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.

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


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 73 COMMENTS

  • I am a cinematographer that just wrapped on a feature film starring Nick Thurston (White Irish Drinkers) and Michael Rispoli (The Sopranos, Rum Diaries and Magic City). We initially were thinking of renting a RED or Alexa but we quickly realized they were out of our budget. Our rental house suggested the Sony F3. I had never worked with the camera before, much less heard alot of buzz about it. I gotta tell you, the F3 is absolutely one of the best cameras I have ever worked with. Our rig consisted of an S-log upgraded F3 recording to a PIX 240 at almost 250megabits. The external PIX recorder allowed us to record at a much higher bit rate than onto it’s sxs cards (which we used as backups) and into a 4.2.2 color space, converting to native QuickTime PRO-RES files. You can even put out ALMOST RAW to other devices such as the Gemini. The camera rig was used in conjunction with Zeiss CP.2 lenses. The 14 stop latitude you get with S-Log is a DREAM. The roll offs from highlights to dark are smooth and broad. I found that I didn’t have to tweak my lights as much because so much detail was being retained before lighting. I rarely had to go over 800 iso. This camera turned out to be the perfect solution for this film mostly because of our limited budget for post, grip and lighting. This camera made my lean light package WORK and gave me bang for my buck. I never felt that I didn’t have enough lights for my scenes. Even my large master ones. I would absolutely recommend this camera for professional work. Because of my experience with it, I am now increasing my rate to include a Sony F3 camera rental package. The images this thing can put out in the hands of a talented DP are STUNNING. (BTW, a trailer to the film will be released soon for “Not For Human Consumption” directed by Chris Alonso, shot by Anthony Dones)

  • I made several tests on the C300 and F3. I was shocked to see the very small size of the video in the F3 comparing to any other camera (5d; red; c300).
    And that small size has nothing to do with the incredible output signal quality of the F3 and the s-log !

  • It really drives me crazy how people talk about different cameras capturing data in the low lights…like that’s a good thing…The info is dark for a reason…that still you posted of the C300 looks terrible…all the artifacting…I’ve done jobs (I’m a colorist, and not a resolve at my house with my quad core cpu colorist, I’m a colorist on a baselight that trained and lived in LA for 8 years working my way up…so yeah, I know how to read a scope) Where was I…Ah yes, i’ve done jobs shot on the F3 but through the gemini, DPX sequences, that were phenomenal…really…I’d put it up against the Alexa all day long…I’ve also work with the .MXF files coming from that camera…Both s-log, both fantastic to work with…I’m doing my first C300 job tomorrow…First annoyance is that the baselight can’t decode the source files they shot…Says they’re .mpg encoded .mxf’s…Don’t know, but it’s an additional 2k+ for the baselight to read them…Never had an issue with the F3…We’ll see…But in my opinion Sony has been out front in the HD world ever since the Cinealta 900…Well with the exception of that Xdcam POS…Anyhow, i’m not a big techno geek…I just know what I see and what I work with and, unless I was doing a ton of compositing, I’d be shooting the F3 all day long…I’ve seen test files from the F65…Was impressive…But total overkill for 99% of what’s being done today…Remember it’s ALWAYS better to shoot over then under…ALWAYS!!!!!!!!!! I don’t care about your low light test BS…

  • I have owned my F3 for 2 years now. I have basically been very happy with the camera. The one weak spot for me seems to be a bit of a green magenta over ride. For example if I am doing an interview with two people and one has a redder complexion it seems to be enhanced on the F3. Additionally I shoot a fair amount in office buildings and find when shooting through the thick glass, particularly when using ND gel, the outside goes green and I have to use 1/2 plus green to compensate on all my lights, and that at times is not enough. I can play with the matrix or lens shading but obviously if I take red out it makes the other parts of the picture green. I often use the 5D II or III as a second camera and find it does not have this issue. Has anyone else experienced this or do you have any suggestions on how to work around it?

Comments pages: 1 [2]