Back To Listings RSS Print

Canon Cinema EOS C300:  A Dissenting View

Disappointed is a weak word...

By Bruce A Johnson | November 07, 2011

image

I know, there have been a million opinions shot over the Internet over the last three days regarding canon's new Cinema EOS C300 camera. About half point out it's great feature set, and about half seem to point out every flaw it has in comparison to RED Epic. Whatever, all that's fine. Me, I'm dissapointed for an entirely different reason:

Where's the killer Canon camera for the tens - to hundreds-of-thousands of us that actually work in television? When I reviewed the Canon XF305 a year ago, I was very impressed with the package, with a few caveats - chief among them the 1/3" chipset. If Canon can jam a 35mm CMOS into the D5 mkII, why not the same hardware in a form-factor that a real TV production crew could easily use? And in a package that can sit on your shoulder?

When I got my invitation to the Canon press event, I was really excited. I even planned to fly from the Midwest to LA just to see the announcement. Luckily, I was offered some freelance work before I bought the plane ticket, but I watched for news on my smartphone in every bit of downtime. And when the news came out...what a letdown. The EOS C300 does nothing for me... and in fact, doesn't seem to do much of anything for anybody until you outfit it with tens of thousands of dollars in accessories, including audio and timecode adapters, lenses, rails, grips, you name it.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I have to figure that there are many more video pros actually making a daily living than there are folks that will ever make money off their films. If I'm wrong, say so, but that's the way I see it. I've used - and generally loved - Canon video cameras since the XL1 came out 13 years ago. Please, Canon, I beg you - put a 35mm chip, a good audio section, swappable lenses, the 50Mb codec, 10-bit HD-SDI out and SMPTE timecode in and out into a $10K shoulder-mount package. You'll have a line flowing out the door for miles.

But in the meantime, I'm dismayed at the EOS C300. I guess I should be old enough by now not to get my hopes up so easily.

Share This

Back To Listings RSS Print

Get articles like this in your inbox: Sign Up

Comments

Andy Taplin: | November, 07, 2011

Couldn’t agree more Bruce.

For us TV and corporate pros, who surely represent the biggest market, we don’t need 4K - we need large sensor 1080 and at least 50mbits in a ‘proper’ compact shoulder mount form-factor.

I don’t get this obsession with boxy little cameras like the F3 and AF101 that need a ton of add ons to be useable for different types of production.  I’ll put up with it in a DSLR, that’s fine, but a pro camcorder should look like a smaller, lighter version of the Betacams most of us grew up with.

The stills guys have always kept the same basic form factor for the SLR and now DSLR for decades - if it aint broke don’t fix it.

I wrote a bolo article nearly a year ago (http://www.andytaplin.co.uk/2011/01/13/the-‘perfect’-video-camera-is-tantalisingly-close/) about my ‘perfect’ camera and thought at the time that Canon were in a great position to produce it with no existing products to protect. Sadly though, this is not it.

RC Fisher: | November, 07, 2011

Upon seeing the announcement I too was disappointed but I went to the event on Friday anyway to check it out. I watched the 4 films made with the pro production cameras and I was Impressed! The image quality is just AWESOME and the 4 films and the BTS films all had entirely different looks. I wandered around and talked to some friends and other folks I knew and got their take and handled one of the cameras myself. Impressed again! For the majority of the work I do this will be an awesome tool. I have been shooting for the past 18 months with a 7D and have gotten to love the look but would really like a more professional body and the C300 fits the bill. I was looking wantingly at the Sony FS100 which is a great camera with a few drawbacks. I don’t really care for the 24Mbs AVCHD codec, the 50Mbs codec in the Canon camera held up amazingly through heavy grading in most of the films. High ISO shooting was greatly noise free. ISO 10k is usable and ISO 20k usable in a pinch. so after the show I digested what I had learned and I am not disapointed any more. Impressed with the little camera is more like it. Now to raise the funds to purchase one SOON.

SvenG.: | November, 08, 2011

Exactly my thoughts when this baby saw the light.

Geoffrey Brown: | November, 08, 2011

Have to agree with Bruce, having shot film for TV (news and current affairs) I believe it was no accident that the original Sony Betacam form factor closely resembled CP 16, Arri BL and Eclair NPR & ACL cameras used for ENG, and was useable ‘out of the box’
The difference was that they where aimed at working pros not weekend warriors and academic filmmakers.

So why indeed do we now get these boxy little cameras that need a million buck worth of add ons to get to the starting gate?

Same answer as to why Apple designed FCP X I fear.

theheat: | November, 09, 2011

Your comments Bruce were true and to the point.  Canon HAS the knowledge/expertise just not the willingness to build a camera for television. Why has the “servo zoom” become an unwanted tool?  I totally agree with your assessment of the C300. This camera will ultimately fail and it will cost Canon both customers and badly needed revenue.

RC Fisher: | November, 09, 2011

The reason Canon came up with this is that since the explosion of the 5/7D large sensor cameras cinematographers begged for a similar camera aimed at the cinema market and the C300 is it. The C300 it is a digital cinema camera not a news or TV camera. But as I said above I think this is a great camera for certain doc shooters. It is not for everyone as Canon aimed it at the indie cinema crowd. A great TV/doc camera would be a 2/3” single sensor, not a Super 35, with a PL mount so you can mount 16mm glass which there is a lot of floating around these days and the form factor of the Aaton LTR. A true should mount camera. I think the C300 will be a success in the limited market it’s aimed at and maybe beyond.

Charles Angus: | November, 09, 2011

This is a piece-of-crap camera that should never have gotten off the page.

“8-bit for $20k” should be the slogan, so that everyone can immediately see what a hilarious rip-off this is…

RC Fisher: | November, 09, 2011

Wow, tell us how you really feel!
Before you make such a determination you should really see the images on a 40 ft screen and handle one. As I said before it’s not a camera for everyone, the C300 is a Digital Cinema Camera. As I said in my first post here I thought it was a crappy camera with horrible specs but changed my mind after seeing the films on a 40 ft screen, talking to folks and handling one. I do think that 8bit out of the HD-SDI port is not good but . . .

I am just a cinematographer off the street with no ties to Canon. Just my .02

Charles Angus: | November, 09, 2011

But really - Canon has the tech and know-how to make a great camera, and instead they keep making crippled baby-cams…

This camera could have been released with 10-bit, 400Mb/s I-frame only recording, and high-speed for half as much money. (Scarlet proves this). Instead, we get this. For chrissakes, the 7d proves this - it does everything this camera does, for all intents and purposes. Just some of the features are more crippled.

This was supposed to be the camera where Canon fixed the problems with the DSLRs, but really they’ve just hidden them better.

wsmith: | November, 10, 2011

I’m with you Bruce. I also was an XL1 user (x2 units) back when I started in this biz.

I was hoping for more here. I’ve thus far eschewed the DSLRs, and patiently played the waiting-for-Canon game while shooting with 2 HMC150s. (I had 2 Panasonics and have shot with a fair number of other cams in between).

I too wanted a shoulder model with a big imager - for video. I’ll continue to wait - this time for what Ikegami has up its sleeve. They made an announcement about such a cam at NAB and there was a short video posted here but it wasn’t much on info. The rep was rather inarticulate (English as a Second Language) and obviously not a suit from their U.S. marketing arm.

I don’t recall seeing anything written about it here (or anywhere else, including their site). 

Maybe you can get some updated coverage from Ikegami. After 13 years and numerous prosumer cams I’m ready for a real pro shoulder TV camera than can do more and do it better.         

Good luck to all the filmmakers out there.

Thanks

wsmith

wsmith: | November, 10, 2011

By the way, were it not for the stinking 8bit only - even on the outs, I might be more willing to consider it (despite it’s ungainliness, compared to a shoulder rig.)

I won’t even consider it given this. I started as a shooter but I’m more than that now. I’m a producer who dabbling but nevertheless taking advantage of Adobe’s tight integration with After Effects.  I have a talented Photoshop friend with over thirty years of impressive high-level pro accomplishments. He wants to begin learning AE and partner with me.

Why should I even consider an 8bit camera? It’s beneath my creative aspirations.

Andy Taplin: | November, 10, 2011

Ikegami have always made better cameras than the Sony equivalents. I have a DV7 and it’s better in every way to the Sony 450. Unfortunately, the broadcasters go for the cheapest option so Ikegami are always second fiddle - the connoisseurs choice though!

I’ve nothing against Sony by the way, I now have a PMW EX350 and It’s very nice - it’s just that IMHO Ikegami make products that are better engineered - great service to from Ikegami UK.

wsmith: | November, 10, 2011

So, Andy, had you heard about this new shoulder Ikegami with a big single imager?

Just curious. I certainly haven’t seen any marketing buzz since the short video posted on this site, from NAB.

Andy Taplin: | November, 11, 2011

Found some infer here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/archive/index.php/t-264220.html?s=997b666e10388793a2c1e6799c6a3174

My guess is that it won’t be cheap as it’s based on their GFpack system.

Jim Nicholls: | November, 13, 2011

I agree with Bruce, 30 years of ergonomic camcorder design development thrown out the window, and look at the Red Rock micro rig in Adam Wilts report to replicate it all! What a monster.The gods must be crazy.

Surely the next size up in lenses and sensors can be made into a balanced ENG/EFP camcorder design!

Jim

Wil Janssen: | November, 14, 2011

Thanks Bruce for your opinion,interesting to read!

Please login or register to comment