Description image

One Reason to Get a Sony F3 Instead of the Canon C300: Flexibility

01.10.12 @ 3:23PM Tags : , , ,

I’m not here to start a camera flame war between the Canon C300, Sony F3, and RED SCARLET. The fact is, with any of these new large-sensor camcorders, you can tell your story effectively, and that’s what’s important. However… these cameras are an investment. And a much more serious investment than a DSLR at that — $15k does not come easily, and that’ll just get you started with each. So I thought I’d share a thought I had the other day when watching Philip Bloom’s latest camera shootout. Bloom didn’t include the RED and I’ll have plenty of thoughts to share on RED going forward (to the chagrin of some of you!), but if I hadn’t gone the RED route I would go with an F3 over the C300. Why?

Renting an upgrade

Because you can rent the S-Log upgrade. Yes, it’s true — you don’t have to buy the firmware if you don’t need it all the time. Because it comes on a SxS card, you can rent the S-Log firmware ($150/day is one example), which is installable/removable from any F3, as far as I know (corroborated). Basically you can “unmount” the upgrade from one camera and use it on another — it’s valid for any F3 so long as it’s only being used on one at a time. Here are some F3 with S-Log results (and a dynamic range test). This to me changes the equation regarding the C300 — while shooters are going gaga over the Canon, and it certainly has its strengths (small size and low light), for the same price you can shoot on an F3 and then, when the need or desire arises, take your F3 to another level by renting an external recorder and S-Log firmware. This gives you the flexibility that I think the C300 is lacking, given the Canon is an 8-bit camera that most people will want to be able to use for the next several years, and not just for web stuff but potentially for features and/or television as well.

Cinevate HDSLR Products

I thought I would share my own thoughts as everyone is lauding the Canon — I have no vested interest in either camera, but this site has been focused on cameras lately (to a fault, I know, but it’ll all even out in a few weeks) — and since it looks like the C300 will come in at roughly the same price as an F3 — I thought I’d put in my $0.02. I’ve owned and shot on both Sony and Canon cameras, and neither one is paying me or sponsoring this site or anything of that nature. Also, I recognize not everyone has the budget or desire to get one of these cameras, but for owner/operators, let’s take a quick look at the C300′s advantages.

Small size

Again, referencing Bloom’s shootout, without S-Log the F3 looks comparable to the C300. The C300 has no such “S-Log with external recorder” equivalent (just a flat picture profile setting). But it is much smaller and lighter. The amount to which the C300′s small size is an advantage depends on your own needs… if you’re trying to steal locations the diminutive profile of the C300 may be worth the price of admission alone (though a DSLR will be equally if not more incognito). Larger size comparison:

Low light

The C300′s “headline feature” is 20,000 ISO. That’s an astronomical number, and kudos to Canon’s engineers for making it look as good as it does. However, the F3 at 6,400 w/ S-Log also looks good (UPDATE: and in fact goes up to 12,800). In fact, you would think an astronomically high number like 20,000 ISO would look a world apart from 6,400 ISO, but I didn’t find that to be the case; here is a comparison from Philip’s result (no color correction other than to dial down saturation on the C300 image to more closely match the F3):

The C300 is certainly brighter — further evidence in the histogram at left — but if the high ISO setting is one of the C300′s main selling points, I’m not sure 20,000 ISO would yield a better image than pushing a F3 (recorded to an external recorder at 6,400 ISO at 12,800 ISO) in post. I won’t push the F3 here, given this is a screen capture from the 1080p h.264 download — and also because the F3 with an external recorder is more expensive — but… what do you think? It’s the F3′s versatility that makes it appealing to me, once you take into account the ability to buy or rent the S-Log firmware for a feature or larger paying job. And it’s worth noting this example is taken from an extremely low-light situation that just a few years ago wouldn’t be exposable at all. Getting a solid exposure at 6,400 ISO is already pretty amazing (and much better than what my RED SCARLET is capable of… with its current sensor, at least).

Since they were infamously announced the same night, I’ll use the SCARLET as a point of comparison: the C300 is for all intents and purposes a cheaper camera (especially if it’s coming in at $14k instead of $20k, and also taking into account RED’s price increase). However, the RED has interchangeable lens mounts — so if you’re sitting on an expensive pile of Canon glass, you can get the SCARLET, shoot with your own lenses, and if you’re working on, say, a feature, rent a PL mount and PL glass. If you’re buying a C300 to own and operate, on the other hand, you have to choose EF or PL version. And you’re stuck that way until you sell your camera (I’m actually getting a BNCR mount for my RED, but that’s another story). Similarly, the F3 has a PL lens mount available, and in fact because of its short flange depth can be adapted to a wide variety of lenses. Plus, both the SCARLET and F3 have upgrade paths — the former with an announced but mysterious Dragon sensor in a year or two (not to mention the ability to use it as a stills camera), the latter with S-Log firmware and an external recorder (not to mention the 3D link upgrade, which I assume is also rentable) — whereas the C300, to me, does not have the same amount of flexibility going forward.

People often focus on the base price, but to me it’s less about sticker shock and more about answering the question, “how much can you get out of your camera over the next four years?” Flexibility is a big part of that equation. Just my $0.02 — if you’re in the market for the C300 and/or F3, what do you think?

[C300/F3 comparison image by Nino Leitner]

Related Posts

  1. How Do the Canon C300 and Sony F3 Compare in Low Light?
  2. Sony F3 and Canon C300 Footage Side-by-Side (and Some C300 Ungraded Files to Download)
  3. Where to Download the Full Canon C300 and RED SCARLET-X Manuals

COMMENT POLICY

We’re all here for the same reason: to better ourselves as writers, directors, cinematographers, producers, photographers... whatever our creative pursuit. Criticism is valuable as long as it is constructive, but personal attacks are grounds for deletion; you don't have to agree with us to learn something. We’re all here to help each other, so thank you for adding to the conversation!

Description image 68 COMMENTS

  • I’m currently DP’ing a feature and we’re shooting F3 w/ S-Log, Zeiss ZE glass w/ Duclos mods, and recording 444 ProRes HQ files in a cheese plate mounted KiPro. We’re shooting 100% handheld and I’m also operating the camera. My 1st AC is acting as DiT between setups. It’s a pretty slim crew and we’re moving very quickly…shooting lot of pages a day, mostly natural light (supplemented w/ a handful of kinos), and I haven’t found it cumbersome and we’ve NEVER had to wait on the camera. Plus, I’ve got to say, the images coming out of that camera are incredible. HUGE range, beautiful highlights, and yeah, as Timur said, higher overall sensitivity. And, I say all of this as a guy who is coming to this project by way of DSLR shooting. (I won one of the Beyond the Still chapters last year, which was my first introduction to filmmaking). I think, honestly, the F3 really shines in this particular kind of environment. I’ve already booked my AC (it’s his camera/recorder/lenses) for three more projects in the next few months. (One commercial, two music videos). However, for a handful of doc style 3-5 min promo pieces coming up? Using an FS100. That is the place that I could see a C300 really shining, though price remains to be seen. Again, the point is, pick the right tool for the right job. If you’re only shooting a certain kind of gig and it makes sense to buy, then go for it. For me, that has meant ditch my DSLRs, pick up an FS100 for doc style pieces, (usually lower budgets which means cheaper to own the $5K camera than rent it for $200/day) and rent a big boy for bigger shoots. Who knows, I’m sure everything will change again in 6 months :)

  • I nearly fell off my chair when i scrolled down the article and saw a picture of me! some good points here but I’m still decided on c300 as per my latest blog post. hopefully il see a return on the cam within 2 years and upgrade if need be to something like the scarlet or f3 with s-log.

    • An animated picture of you no less!

      The C300 is an amazing camera and the best for particular purposes, to be sure. Looking forward to what you shoot with it!

  • Karina Achilefu on 01.19.12 @ 9:04PM

    QUOTE ; “I’m currently DP’ing a feature and we’re shooting F3 w/ S-Log, Zeiss ZE glass w/ Duclos mods, and recording 444 ProRes HQ files in a cheese plate mounted KiPro.”

    Ryan, can you please shed some light on your experiences using the Zeiss ZE glass w/ Duclos mods, for feature film work. I am particularly interested in how it handles with respect to Focus Breathing, when rack focusing. Thanks.

  • Just for the record, and I must say it’s really annoying that people keep doing the math wrong:

    C300 = $18,000 without lenses BUT with everything else needed to shoot all day long. Yes, I am talking batteries and recording media.

    Scarlet = MINIMUM comparable package = $29,000

    And this is not taking into account post-production requirements.

    Also, two VERY different markets – with some obvious overlap. C300 is great for docs, TV, corporate, and some narrative and commercial work. Scarlet is aimed much more toward feature film and commercial use.

    So really, without an honest dollar comparison and without pointing out what kind of work the respective cameras are mostly designed to be used for, these comparisons are at best useless, and at worst misleading.

Comments pages: 1 [2]