September 02, 2014, 11:45:14 PM

Author Topic: C 300 is not an alternative to 35mm motion picture film.  (Read 3844 times)

Axilrod

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1373
    • View Profile
Re: C 300 is not an alternative to 35mm motion picture film.
« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2012, 06:15:12 PM »
+1

I'm also sick of people on other forums acting like this camera is some sort of godsend from the heavens. It a $3000 XF camcorder with a large sensor. It running a DigivIII for craps sake. This camera is such a up-sell it's not even funny. The worst part is when people constantly support it... everyone should have said "f- you canon, back to the drawing board". Instead it just a bunch of elitist delusional non-sense about how you "only need 4:2:2 8-bit" and "now you can stop using 'cheap looking' DOF in night shots with the high ISO"

It's all a bunch of garbage from wannabe pros who just want big expensive cameras to make themselves feel more important that the 20 year olds with DSLRs that they despise.

The C300 is only a marginal upgrade from a 7D, if that. Not a $15,000 one.

on board 10bit 444 uncompressed for 16k? try 60k, and you got yourself an Arri Alexa.

It doesn't matter what Arri is selling the Alexa for. We should have 10bit 4:4:4 for $15,000 by now. The GH2 is capable of 200mb/s video... that's good enough for 4:2:2 at 10bit. The hacker who worked on the GH2 also said that the hardware to make something like the AF-100 into 4:4:4 10bit is only around $2. It's all smoke and mirrors marketing BS, that is in turn supported by "pros" who don't want the technology to become available to the masses.

Are you basing all this on personal experience or spec sheets?  Have you actually used it yourself?
I don't think that anyone was acting like it was from the heavens, if anything people were disappointed bc it's not 4K (like that is all that matters).  I'm not sure what your definition of "marginal" is, but the 7D's rolling shutter/aliasing/moire can be quite terrible.  If it's only slightly better and 10X the price, then I guess no one will buy it, right?

7D is a great camera for the money, but it doesn't have HD-SDI outs, built-in ND filters, and you can't comfortably shoot over ISO 800, and you have no codec options aside from H.264.  It doesn't have the ergonomics, it doesn't have the adjustability, they are nowhere close in my book.

Remember, this is the Internet where everyone and anyone with a web browser can be an expert in anything and everything with just a little bit of typing and clicking.

Very true, I don't think I've ever seen someone so angry with a camera that they don't have or want. 
5DIII/5DII/Bunch of L's and ZE's, currently rearranging.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: C 300 is not an alternative to 35mm motion picture film.
« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2012, 06:15:12 PM »

ssrdd

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: C 300 is not an alternative to 35mm motion picture film.
« Reply #16 on: January 06, 2012, 03:16:22 AM »
we keep on argue for this confused ideas in canons mind!!!
other side nikon has an uncompressed video in dslr.

canon is to even in the competition with 1dx or c300 agent nikon.
appreciate nikon for not playing any cheap games like canon.

NotABunny

  • Guest
Re: C 300 is not an alternative to 35mm motion picture film.
« Reply #17 on: January 06, 2012, 05:43:07 AM »
I just saw Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, and was again reminded how muddy the RED makes images look.

When I saw the movie, I thought "Holly smokes, and we have to watch that Hollywood crap images with all that digital noise?!" That movie showed me that the the future doesn't include any more "oh, but 24p and noisy images is what gives movies that special look!"

canon rumors FORUM

Re: C 300 is not an alternative to 35mm motion picture film.
« Reply #17 on: January 06, 2012, 05:43:07 AM »