Canon C300mkIII vs C500mkII // Super35, Full Frame, 120fps and more...
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 ส.ค. 2024
- A review of the Canon C300mkIII by comparison to the C500mkII. More detailed information can be found in the article linked below.
Full Post Here :: www.provideoco...
Follow OWL BOT
Subscribe ► www.youtube.co...
Website ► www.owlbot.co
Instagram ► / _owlbot
Twitter ► / _owlbot
Shot/Cut by Kenny McMillan
Instagram ► / kwmcmillan
Website ► www.kennymcmil...
Shop ► owl-bot.myshop...
#C300mkIII #C500mkII #OWLBOT
Be sure to read the full article on ProVideo: www.provideocoalition.com/super35-vs-full-frame-canon/
Here in 2023. Appreciating the comparison 😊
The sweetest words in all of TH-cam, “Hello. I’m Kenny from OwlBot.”
I’ve really been looking forward to this as a recent C500 MkII purchaser / owner. Thank you, sir.
Dude you explain stuff so nicely, probably the best description of FF vs S35 ive seen.
Appreciate it!
This is honestly the best and you are the best. You talk sooo much senses!
Our 300 mkiii arrives this week soooo excited
I did a year on the 500mk ii Love these both so much 🤍
Appreciate it!
Thanks for the video. Still undecided at the moment. Gotta wait until work comes back stronger before I pull the trigger on either. Always look forward to hearing what you have to say. Always feels like it applies the right amount of technical and practical.
I appreciate that man, thank you.
Thank you for diving into the full frame "look" vs. S35. People still don't really understand it, and virtually every time I see someone comment on it they chuck about equivalent lens FOV as though shooting on one format vs another changes the focal length of the lens. DRIVES ME NUTTTTSSSSS. [EDIT] I will say the manual Canon CN-E primes pass through focus info and you can use the focus assist function with them. I'm guessing the cine zooms with EF mount have this functionality as well.
You're right! I forgot about that, I've only shot with a CN.E lens once haha
C500 can crop to super 35 in 4K so it can use the same lenses as C300 and it can get the same reach. C70 can use a speed booster to get the same full-frame view as the C500 and it can also use RF lenses but the C70 loses RAW, SDI, full-sized XLR, some codecs, and many function buttons.
Very good and informative video. Thank you! One addition: manual focus has focus assist, but you'll need electronic communication between lens and body. I use CN-E lenses and it works perfectly.
Great to know! Thanks brotha
Came here after the C400 launch to remind myself of how good these cameras are as are your reviews.
🤘🤘
I'll be hands on with the C400 soon! Just got out of the launch event in Burbank, thing looks really good
@@Owlbot Fantastic! I hoped you'd be involved.
Well... Mildly involved haha. Unofficially.
If you miss shooting on your Sigma 18-35 f1.8 with a crop sensor the 24-70 f2.8 should match the look pretty closely while giving you more range while shooting on the c500 full frame. With the crop factor and f-stop conversion the sigma acts like a full frame 25-50 F2.6 depending on the sensor size so the Canon standard zoom gets you a long way :). Also it seems like the autofocus assist needs the auto focus data communicating distance information to the camera to work, so manual glass can't do it. But it seems the Canon Cine Primes DO work with the auto focus assist because they communicate digitally with the EF mount on the C500/C300. This is really a helpful comparison, thank you!
Sigma 24-35mm F2 comes closer.
@@JanAndhisfiets The 24-35, since it covers full frame, is quite a bit faster than the 24-70, but you get a lot less range.
Recent subscriber here, adding chapters to your videos goes a long way, just something to consider. Great content otherwise, here for it all.
Hello Kenny from OwlBot. Brilliant stuff. Subbed, liked and awaiting future content. Feels like Ron Swanson explaining it all.
correct me if i'm wrong, but the subject will be impacted by more perspective distortion by putting a 24mm lens on a super 35 sensor, than putting a 35mm on a full frame sensor.
If that's correct, if you want subjects with more natural looking faces, you might need to make camera /sensor decision including lens usage expectations.
You are wrong :)
@@Owlbot - love it.
okay, though... you thoughts/experience with this scenario?
maybe its its just in my mind, but i've avoided putting my 24 in super 35 based on what i'm seeing as a result.
(Im using a 1D series ... so maybe that might be at play) because while i get a narrower field of view/closer to my subject w the 24 on Super 35, my subjects seem a bit skinnier than they are in real life. Many times i'm loving the result, so no real complaints. )
But, now, i just tend to default to starting with the 35mm in full frame and work it backwards (till i really need 24mm, that is).
(thanks a million for the touch back ;) )
I recommend reading this and then going back and consuming the rest of Steve's articles for a better understanding of optics as they relate to sensor size -- yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/LargeFormatMisconceptions.html
Essentially, a lens just zooms in on your image. The perspective shift you see is due to how close you are to the subject. If you had a perfectly corrected, say, 8mm lens with no "fisheye" effect, and took a photo from far away and zoomed in, there wouldn't be that effect you're thinking of.
OWL BOT - this I shall do! Thanks for the info and links...valuable, indie.
16:35. Glad you clarified the type of dance number 😁
Great video Kenny, hope to see more like this from the channel. Do let us know if you remember what the actual native ISO of these cinema canon cameras are (160/200) haha.
I'm like 95% it's 160 just since that's the lowest it goes and that's what the other ones uses to default to when you'd factory reset them haha
Base ISO = lowest ISO setting. Native ISO = ISO setting that maximizes dynamic range equally in the shadows and highlights, while producing the lowest amount of noise. Base ISO for both cameras is 160. Native ISO for both cameras is 800. If you have the option, like you said, shoot at the lowest practical ISO for dark scenes and just use more light, and alternatively for bright scenes shoot at the highest practical ISO and use more stops of ND. A lot of people use Base ISO and Native ISO interchangeably, when they are in fact completely different terms. On set there will always be compromises and you have to just adapt to the situation. But ultimately for the comparison between these two cameras you really won't be upset with how either performs in both low light and bright conditions, regardless of the DGO sensor in the C300 Mark III.
Amazing information as in all your videos. You’ve put me on to Steve Yedlin’s amazing site and journal blogs as well. Looking forward to a C70 review like these 🎥
Well done mate. Like your video always
This is a great explanation of the differences
Insightful topic, perfect delivery, all should sub. well worth the time. thank you
Much appreciated!
For 4K documentary, how high ISO can you shoot in the dark with c300mkiii without ruining the image?
Depends on your tolerance for noise but pretty high, not that you'll necessarily need to go that high. The article I wrote that's linked in the description has a full section on it with video.
In a live show could you match the two cameras perfectly?
Probably, it was just a little tint and a little contrast/black point.
Hello, what can you say about the rolling shutter on C500 mark II ? is it different in the Super 35mm Mode ? Thanks for Infos
It's not very noticeable, s35 is a bit better than ff but that's true for anything
@@Owlbot i have a c300 mark iii now - but i will give it back because for my for doc shooting the rolling shutter is a real step back from my trusty c300 mark ii - for me a rolling shutter is what you see i you do movements or cars drive by or a train ... 1 stop more dynamic range is not so important in my opinion - 15,6ms for a super 35mm sensor is really not good - the mark ii has 7ms - everything is great about the mark iii but the rolling shutter is a really big step back ...
if you could turn off the dual gain output manually - this would be a solution
Great review indeed! I wish Canon would implement 120FPS to the C500 MKII. And possibly auto focus at all frame rates just like c300.
Yeah the AF not working in S&F when all the other cameras do is a real head scratcher.
Great review!
Ha. You made me laugh when you said clients are asking for so many crazy crops. I just shot a still catalog (food) and the crop asks were pretty intense. Luckily the client was aware of this and built in more time per day for the crops.
Thanks for your content but I do t agree every focal length has room compression factor for example on a bigger sensor I can have the the compression factor of the focal length with a wider Feld of few a lil bit like what for me is the best thing on anamorphic lenses u get the room compression of the focal length but a wider feld of few this changes so mush even like u move the camera (Englich is not my first language hope u got what I meant) greetings
I've been using the C500II in CLOG3 and love what I'm getting but, how much of a difference is CLOG2?
You get a bit more room in the shadows, a stop or two, but a bit more noise as well if they're under exposed.
Thank you for your Video.
Can you say somthing about the downscaled image to s35 4K RAW from the C500 MarkII in terms of sharpness and debayering false patterns?
As a option when i would shoot in RAW but not with the huge datefiles at FF 6K.
Thx for your answer.
Light your dam scene! LOL
Is this a camera comparison or a lecture on image sensors?
Porque no los dos?
I’m pretty interested in just how big the difference in perspective shift can be (If it even exists). I’m planning to use my xl2 with its 1/3inch sensors and use a equivalent focal length and aperture on my lumix s5, both recording prores onto a blackmagic video assist 12g. I think this will determine if it truly exists or not.
Definitely do your own research but also look up Steve Yedlin's *extensive* writings and even video essays on the topic.
Great article ! thanks. I am curious about raw files storage. It is very heavy even if it is Raw "light", so, do you find a convenient way to work with in the field ? Maybe with ssd or external recorder + ssd ? In the article you wrote that we can't use sdi and Hdmi at same time.. maybe it is problematic fot this external storage aspect ?
Yeah I mean it definitely depends on the shoot. If you're shooting raw you likely have the budget for it, so in a perfect world you would have enough cards for the day since you really don't wanna be in a situation where you're overwriting cards on-set. But, if you needed to, you _could_ have a laptop and drive(s) off to the side and just dump them as they fill. The C500 gets something like an hour and some change on a 512 card in 6K, but dumps in like 15 or something minutes depending on your connection, so you could easily get that started and go back to shooting because you won't fill up your second card before that first one is done copying over. An external recorder could work, but then you're probably saving as ProRes or something so you might as well just save internally in XF-AVC. I suppose it depends on the recorder obviously, I'm just thinking about my 7Q+.
So yeah, long story short either get enough cards to last you the day, or hire someone to handle making the copies (to multiple drives) and just juggle two or more cards.
I am just starting out and just purchased a C 100 mark i . What can you tell me about this camera in regards to setting the best pic profile for max dynamic range and grading.
It has the dual pixel AF upgrade done to it.
It is only 8 bit so I know that I will be limited to how much I can color grade the image so I am after advise on what the base ISO is and how to set up a picture profile that gives me the most latitude for grading. Maybe even a picture profile that will look good without much of a grade as well.
Randall Burgess I’ve used it at “native” iso of 800. He mentioned trying iso 200 if you have enough light. Clog profile works well and doesn’t require a lot of grading yet I have heard the “wide DR” is a good middle ground if you’d like decent dynamic range without having to use a REC709 lut on the Clog footage to make it look normal. Neutral is usually a good profile as well with the intensity dialed back but I don’t remember if this camera has that profile. C100 mk1 is still an awesome camera.
Nick Dubesa thanks Nick. Will give that a try!!
So how would I get a full frame equivalent 24mm prime on a super 35 sensor? That’s my favorite lens for handheld shooting. I’m not aware of any EF lens that is that fast and wide. The closest lens is the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, but that ends up being an F/2.5 on a 1.43x Super 35 sensor. For a FF equivalent F/1.4-F/2 24mm lens on Super 35, Canon would need to make something like a 16mm F/1.2 prime. Am I understanding this correctly?
What do you mean "ends up being a f2.5?" Fstop doesn't change due to format.
@@Owlbot So the depth of field is identical to full frame f/1.8? I was under the impression the depth of field is less shallow on Super 35 vs full frame at the same F stop.
The image is exactly the same except you just see more of it on full frame than you do s35.
@@Owlbot Here Spenser Sakurai says F/2 on Super 35 has a similar look to F/4 Full Frame. It’s aprox. 4.5 min or so in to the video if you want to see his explanation: th-cam.com/video/MtkvafFEbXQ/w-d-xo.html
Not saying you’re wrong, just thought I understood this but now I’m confused lol
@@zacharykepler3567 You can read a lot of good information from a primary source, Steve Yedlin (DP of Last Jedi, Knives Out, Looper, etc), on his blog at Yedlin.net, specifically the articles about "large format optics". He's by far the most accurate "expert" on the matter.
Think about it though: what affect would a different sized sensor have on the glass? Nothing about the lens changes, right? It's just projecting an imaging circle. Whether or not you fill it has no bearing on the image projected by the lens, so the "look" you get from any lens on s35 is identical on FF, you just see MORE of the image. It's the same as if you were to take a picture in FF and just crop in 1.5x or whatever. That's what your S35 frame would look like, right? Because it's a CROP factor, not some magical optical change.
I didn't watch the video but what Spencer is likely referring to is that, if you want a similar LOOK on S35 as you get on Full Frame, you need to go one "lens length" up and one more stop open, roughly. So a S35 camera with a 35mm lens set to f2.8 will produce a look roughly like a FF camera with a 50mm lens set to f4 when you place the cameras in the same location. BUT, that has nothing to do with the sensors, right? That's because you're using different lenses. The reason you change the f-stop is simply because you're on a different lens and need to account for that if you're trying to match frames.
Look up Yedlin's articles about blur circles, as DoF is not what we're actually talking about here but in fact the blurriness of the background. Depth of Field is the area that is "acceptably" in focus, not how blurry your background is. That has more to do with distance to subject as well as what stop you shoot at.
Make sense?
Another solid review. #daydrinking
Haha, this time it was Topo Chico
@@Owlbot Noted. You know you've made it in LA when you are drinking sparkling water out of a glass bottle!! lol
What are you really getting for the additional $5,000 with the C500?
6k/Full Frame mostly. But I think it slightly edges out the C300 in sharpness as well
Not necessarily sharpness but detail specifically which reads as "sharp", and the tones/gradations are more subtle and nuanced. Lower/smaller noise pattern as well. Plus with FF you get a nicer Anamorphic image.
@@Owlbot I can’t decide between the c70 or the c300 iii or Komodo. Help!!
If you're a solo operator probably the C70, if you work professional jobs the C300, and I've never used the Komodo so I couldn't give an honest opinion
Not yrue