Thread: Canon C500 Mark II

Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 118
  1. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by Misha Engel View Post
    Not the same sensor and not the same camera. The thing they do share is the Canon name.
    Just curious, have you shot with the C700FF? Just wondering how much of a departure the C500 II will be from the C200 aside from the obvious full frame vs super35.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #72  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Doublin View Post
    Just curious, have you shot with the C700FF? Just wondering how much of a departure the C500 II will be from the C200 aside from the obvious full frame vs super35.
    No I normally read tons of reviews before we rent and after the first 2 reviews about the C200 and the C700FF, I stopped reading, the C500 mark II has my attention though.
    https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test...Autofokus.html
    https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test...---Teil-2.html

    Lot's of options these days.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #73  
    I've shot with a C500MK2 prototype.

    In fact, it does share the same sensor with the C700FF but has a new processor and improved colour science.

    For a long shooting day, 4 90wh V-Mount batteries will do it. It records 5.9k off a full-frame sensor in raw, similar to Redcode mildly compressed. You can window the sensor to S-35mm which will deliver pristine 4k, both Raw and YUV 10Bit, or even down to 2K matching S-16. With a PL-Mount and S-16 glass a cool offering. There's also an anamorphic sensor crop option. On an SD card, you can record matching proxies.

    Canon allows you to change the mount from EF to PL on your kitchen table in 2 minutes (done that). It's very lightweight and has for everything a button, and of course internal ND, up to 10 stops. The original C700 EVF (very good EVF!) works, of course, with the C500MK2. With the additional rear-module, it becomes a serious production camera with 4 XLR audio inputs, TC-in, power outlets, you name it. And it has the most impressive AF in the industry of today that allows you to use algorithms that mimic a human focus puller. Seen and tried it, and it's just plain awesome.

    In my opinion, the only reason why one would go with a Gemini or Sony is a personal preference when it comes to colour. But even then, you can set colour to neutral and skip Canon's colour interpretation. With CLog2 the camera is fully ACES compatible, and other IDT like Arri's CLog can be used for colour interpretation (you can do that with Red too).

    Finally a milestone from Canon that dwarfs many offerings from the competition, especially Sony's FX9 and in my opinion everything from Red, being Monstro the exception, albeit a pretty expensive one if you consider the C500Mks pricetag. This time Canon got a lot right.

    Hans
    Hans von Sonntag
    www.hubbertvonsonntag.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans von Sonntag View Post
    I've shot with a C500MK2 prototype.
    In my opinion, the only reason why one would go with a Gemini or Sony is a personal preference when it comes to colour. But even then, you can set colour to neutral and skip Canon's colour interpretation. With CLog2 the camera is fully ACES compatible, and other IDT like Arri's CLog can be used for colour interpretation (you can do that with Red too).

    Finally a milestone from Canon that dwarfs many offerings from the competition, especially Sony's FX9 and in my opinion everything from Red, being Monstro the exception, albeit a pretty expensive one if you consider the C500Mks pricetag. This time Canon got a lot right.

    Hans
    Wow, it's great to hear from someone that's actually used the C500 II. And super encouraging. I can't wait until it's released next month and we can start seeing some footage posted. The C500 II does appear to be much more future proof than the Gemini. And I can't help but feel the Gemini is going to experience a drop in value in the next year or two, which is usually the dynamic with the Red ecosystem. Much like the FS7, it sounds like the C500 II will be relevant for quit a long time.

    I will say, I've worked with multiple Canon cameras throughout my life, 5D II, 5D III, C300, C300 II and C200, and not to discount the stuff I've shot with my Canons, but the footage I've shot with my Red Dragon is still my favorite of the cameras I've owned. I've also shot plenty of stuff with a rented Alexa that I absolutely love. And when I look back at everything, it's very clear to me that the footage I captured with the Red and the Arri look the most "cinematic" to me, which isn't surprising. But I'm open to seeing what the C500 II can do when put in the right hands. It sounds like they finally nailed it. I certainly prefer my Canon cameras when it comes to usability, durability and longevity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #75  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Portland,OR
    Posts
    317
    Yeah, with Red did dropping Dragon repair after four years , c500mk ii is my next camera. Such utter bullshit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #76  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,143
    Quote Originally Posted by Timothy Jones View Post
    Yeah, with Red did dropping Dragon repair after four years , c500mk ii is my next camera. Such utter bullshit.
    4 years?
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Monstro 8K VV Bodies and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #77  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto & Vancouver
    Posts
    3,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    4 years?
    To be fair, Jarred has since recanted the 'finished by 2020' rule and switched to 'until parts run out'... Not much better, but certainly better than a hard stop.
    Last edited by Mike P.; 11-22-2019 at 09:26 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #78  
    My 2 cents regarding the Dragon sensor. Without doubt, when Red brought the Dragon sensor to market, it was a very good answer to Arri. It was about a stop slower but offered considerably more resolution and colour-wise a cinematic interpretation that could hold its own. Sparsely exposed the Dragon sensor exhibited a texture second to none. But it was just as well prone to noise when unintentionally underexposed (what happened many, many times as hundreds of threads on Reduser prove).

    I shot 6 years with my Epic and the Dragon sensor for many projects. It failed me 2 times, but Red swapped the faulty sensors at no costs. I only had to pay the rent of a camera when my Epic was at the repair shop. I consider this as the natural behaviour of a vendor in this particular market.

    Fast forward to today. S35mm is history. Not as a format but as the sensor size in a top tier cinema camera. A sensor of 2020 delivers in FF min. 4k, better 6K and has a real-world sensitivity of ISO 1600. This is 2 more stops compared to the Dragon sensor. Colour shouldn't be an issue but somewhat still seems to be and is still connected to resolution. Pros tend to prefer colour over resolution.

    Regarding Red's proposed end of Dragon repair which is now extended to 'when parts run out": Red is not Canon, nor Sony. It's like Arri a speciality vendor of high-end digital cinema cameras, albeit in a different segment of the market but with many overlappings. Red camera's lifecycles are shorter than for instance Arri's. This is due to Red's faster pace of product releases and a less streamlined product range, but also to the manufacturing quality which cannot compete with Arri. But the technical advancement was always remarkable (and still is).

    Their customer relation is not built upon life-long development of mutual trust like Arri's but more on the zeitgeist. Red is damned to innovate. In this regard closing down Dragon's sensor repairs are only logical and understandable. The question remains whether Red's innovation pace and price policy compensate that. In the past, it did - at least for me. Today not so much, unfortunately.
    The big Japanese mass-market camera companies are closing in, there is no current Red offering that makes me to invest. And I'm in the market.

    Red has to innovate. But in which direction? Monstro is now positioned against Arri's Mini LF. Pretty hard endeavour.

    Hans
    Hans von Sonntag
    www.hubbertvonsonntag.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans von Sonntag View Post
    My 2 cents regarding the Dragon sensor. Without doubt, when Red brought the Dragon sensor to market, it was a very good answer to Arri. It was about a stop slower but offered considerably more resolution and colour-wise a cinematic interpretation that could hold its own. Sparsely exposed the Dragon sensor exhibited a texture second to none. But it was just as well prone to noise when unintentionally underexposed (what happened many, many times as hundreds of threads on Reduser prove).
    Hans
    Yeah, I know what you mean. When I kept the ISO at around 640, the Dragon just shined with a specific texture that looked so cinematic to me. And the colors just looked so damned good. And there-in lies my dilemma. I've been mostly shooting with Canons for the last 10 years, and to me the Canon look is extremely prevalent in every Canon I've used. Colors look great, but skintones push heavily towards magenta which is more obvious in certain lighting conditions than others. And frankly, there is a certain look to the image that screams "Canon" to me. It's not a bad thing, it just seems like I work a little harder to create a "cinematic" image to me whereas with that Dragon (with the right settings), I would just look at the monitor and think, "Damn. That looks like a friggin' movie right there." I realize the term "cinematic" is a hotly debated, unscientific term and means different things to different people. To me, when I look at an Alexa image or a Red image, I think "movie". When I look at a Canon image I think, documentary or corporate/editorial video. Under a microscopic, I know this all has to do with the usual variables of highlight rolloff, latitude, noise, bitrate, color fidelity, chroma subsampling, yada yada yada. To keep it simple, most people just say "cinematic" or that image has "mojo".

    I just got off the phone with my tax attorney and I'm being advised that if I have a big camera purchase to make soon, then I need to make it in the next 5 weeks because I'm gonna really need that write-off this year. My original plan was to just wait, rent both of the C500 II and the Gemini, do my own shoot off, and make an educated decision from that experience. Now I'm calculating how much waiting will cost me in spent tax dollars. I may have to just make a decision without a test, which sucks.

    I wish there was more C500 II stuff out there to look at. The most promising thing on the internet is just this, which doesn't really show me a ton. It looks like a really, really nice Canon image to me, but with shallower depth of field. Though, to be fair, I'm not sure a Gemini in this scenario would look vastly superior.

    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #80  
    This is the video that made me want to revisit Red again. Some people don't like it, but I think it looks amazing. I know he's doing a ton to this image, both with his lens whacking, modifications and heavy post grade. But looking past all that, there is clearly a depth/richness and texture to this image that just looks so awesome to me. I am not sure I could achieve this with any Canon I currently have. I could be wrong though. And the C500 II might be a different beast.

    I will say one thing though, this video seems like a perfect example of how useful DPAF is on the Canon when being a solo shooter. He can't seem to keep his subjects in focus at all. But maybe that is intentional? Even so, while the loose racks and ultra blurry image works well with this sort of ethereal type of footage, if this was any other form of shoot, an extremely skilled 1st AC would be absolutely required. Whereas with the Canon, you might actually get away with not having a 1st AC and could still end up with comparable footage. So there is a lot to be said for that.

    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts