every category of performance. -- If that top of the line Canon belonged to me, I would have sold it as soon as possible and gone out and purchased the D3X and never looked back. And the Nikon D4 is even more impressive - it's hard to fathom how they could make a camera in the less that $10,000 price range do better than the D3X, but Nikon managed to do it - and hats off to them - even though I still don't own any Nikon products.
I just tell it like it is....
Yeah, it's not you that doesn't get it, it must be a multi-billion dollar company and industry that have it all wrong. Jeez your ignorance is beyond belief. Compared to a $60,000 Arri Alexa, or a $55,000 Red Epic, it's dirt cheap. This is for professional productions, not budget filmmakers (although it is a budget camera in the industry). If you did the slightest bit of research you'd hear everyone that shot with it before the announcement raving about how AMAZING the C300's low light performance is. The Cinema DSLR that is in production is what all the 5D/7D users are going to be clammoring over.
Sounds like you work for Canon - or are a Canon evangelist - which amounts to the same thing - a highly biased blogger. -- I don't care who makes what - I just tell it like it is.
I stand by my statement - there are way toooooooo many examples of big company engineers being cloistered in their windowless labs and falling totally out of touch with what their market really wants and needs. --- And there are countless bloggers in numerous photography blogs who are stating the exact same thing about companies "not getting it" - the "it" being what the market really wants and needs in their products. ---
And I stand by my statement that this Canon product is a ridculous joke, because for the same money there's true cinema professional equipment available which will produce impeccable results; what you see on the little screen and big screen everyday. This Canon product is NOT - by a wide margin - in the same league as that equipment, yet it is put on the market in the same price range. That = a joke! -- meaning: something laughably ridiculous...
"because for the same money there's true cinema professional equipment available which will produce impeccable results;"
Oh, really? Please enlighten us as to what this equipment is, and by whom it is manufatured.
The C300 looks like a nice camera for documentary work, broadcast and maybe even a bit of narrative stuff as well, but at this price point 8-bit is extremely disappointing. Don't get me wrong, I can understand why someone might go for this, but personally a shootable Scarlet-X or a Sony F3 at a pretty similar price seems much more appealing to me. It's got some nice features, but its shortcomings really kill the appeal. It should either be half the price or it should be 10-bit and offer Full HD slow motion. If it offered both of those features then it would have a much broader set of strengths and, as a result, a wider range of uses for which it is competitive with the other cameras in its price class.
I don't think this is a real cinema camera, MAYBE a camera for broadcasters with a lot of budget but for 16K I would buy a Red Scarlet fully functional - It shoots up to 5K / up to 120 fps / 13 - 18 Stops Dynamic Range video and has a non destructive flow that lets you even decide the Color Temperature in post.
And talking about Lame Releases the Canon D1X doesn't stand a chance against the Nikon D4. I was expecting the Canon D1X to have great video breakthroughs but It won't even have a clean Full HD Hdmi or Audio outputs. As for the Nikon guy realised that the market was changing and are releasing that beautiful camera Full of amazing features.
Since I bought my 500D (now I have a 60D) I've defended and sold the Canon brand to everyone that asked me witch camera to buy. I'm hoping they do better with the replacement of the 5D. If not I'm switching to Nikon! (good thing i didn't start buying Canon lenses).
$16k for the body only.
That would buy a "huge" amount of 16mm motion picture film. It's nice, but not impressive enough to invest that kind of money.