Canon Announces EOS C200 – Internal 4K Raw at Affordable Price

May 31st, 2017
Canon Announces EOS C200 - Internal 4K Raw at Affordable Price

Canon just announced the launch of the Canon EOS C200, which marks not only a new addition to the famous Cinema EOS line of cameras, but also a bold step by Canon, introducing internal 4K raw at a relatively affordable price. Check out all the details of the new camera below.

Canon EOS C200 body

Canon EOS C200 – Internal Raw Recording & More

The Canon EOS C200 is here and it shoots raw! In fact, this is a camera for documentary style shooters that is laid out to record raw as a main codec. To make shooting raw feasible, the camera supports a new recording format called “Cinema RAW Light” which, according to Canon, provides the same flexibility in colour grading as Cinema RAW but at a smaller file size, making it possible to record internally to CFast 2.0 media.

Canon EOS C200 front

This is big news for many cinema camera enthusiasts, especially considering the comparatively low price point (see at the bottom). Raw and higher bit-rate recordings have always been a format filmmakers of all niches craved in order to achieve high-quality results, but for many it has been out of reach, so having a sub-$10k Canon EOS camera with internal 4K RAW recording is very big news.

Recording Formats

But that’s not all. The newly-developed Dual DIGIC DV6 processor of the C200 enables internal recordings in 4K UHD/50P MP4, 4K DCI raw 50P (!) and continuous 120fps High Frame Rate (HFR) in Full HD without cropping the sensor.

As an alternative to the Cinema RAW Light format, the C200 can also record 4K UHD at 150Mbps and 2K or Full HD at 35Mbps to an SD card in the MP4 format.

Canon EOS C200 back

This highlights another interesting fact about this camera: at this time there is no “410Mbps All-I codec” as on other EOS cameras like the C300 Mark II. While it offers 4K raw recordings at 50P, which is great, we see that the only alternative is 150Mbps MP4 – a rather low bit-rate codec that is not ideal for professional productions. This could be a deal breaker for some documentary and TV productions aiming for good-quality recordings, but who don’t necessarily want the extensive and hard disk space-consuming workflow that come with shooting raw.

The good news, however, is that according to the press release, Canon’s XF-AVC video format will be available via a future firmware upgrade. The upgrade will be free of charge and is planned to be available from Q1 2018.

Advanced Auto Focus

The Canon EOS C200 has Dual Pixel CMOS Auto Focus (AF) technology as well as a new touch-screen LCD monitor that allows users to select their subject and provide smooth AF operation and tracking. There is Face Detection with Face Priority and Face-Only options to assist users with focus control.

Canon’s cameras with Dual Pixel technology has been delivering some of the best large-sensor AF. It’s great to have even better and more intelligent auto focus options on a camera like the C200.

Canon EOS C200 connections

Low Light & ND

Canon EOS cameras are famous for very good low-light performance. This is surely one reason for their popularity. The C200 will be no exception, and will sport a similar ISO range as its predecessors up to 102,400. Canon claims the camera delivers “excellent performance, even in difficult lighting conditions”.

According to Canon, the C200 supports up to 15-stops of dynamic range with Cinema RAW Light, similar to the claimed dynamic range of other EOS cameras, and up to 13-stops in MP4 with Canon Log / Log 3.

There are built-in ND filters with up to 10 stops of density.

Canon EOS C200 full body

Canon EOS C200 body left

Ergonomics

The new Canon EOS C200 weighs 1.4kg. In comparison, the C300 mark II weighs about 1.8kg and the C100 mark II weighs 1.1kg. Considering that this camera shoots raw, a weight of 1.4kg is a good start, especially as applications like handheld gimbals or drones become more and more popular.

There is also built-in Wi-Fi and Ethernet connectivity that allows users to remote control the camera and there is even an option to transfer files via FTP.

Canon will also be introducing a way to attach and connect the Canon EVF-V70 EVF that was originally designed for the C700.

Canon EOS C200 with V70 EVF

Canon EOS C200 with V70 EVF

Cinema RAW Light Workflow

Canon has worked with several partners to ensure Cinema RAW Light is integrated with various software programs. As a result, editing and grading of the Cinema RAW Light video format will be supported in DaVinci Resolve of Blackmagic Design. Editing will be possible in Media Composer from Avid Technology, using Canon RAW Plugin for Avid Media Access. This format can also be processed using a Canon application, Cinema RAW Development.
Support for Cinema RAW Light is also scheduled for EDIUS Pro, Grass Valley’s editing software, Cinema RAW Light, using Canon RAW Plugin for Final Cut Pro X.

It seems like Adobe Premiere is not on the list of apps supporting the new camera format at this time.

Canon EOS C200 with lens

EOS C200 Key Features

  • Internal 4K recording with Cinema RAW Light or MP4 format
  • Continuous 120fps (maximum) High Frame Rate with no cropping at Full HD
  • Up to 15-stops dynamic range (Cinema RAW Light)
  • Professional high-quality image and audio
  • Dual Pixel CMOS AF with touch control and extensive shooting functions
  • Easy operation and flexible configuration

Price and Availability

The Canon EOS C200 is available for pre-order now in Europe and will start shipping in July 2017. The fully equipped camera body is $7,499 (€7,348 exc. tax).

If you go for the body-only version (without LCD, handle and grip), the camera only costs $5,999. You can find links to recommended retailers below.

As I’ve pointed out before, this is a very interesting product that could likely be seen as a come back by a company that has been “playing it safe” for the past few years, losing a lot of customers to other brands in the process.

There are many things to like about this camera and we’re looking forward to reviewing it in the course of the next month. We will get our first hands-on at Cine Gear in LA in a couple of days, so stay tuned.

150
Leave a reply

guest
1
1
- 9
Filter:
all
Sort by:
latest
 Liz Pekler
Liz Pekler
Member
June 29th, 2017

Just saw a review here – https://www.cined.com/canon-c200-review-camera-impressive-raw-footage/ and it says it’ll be out for $6k? But I’m seeing $7499 here – https://www.adorama.com/cac200ef.html Do you mind telling me where I can get it with that price?

 Gary King
Member
June 4th, 2017

C200 & acceptable bitrates –

A question to the guys out there providing broadcast spec footage… Until the new codec arrives, would it be acceptable to provide the broadcasters with 4k/150mbps footage that’s been resized and rendered to 2k with a bitrate higher than 50mbps?

Nicolai Brix
Guest
June 3rd, 2017

It’s a crazy good camera.. I’m Shooting with it right now… Shooting the first official film for Canon Denmark

ARRI PCA
Guest
June 2nd, 2017

The new Canon C200 already equipped with accessories from ARRI PCA at Cinegear #ARRIPCA #C200 #CanonC200

Peter Kent
Member
June 1st, 2017

Wait are those prices correct?

It looks like a $6000 “C200B” with the grip($240), handle($200) and LCD w arm ($900) adds up to $7,340 vs the C200 “kit” for $7,500.

What am I missing, a $200 extra battery maybe?

Peter Kent
Member
June 2nd, 2017
Reply to  Peter Kent

Oh the C200B removes the rear built in EVF too!

John San
Guest
June 1st, 2017

When you buy a $5,000-$10,000 camera to just “Run-and-Gun” and you’re okay with it because the client is “Happy with it”.

This is why the camera industry is so stale, stagnant, and doesn’t seem to evolve much. You’re being sold yesterday’s technology over and over at the same price.

Sounds like the same type of people that want to buy a Ferrari without paddle shifters or a shift knob.

 John Parr
John Parr
Member
June 1st, 2017

Short doc shot on C200 – https://vimeo.com/219638089

C200 BTS video – https://vimeo.com/219577958

Vasily Schpraga
Guest
June 1st, 2017

I dont understand the hype over this camera.

 John Parr
John Parr
Member
June 1st, 2017

Shooting with a C100ii or a C300ii will help you understand.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017

That’s not a comment. Did you have something to contribute?

Member
May 31st, 2017

Just as I was gonna commit to fully manual cinema lenses here comes 4K RAW with useful dual pixel autofocus. This is a big deal especially at this low of a price. And low light, puts up a nice fight against the URSA MINI Pro but is still higher priced once you put on the LCD screen. Plus 15 stops of range? This thing checks a lot of boxes in the right direction.

 scott stoneback
scott stoneback
Member
May 31st, 2017

No timecode bnc? That might be the only deal killer for me. Otherwise, this thing looks like a great C300m2 b-cam or C300m1 replacement.

Tito Juarsa
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Canon marah tah

Wolfgang Ernst
Wolfgang Ernst
Member
May 31st, 2017

Finally, I’m glad that the C200 now offers DPAF with touch screen functionality
“that allows users to select their subject and provide smooth AF operation”. Great. Progress can’t be stopped.
It was Nino Nino Leitner of Cinema 5D, Jan. 20, 2015, when the C100 mark II was introduced, who said: “I for one am actually glad it isn’t a touch screen, because for me that’s one of the most annoying features on a video camera. I want clear vision of my image without fingerprint smudge.”
Fortunately Canon only listened to professionals who understand that they well may benefit from this feature (easy focus pull). And who don’t care about fingerprint smudge on the screen . . . because I won’t be visible in the clip.

Ben J
Ben J
Member
May 31st, 2017

Just to balance the inevitable (and, sometimes, understandable) Canon moaning…

I shot with a small camera rig and never thought I’d settle for less than 10 bit/4:2:2, but the C100 Mk2 has made every job so much less stressful than before. If you don’t need to consider – and, ultimately, put a price on – this kind of functionality, it won’t make sense. But built-in NDs, a small battery than goes on for hours, tiny files sizes, one-button-per-function for everything, decent EVF, powered mic amps… all in one unit that weights hardly anything.

Well, it’s worth the compromises for me and plenty of others. ‘Real-world’ use seems so easily disregarded when assessing new cameras.

8-bit is 8-bit, but the files punch well above their weight. And clients are happy with the image.

Aside from this, I always wonder why Canon doesn’t choose from the many aspiring DOPs who have a great eye and some ideas, throw a small budget at them and then shoot behind-the-scenes. Kai does ‘fun’ and has a consumer electronics following, but people should see what the camera can really do.

 John Parr
John Parr
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Ben J

I couldn’t agree more about the Real world use. I have been saying the same thing about my C100ii and it seems that only people who have shot with it understand. With that said, the C200 seems like a great sidekick paired with my C100ii!

 Fahnon Bennett
Member
May 31st, 2017

Some folks here are mistakenly calling this a $9,000 camera, which I agree would not be “affordable” (although looking at the FS7 II it seems at least “reasonable”). I don’t know if the article was originally wrong, but it’s actually a $7,500 camera, which is as I’m writing this correctly noted in the article.

I think that price could be described aggressive especially considering the company it’s coming from. Canon has been losing to Sony and BMD in terms of features for years now and they finally woke up. Some may complain about the bitrate of the HD recording, but look at what this thing does from a birds eye view:

-4k internal raw recording w/simultaneous proxy recording
-4k 6p internal
-10-bit output to an external recorder
-2,4,6,8,10 stop internal ND
-Video camera ergonomics
-no rigging required/runs on small batteries
-excellent continuous autofocus
-small and light enough to run on a gimbal
-excellent low light/high ISO performance (if C300-2 is an indication)
-full canon lens compatibility with no adapter required

Does anyone, especially in light of the competition, really think all that is not worth $7,500US?

 Fahnon Bennett
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Fahnon Bennett

lol I meant “60p”, not “6p”.

 Dan Hyman
Dan Hyman
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Fahnon Bennett

Agree!

$5999 for an internal 12-bit RAW recording Canon body with built-in XLR’s? YUP.

Add in the handgrip ($239) and maybe the monitor if you want touch screen focusing and this thing could be a beast. Grab a handle and helmet on the side and you’re ready to go.

I particularly don’t like RAW since our Magic Lantern days. I enjoyed the image, but the workflow and storage was too much for run and gun. This camera will be for people shooting shorts, docs and commercials. Not for event coverage or run n’ gun.

The Sony A9 is $4500, plus adapter cost, plus XLR cost, plus it doesn’t give you 10-bit, let alone 12-bit.

Once we see the image popping off this camera in 12-bit 4K RAW, I think people will reconsider.

Member
June 3rd, 2017
Reply to  Fahnon Bennett

I was pleased it was $7500….geez, I thought it would be $8999-$9999. I will get one to go with my C300 MK II and XC10.

Calvin Engel
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Why is everyone saying it’s $9k, it’s $7,500 which puts it $1k less than the FS7 and $2,500 less than the FS7 m2. Am I missing something? I have a FS7 I love, but once they release the XAVC firmware update (assuming it’s 10 bit 4:2:2) I’d swap to this to save metabones adapters (which adds another $1k to the sony price if you use canon glass and have a backup adapter) and have Canon color science with built in RAW without needing a $2k adapter.

Calvin Engel
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Calvin Engel

Also I love the size of the FS5, but 8 bit 4:2:0 4k and $500 for the RAW license plus a recorder to capture the RAW you’re looking at about the same price as the C200

 scott stoneback
scott stoneback
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Calvin Engel

And fs5 and fs7 just don’t “feel” right. I use them but I won’t buy one. The canon eos cameras are much more solid, way less “plasticy”. And the Sony menus…. ugh.

Kyle Chappell
Guest
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Calvin Engel

Have read several places the firmware will be 8bit 422…. Oh canon…

 John Parr
John Parr
Member
May 31st, 2017

“we see that the only alternative is 150Mbps MP4 – a rather low bit-rate codec that is not ideal for professional productions.”

I think Canon has proven with the C100 and C300 that they can give you an amazing image with a super low bit rate. To say that this will not be ideal for professionals seems a bit, incorrect? Otherwise, informing article. I’m looking forward to this camera but as always, it’s just a tool:)

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  John Parr

Well, that doesn’t say what the codec is. MPEG-4 is the container file, but what is the codec used to record the video within it?

ProRes HQ is 220 Mbps, a considerable advantage and a 4:2:2 format.

Martin Zapata Véliz
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Awesome

Arnold Finkelstein
Guest
May 31st, 2017

The article mentions a price point. Does Canon share price points and demand curves? Did you mean price and not price point?

Josh Benser
Guest
May 31st, 2017

And there she is…

 Aaron Jones
Aaron Jones
Member
May 31st, 2017

Sounds wonderful except…..no internal image stabilization!!! I’m not going back to slow i.s. Lenses. Sorry Canon, I’ll keep using my fast canon primes on my A7Sll…..

Taylor Garvin
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I’m liking the specs on this camera. I’ll wait till the price comes down to $6,500 before I buy it though.

Jonathan Constantinou
Jonathan Constantinou
Member
May 31st, 2017

Thanks Seb, a good article which answered all my questions save for one: Will there be a firmware update to the C300 mkii to enable it match the C200 in some or all of 4k50p/ HD100 full sensor/ raw recording?

Asking as a C300Mkii owner. I know the hardware inside is different to the C200, will be interesting to see what canon are able to do.

Thanks, Jon

Johnnie Behiri
Admin
May 31st, 2017

Hi Jon. Will ask that question in your behalf when meeting the Canon people at CineGear. Will keep you updated. Thank you. Johnnie

Ivan
Ivan
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Johnnie Behiri

Thank you Johnnie, I’m very interested in this as well. I’m concerned that the Digic 5 in the C300mkII will hold it back, as compared to the newer Digic 6 in the C200.

It seems that this is an awkward phase in Canon’s product lineup, but I hope the discrepancies can be settled via firmware updates… restoring some sort of logical progression up their product line.

As the owner of a (now) $12k C300mkII, I feel resentment that I can’t shoot 4K @ 60fps, RAW, or uncropped 120fps. It still does exactly what was promised when I bought it, but is trumped by a $7.5k offering.

I hope there is an upgrade path for us.

Daves Fakten
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I just read the specs on newsshooter.com: if you don’t wanna shoot raw, the internal codec can only record in 8bit 4:2:0 what a joke:-)

 scott stoneback
scott stoneback
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Daves Fakten

according to article, there will be a firmware update soon to get XF AVC codec.

Alexi Tanguay
Guest
May 31st, 2017

such a low price that I’ll take one for the car, one for the boat, I’ll install one in the bathroom and in the kitchen.. #typicalcanon

Karl Morin
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Alexi Tanguay

???

Patrick Richter
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I guess they found out how Magic Lantern works and installed it on the C100

Joelle Mcneil
Guest
May 31st, 2017

God damn lol

Mohamed Hamed
Guest
May 31st, 2017

how much this camera

 Van Daven
Van Daven
Member
May 31st, 2017

A very nice offering that places the camera in the right spot as a B-Cam for the C700 or standalone cinematic camera. Good move, Canon!

Charly Lista
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Affordable? For 8 bits camera? Ursa mini!

Charlene Loh
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Yaaaaaaas!! ??

Stamatis Gero
Guest
May 31st, 2017

And I thought I was going to buy it with DJI Spark.

Javier Mollo
Guest
May 31st, 2017

5d mark 3 with ML 4k RAW

 Kayode O
Kayode O
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Javier Mollo

You just had to go there… LOL. True though.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
May 31st, 2017

Wrong language.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
May 31st, 2017

Wrong language.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
May 31st, 2017

That’s not a comment. Are you having problems with this whole “Internet” thing?

Daniel Lindegren
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Global shutter?

Knut Hansen
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Canon actually delivering something that is exciting!?well fuck me sideways and call me betty.

Artur Klassen
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Hatte die UM noch nie in der Hand und Color Science ist auf jeden Fall top keine Frage. Für Indie- / Doku- / TV-Produktionen ist der Canon AF aber auf jeden Fall Gold wert ?

Dino Hanning
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Autofocus, Sensor Sensitivity ok. Aber die anderen Punkte gehen Haushoch an BM. Handling der Pro ist der Wahnsinn, dass sie die besten Farben hat weißt du ebenfalls?

Artur Klassen
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Dual Pixel Autofocus, Sensor Sensitivity, Canon Color Science, Handling!

Dino Hanning
Guest
May 31st, 2017

UM Pro

 Christian Denslow
Member
May 31st, 2017

Nice move by Canon! A solid build camera offering up to date, competitive specs (with the firmware update), and trustworthy colour science.

Not everyone’s career will allow for an $8k-$10k camera, and for those people there are plenty of great cameras that will pay themselves off quicker like GH4 or A7s.

I’m personally happy to see a camera that is lightweight, with minimal accessories needed, cheap lightweight battery option (unlike ursa mini pro with v-lock), affordable SD media option for when the compressed codec is released, and of course a significant increase in quality for documentary work with compressed raw.

Let’s see what Panasonic has coming :)

Artur Klassen
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Halelulja

Mason Hoffman
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Meh. Get a LUMIX GH4 or GH5, more portable for Documentary film makers and shoots 50/60fps. If you want to get it closer to a Super35mm look, get a Metabones Speedbooster and a Atomos Shogun – that overall is less that $5000.

Stefan Chernev
Guest
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Mason Hoffman

Those are photo cameras.

Mason Hoffman
Guest
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Mason Hoffman

Any camera that can shoot video is a movie camera these days. It’s not what you use – it’s how you use it I say, especially with a good set of lenses.
I’m more pointing out that you don’t need to spend close to $10000 on a camera to make your movie ?

KC Bassett
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Seems like a great camera sure the price could be less but to me this is a surprise from Canon the features are really nice.

Steven McMuffin
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Fuck you Canon

Daniele Farina
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Jimmy ?

Jimmy Rey
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Muahh muahhh ma canon puó andare dove dico io.Per me ha chiuso…9000$ affordable???Cazzo a quel prezzo vado di Raven o Kinefinity…Cos’è non sono riusciti a piazzare quel cesso di Mark4 e ci riprovano con questa superofferta?????

Cara Ontanu
Guest
May 31st, 2017

take my money xD <3

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Cara Ontanu

You’re still using XD?

Thought that went defunct years ago.

less than three?

Steve Nyarwaya Ngumbala
Guest
May 31st, 2017

My new camera ?

Aram Khachaturyan
Guest
May 31st, 2017

What a total joke…for that money either Ursa Pro or Red Raven…..

 Luke Riley
Member
May 31st, 2017

Canon is Finally a Leader Again!

There is nothing on the market at this low a price point! 15 stops of Dynamic Range, RAW in workable file sizes, AUTOFOCUS, high ISO performance, built in ND all in a run and gun package that just works. Amazing work canon!

RED and Blackmagic Ursa Mini Pro are the only two that even come close with 15 stops of Dynamic Range.

A RED package will run you many thousand $$$ more plus you’ll need ND and there is no autofocus. Anyone who has priced out even a bare bones Super 35 Red build, would know it doesn’t even come close to the c200.

URSA Mini is close, however it has no autofocus, a barely usable 1600 Max ISO, & you need to buy several V-mount or Gold mount batteries to run for a day. It’s a camera that would be especially hard to use as a solo operator.

Sony A7s has 3 stops less Dynamic Range, you need to buy ND filters to stop down to the base SLog3 ISO, takes a crap ton of batteries and you need to accessorize for XLR inputs.

The GH5 isn’t a super 35mm sensor, only has 10 stops of dynamic range, doesn’t shoot a 4:4:4 color space and has major autofocus issues. Still, it’s a Super 16 sensor and is like comparing apples and oranges. It takes smaller lenses and you can end up needing wider focal lengths for the same field of view.

Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Luke Riley

Yeah Luke welcome to the… past!
Just to let you know Sony released FS5 & FS7 many years ago…

https://www.cined.com/sony-fs7-launched-portable-super35-4k-camera-exclusive-hands-on-video/

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Luke Riley

Your regurgitation of bullshit dynamic-range specs is laughable.

Show us your verifiable, accurate DR tests of all these cameras and then maybe you’ll be less of a joke.

 Steven Bailey
Steven Bailey
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Palmer Woodrow

Camera companies like Red and Canon generally do better in the shadows than cameras like the Alexa. Alexa gives you really good highlight retention, but if you underexpose a couple stops you’ll have a harder time saving the image than if you had shot Red. People don’t seem to like that Red and Canon claim a certain amount of dynamic range when they don’t see it in highlight retention. That doesn’t mean it is untrue.

I’d prefer better highlights than better shadows, personally. But it’s not the deal breaker. There are benefits to having good shadow performance I guess.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Steven Bailey

Claims about dynamic range need to be verified with controlled, repeatable, and standardized tests. That’s all.

Member
May 31st, 2017

This is not so exciting for anyone who has worked with Canon raw before.
It is hands-down the worse implementation of raw I have ever worked with.
Almost no DR increase, stuck with specific WB settings, noisy as hell…
And this is a light version that is probably even worse or they’d kill the C700.
People will end up using the low bitrate codecs and wonder why they bought the camera in the first place :)

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017

“stuck with specific WB settings”

WTF? Seriously?

That is NOT raw then; it’s a lie.

 Steven Bailey
Steven Bailey
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Palmer Woodrow

Canon has updated their flavor of raw since the C500 days. You can change the WB now.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017

No.

Member
May 31st, 2017

Accordingly to some information I’ve got a few weeks ago, it has the best and improved AF currently available yet. So great news for doc shooters.
Sadly I had no time to play with it my self yet.

Phil Rich
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I own a c300 mk11 but need to buy one of these to shoot 100 frames without a crop… come on Canon get real with some appropriate updates for the c300 mk11

 scott stoneback
scott stoneback
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Phil Rich

Agreed on this point. I too feel like the only thing holding the c300m2 back is the high frame rate crop. Can be a pain in the field, although totally workable. I do love the camera.

C200 seems pretty great, looks like a great C300m2 B camera companion, which my C300m1 is not so great at.

Brian Hudson
Guest
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Phil Rich

I’m in the same position, Phil. Even if they do come out with a firmware update – which there is no guarantee of – it’s bad business not to make some sort of announcement at the same time you release the C200

Greg Lassik
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Jeez…lmao

Jiku Banik
Guest
May 31st, 2017

4k at affordable price from canon , Canon must be joking ?

Daves Fakten
Guest
May 31st, 2017

i stoped reading here: …can also record 4K UHD at 150Mbps and 2K or Full HD at 35Mbps, recorded to an SD card in the MP4 format?

 Steven Bailey
Steven Bailey
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Daves Fakten

What’s wrong with that? Easy proxy workflow.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Daves Fakten

Are you saying it can shoot 150Mbps UHD to SDs?

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Palmer Woodrow

Just watched Canon’s video, and yes, it can record this to SDs. That’s not bad for quick-&-dirty material, but the codec is sure to be some decimated-color crap.

 Caine Mitchell
Caine Mitchell
Member
May 31st, 2017

A lot to like, a bit of dislike, and some questions.

Likes – [email protected], [email protected] (should be the norm these days anyway), a lite internal 4K RAW (really like this), C-Log (lovely), general ergonomics (love external buttons for the speed of use, plus that side handle w the joy stick).

Dislikes – Price… It is what it is though… I see C100 mkii’s are quite cheap on B&H now though I won’t be buying one.

Questionable – so they’ve included a built in EVF and LCD, however are touting an assumed better EVF add-on in some of the promo picks. Says to me crappy built in EVF which looks like when viewed might leave a top handle imprint on your forehead; PLUS if you use the “add-on” EVF as the pics show, it then appears you lose usability of the LCD (I could be wrong there, I am sporting an old brain)?

The Question then is why not design with a quality EVF built in? I’m sure the answer is price, and giving users the option to add a “better” EVF if they prefer while not adding to the existing entry price by default.

 Steven Bailey
Steven Bailey
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Caine Mitchell

The article has it wrong. The EVF (EVF V-70) came out with the C700. They’re just showing that it is compatible. Included EVF is the same as C300, C100MK II, etc. It is very good.

Johnnie Behiri
Admin
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Steven Bailey

Steven. Thanks for pointing out our mistake.

Article corrected.

Johnnie

 Steven Bailey
Steven Bailey
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Johnnie Behiri

Sure thing!

Joshua Valdez
Guest
May 31st, 2017

$5,000 seems more practical for a price point the FS5 is in this range. I hope they don’t overprice like the c100II

microobserver
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Joshua Valdez

Agreed.

Robi Metti
Guest
May 31st, 2017

bye bye ursa mini

 Kayode O
Kayode O
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Robi Metti

You really think that? Even if you don’t like their product they are the best thing to happen to the industry. They are keeping Sony, Canon and the others honest otherwise prices would have continued to rise. Thanks to Blackmagic, the others have to keep looking over their shoulder which means we the users win in the long run. So saying ‘bye bye ursa mini’ is failing to recognise what we all gain from a company like Blackmagic disrupting the market.

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Kayode O

Indeed. Not to mention that the BlackMagic offers full-resolution ProRes, which Canon doesn’t. It also records real raw, not whatever this “raw light” is.

Canon has blown it monumentally thus far in the motion-picture market. They were the company whose entry was most feared by the likes of Red, but they continue to issue overpriced cameras shooting outdated codecs or pitifully low-grade encoding. Remember, this is the company that clung to INTERLACING, YEARS after the DVX100 brought progressive recording to the consumer level.

Not to mention that the 5D shot 25p and 30p but not 24p for years after its introduction. That’s just stupid.

Canon needs a major management housecleaning, but so far they keep blundering along.

Alessio De Nicola
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Why people still compare a mirror less camera with this? They are different, for different scopes. Otherwise Sony wouldn’t do FS7 what do you think?

Raymond Rahner
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I saw Canon then I saw affordable 4K ? I should have known this was clickbait…

 Kayode O
Kayode O
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Raymond Rahner

Lol… True.

Robert Frank
Guest
May 31st, 2017

How do the specs compare to the BMD Ursa Mini Pro considering the $3000 price difference?

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Robert Frank

Not that well, considering that Canon doesn’t offer any 4K ProRes or equivalent. All they offer for non-raw shooting is shitty low-bitrate nonsense, as usual.

This article doesn’t even say what codec it uses: “in the MP4 format.”

MP4 is a container file. What is the codec?

 Jeremy Abbott
Member
May 31st, 2017

All these people complaining about the price…I’ve been pissed at Canon for years for overpricing their cameras and not competing with the market anymore, but I’ll be the first to say this is at long last priced right on par with the competition. The “cheaper” Fs7? Really?

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1295217-REG/sony_pxw_fs7_ii_xdcam_super.html

$10K USD without lens for the Fs7 ii, AKA the most comparable competition. With 4K RAW, Canon’s awesome Dual Pixel AF, and a codec upgrade early next year that (unlike with Sony’s upgrades) they’re not charging for, it is in fact an affordable camera for its market.

This is not an Fs5, it is more than that. If you expect Fs5 pricing for a camera of this caliber you’re nuts. It would be great if they would also release a competitive equivalent to the Fs5, but this is obviously not it.

 Caine Mitchell
Caine Mitchell
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Jeremy Abbott

I’d agree Jeremy… Don’t like the price, or a lack of stabilisation that’s fine….Instead buy a GH5 or A7S ii, plus a drone, plus a gimbal, plus a six pack instead, and then kick back on a comfy chair and toast your extra bang for your buck ;-)

 scott stoneback
scott stoneback
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Jeremy Abbott

This forum may explain the moaning over price… it is Cinema 5D. Not high end but a website based around an SLR. I like that all ranges of camera are explored on this site but I think there is a large base of readers that don’t understand that higher priced cameras are not meant for casual users, cheap productions, or student film budgets. They also don’t understand that cameras like a C300 are great for broadcast.

Those of us that make a living producing TV, corporate productions, etc., and use these cameras will understand that specs are not the most important factor. Paying clients don’t normally geek out over specs… so if a camera works for me in the field, I will consider using it to deliver for that client.

I’ve jumped on the Canon wagon ever since 2012, with the release of the 5Dm3. I’ve owned two of them and loved what they could, and still can, deliver… especially for the price. However, they really limit speed and functionality for video, which the C300 delivers in spades. Clients, especially tv shows, really dig the C300 and it became a must-have camera for me. Once the C300m2 came out, I jumped on it because it solved many issues I had with the C300m1. None of these cameras did I fret about cost… because when you use them as intended with paying clients… they pay themselves off rather quickly.

Many people on this forum have no idea the value they get in a camera like the C200, instead fretting over details and cost differences between the plethora of gear available. We get ten times more camera now than 15 years ago, and for 1/5th the cost… and we made money on those expensive cameras back then. Now, it is even easier to make money. Readers may have different priorities in cameras, but this camera is aimed squarely at owners like me, who see the incredible value and have bought into the Canon look, ergonomics, and workflow.

Between the C300 and Sony Fs7… these are the two systems I get the most calls for. But, if you hate Canon gear, go ahead and buy that Red and try and get hired by a tv show, web, or current events producer. See what happens when you just have an Ursa Pro to bring to the table. These are great cameras but they have a different user in mind than someone like me.

I get a chuckle out of the bellyaching over costs, when those costs are borne out by functionality and happy clients. Anyways, rant over.

 Van Daven
Van Daven
Member
May 31st, 2017

I completely agree with what you are saying, Scott, still, exactly this camera seems to be targeted exactly at those people you mention in your post. The internal 4:2:0 / 8 bit mp4 seems to be targeted at V-Bloggers who need a quick powerful auto-focus cam and the internal raw is targeted at (small-format) indie-shortfilm-artists.

The C300MkII still seems to be the most viable solution for S35 broadcast work.

 scott stoneback
scott stoneback
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Van Daven

XF-AVC will be available in future firmware update, so it is temporary to have 4:2:0 8bit, I think. I just don’t see the joy in using an SLR or mirrorless camera, when there are huge functionality issues to get those cameras to work in the field.

 Alex Harper
Alex Harper
Member
May 31st, 2017

No stabilised sensor? $6500 would have been a more appropriate price.

Florian Klaes
Guest
May 31st, 2017

So the cheaper “lower” ranked c200 tops the c300-2 specwise?! …i think there is major firmware update missing for the c300-2….

 abril urrutia
abril urrutia
Member
May 31st, 2017

Nine thousands?
Are they retards?

Astral Xilef
Guest
May 31st, 2017

lol.

Tumstar WaDinepe
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I need to play lotto fam

James Davis
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Yawn.

Tumstar WaDinepe
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Rafael Molina
Guest
May 31st, 2017

At $9000 USD I’d highly consider buying at least a RED-W brain, fuck Canon man, honestly. ?

Matt Beardsley
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Rafael Molina

I jumped to Red from Canon a year ago… loving it. Though $9K won’t take you very far in Red land

Rafael Molina
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Rafael Molina

That why I said RED-W brain.

Raymond Rahner
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Rafael Molina

You can get a used RED Scarlet or even one of the older Epics for under 10K. Maybe 8-9K for a whole package deal.

Rolf Janssen
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Rafael Molina

Sure that’ll get the you the brain only. Just wait till you double that price to make it an actual functional camera.

NDT
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Rafael Molina

Do the maths on the Red accessories just to turn the thing on. Media, monitor, battery mount. The price of the body again. 20k minimum.

Jared Baigent
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Terrible bitrates Canon.

 Gary King
Member
June 3rd, 2017
Reply to  Jared Baigent

For those concerned about bitrates, there are 3 things to be considered:

1. Canon has always been able to get a great picture from a little data.
2. There are broadcast compatible codecs on the way.
3. The mp4 bitrate of the A7Sii is only 100mbps compared to the C200’s 150mbps.

 Van Daven
Van Daven
Member
June 3rd, 2017
Reply to  Gary King

If people would be less spec-oriented we wouldn’t have to overexpose the FS5 :D

Khalid Saif AL-Mesalam
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I think they want to get closer to sony FS7 II & I think with advance auto focus and internal 4K raw recording this might be a good competitor to the FS7 II plus the very close price tag (u have to add 3K $ to the sony to get 4:4:4 recording)

Marcus V Warner
Guest
May 31st, 2017

9000.00 is considered the “affordable” bracket? Nah fam, I’m good with Sony’s and Blackmagic’s affordable camera, or renting.

I see no reason to justify the price tag. 5000 might have been interesting, but color science only means so much when I can shoot slog with a Lut on set.

Canon’s unwillingness to learn from the loss of marketshare, proves it was in fact an accident they started the dslrevolution… and if they haven’t learned by now, the won’t.

Bas Van de Kamp
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Find another camera that shoots 4K RAW internal and see what’s “affordable”. This is a FS7(II) like body for about the same price and it’s good!

The fact you can deliver with BM and cheaper Sony cameras doesn’t mean this is a shitty move of Canon? Look at the specs?

Rolf Janssen
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Black magic ursa mini might look cheap but requires additional equipment to be useful, like battery, viewfinder etc. besides that the cheapest version doesn’t have built in ND filters.

Btw 9000 is the price that canon sets. Probably it’ll be cheaper.

 Luke Riley
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Rolf Janssen

+1

Mase Daniel
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Bas Van de Kamp Good luck with that canon’s “4k”. You have an error in the word movie (move)?

Kai Liu
Guest
May 31st, 2017

This c200 actually has a good price for the feature. I am quite surprise at this.

Eduardo Olmos
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I have a waaaay different definition of “affordable”

Marvin Flavien
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Eduardo Olmos

i could get a fs5 and Gh5 for that price

Peter Kent
Member
June 1st, 2017
Reply to  Marvin Flavien

This camera looks perfect! but that remark just unsold me on it. Really needed to be more competitively priced but at least Canon is back on the right track, C100 MKIII and 7D MKIII might be worth the purchase.

Eduardo Olmos
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Eduardo Olmos

The fs5 and the gh5 seems like a more viable combo

Alessio De Nicola
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Eduardo Olmos

Photo cameras are not video cameras. This price is absolutely average for what they sell and the actual market.

Eduardo Olmos
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Eduardo Olmos

I beg to differ mate, the GH5 is more a video camera (plus photography cam) than the canon XC10 which was intended for video and targeted for that market…

 Van Daven
Van Daven
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Eduardo Olmos

To be very honest with you, the XC10 is one of the most excellent small-sized / lightweight video cameras on the market. Probably you never used it. As a B-cam, it is at least capable of delivering an image that can fit larger / more expensive cameras. Once I got my hands on it I never touched my GH4 again. The image, right out of the box, surpasses any Sony.

Member
June 3rd, 2017
Reply to  Van Daven

Yea the XC10 is awesome powerhouse of a camera.

 Kayode O
Kayode O
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Eduardo Olmos

Thought I was the only one who thought £7650 ($9000+) was not affordable given the price of the Ursa Mini Pro and the Sony FS5. Are we now paying Canon extra cost the finally delivered internal 4k that should have been in the c100 mk2?

Benjamin Bush
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I’ve been waiting for this. Can’t wait to hear what the other specs are. I’m so close to going a7s this might stop me provided is in the right price bracket

Benjamin Bush
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Benjamin Bush

Yeah just read that. I’ll be going a7s

Benjamin Bush
Guest
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Benjamin Bush

I’m there. I was only going to stick with c200 of the price point worked. I love the c100 because of its form, size and that canon image “feel” but at 9k it’s ridiculously out of my price range. A7s more than fits the mark I just didn’t want to have to adjust to Sony ergonomics. But small price to pay for infinitely more affordable camera

 Steve Erickson
Member
June 2nd, 2017
Reply to  Benjamin Bush

I’m not thrilled with a7s (google “a7sii sensor dust”. It’s a nightmare). Used it on several shoots and then went right back to 5Diii. The c200 seems a bit pricey, but still a pretty good middle ground between the c100 and c300. Plus… lenses.

James Bridges
Guest
May 31st, 2017

I’ll wait for the Varicam mini…

Peter Danks
Guest
May 31st, 2017

Finally Canon is doing something right

Palmer Woodrow
Palmer Woodrow
Member
May 31st, 2017
Reply to  Peter Danks

Those shitty bitrates aren’t “right.”

But this IS an improvement over Canon’s existing overpriced/underperforming offerings.

1
1
- 9
Filter:
all
Sort by:
latest

Take part in the CineD community experience