April 13, 2015
NAB 2015

Watch the First Short Film Shot on the 4K Canon C300 Mark II

Last week, Canon announced a major upgrade to their popular C300 cinema camera. Not only did the company opt for internal 4K recording, but the new camera also has an impressive 15 stops of dynamic range and 120fps slow motion in full HD. Here are the specs and pictures again, just in case you need a refresher.

Canon C300 Mark II with LCD
  • 9.84 megapixel Super35 CMOS sensor (rolling shutter, but twice read speed than previous C300)
  • Dual Digic DV5 Processors
  • 4K/UHD up to 30fps Internally at 10-bit 4:2:2
  • 2K/HD 10/12-bit 4:4:4 up to 60fps, Cropped 2K/HD mode up to 120fps
  • XF-XAVC Intra 410/225/220/110Mbps and XF-XAVC Long GOP 50Mbps
  • XF-XAVC Long GOP 35Mbps and 24Mbps for Proxy
  • 15 Stops of Dynamic Range
  • 4K RAW Externally (Can record 4K internally and 4K RAW externally at the same time)
  • While shooting 4K, can record proxies in 8-bit 4:2:0 at 35mbps or 24mbps in 2K/HD
  • Flatter Canon Log Gamma 2 (and Canon Wide DR)
  • Baked in Looks Option Allows Matching the Image of Other Cameras Internally
  • ISO Up to 102,400 
C300 MKII
  • Dual CFast 2.0 Card Slots
  • Dual 3G-SDI & HDMI (Unclear if the HDMI can output 4K)
  • Supports BT.2020, Canon Cinema Gamut, and DCI-P3 Color Spaces
  • XF-AVC intra for 4K, and XF-AVC Intra/Long GOP and Proxy options for 2K/Full HD 
  • Internally ND up to 10 stops in expansion mode
  • Dual Pixel CMOS AF (now covering approx. 80% of the frame vertically and 80% horizontally)
  • Audio: 4 Ch. 16/24 bit and 48 kHz, Built-in mic for scratch track
  • Rotating 4" LCD
  • OLED EVF 1024 x 576
  • Uses new batteries different from the Original C300
  • Weight: 4 lbs. Body only, Over 7 lbs. with everything 
  • Availability: September 2015
  • Price: Listed at $16,000 (may or may not change upon release)

What do you guys think of the images from the C300 Mark II in Canon's slick new short film? Let us know down in the comments!      

Your Comment

47 Comments

Hmm, to be honest I wasn't very impressed. I didn't find the image to be very sharp and really didn't like the color, although I believe that it was likely due to the way they color corrected it. I'm guessing they were trying to show off it's low light capability as well, seems very "low budget video" to me.

April 13, 2015 at 3:49PM

1
Reply
avatar
Vladimir Druts
Founder & Director at Intangible.co
352

The video was hosted on Vimeo in 720p, so it's probably not best to make judgements on sharpness based off of this example. There doesn't seem to be a place to download a higher resolution version, unfortunately.

April 13, 2015 at 4:34PM

0
Reply

Video quality on both Vimeo and Youtube seems to be getting worse; especially for 4K uploads (regardless of playback res).

April 13, 2015 at 5:36PM

0
Reply
avatar
Daniel Reed
Hat Collector
1372

Nice, but seems terribly overpriced now.

April 13, 2015 at 3:49PM

0
Reply
avatar
Josh.R
Motion Designer/Predator
836

Was terribly overpriced from day one. Should be $12K tops. Canon refused to bend with industry trends and prices this thing like it's the only 4K cinema camera on the market.

April 13, 2015 at 6:43PM

0
Reply
Jeremy Abbott
Video Producer/Independent Filmmaker
234

Depending on things like ISO sensitivity and reliability, the URSA mini with BM viewfinder for much less than half the price of this is going to, er, disrupt things.

April 13, 2015 at 3:53PM

0
Reply
Dean Mermell
Filmish Person
111

This Need s To Be Uploaded To Youtbe Since Vimeo Does Not support 4K Yet...But Canon is So OverPriced and They Honestly Determine Wheter Other Camera Companies will Lower Ther Prices..If Canon Dropped There C300 MarkII To About 8,000 and lower everything else..RED and Everyone Else Would be Trying to Compete..MAybe 10,000 is Reasonable because its a Cinema EOS Line...But This Footage Looks Like Blackmagic honestly...not Impressed..

April 13, 2015 at 4:10PM

8
Reply
avatar
CABLE (X-FORCE)
DP/EDITOR/DIR
271

The footage looks nothing like blackmagic - you wish. I have worked on a C300 mk1 for over a year and even the pocket cam from blackmagic blows it. The new C300 uses the same 4k sensor and the only thing they've upgraded is the recorder. Even that still can't do raw internally which again, as much as I don't like comparing again, all blackmagic cameras can, the pocket too. The C300 mk2 has the same 11-12 stop DR sensor and in this film it shows. Clearly sir, you haven't worked with a blackmagic. I can't wait to get the URSA MINI 4.6K and I was prepared to pay double that. finally a run and gun that can do it all.

April 14, 2015 at 9:28AM

0
Reply
avatar
Marko Hila
Cameraman/DOP
234

Clearly you haven't worked with black magic cameras. We had two blow up their internal batteries on set. Infinite bugs with the firmware. Data loss from memory cards errors that should not exist on any professional camera. The data rate is too high for most practical applications. Most of their features are behind the times. Native ISO is what like 400? And their dynamic range tests closer to 10 on the charts. RAW is fun and all but its not worth the hassle with the black magic cams. I would rather use a RED one again and I HATE that camera.

That being said the Mini looks promising, but with the cost of media, batteries, support, EVF, ect it will still put you in the same price range of other (potentially better) cameras.

Put your money into some nice glass instead, at least that won't be obsoleted in a years time and when you shoot get an Alexa.

April 14, 2015 at 11:47AM

0
Reply

Wow this is miserable. HUGE let down yet again from Canon.

April 13, 2015 at 4:12PM

0
Reply
avatar
Caleb Rasak
Camera Operator / AC
402

That was a great short, I loved it!! As for the camera.... ehh I wasn't impressed. The image wasn't very sharp and for being a 4k camera the image should have been much much better. To me it doesn't look any different than the original C300. I also thought the colors were very non-cinematic. If this is what we have to look forward to in the new $16,000 Mark II, I will be taking a pass. I know I can get better images out of the Sony FS7 than what we saw here. Great short though with good acting and a twisty story.

April 13, 2015 at 4:19PM

0
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
822

I can only hope your kidding about the short. I'd say it's yet another example of how great gear doesn't make great content lol. Sooo bad. As for the look, it's a good example of what people mean when they say "looks like video."

April 13, 2015 at 6:12PM

0
Reply
avatar
Stephen Herron
Writer/Director
1334

100% agree with you, Stephen. It DOES look like video. Personally people can have all the 4K they want and I will trade I for an extra stop or two of DR

April 13, 2015 at 7:29PM

0
Reply

Wow the acting and the script really distract from the image : P

I'm a little disappointed but perhaps in more capable hands it may look better. I was more impressed with new URSA sensor than this but time will tell.

April 13, 2015 at 4:27PM

0
Reply
avatar
Brad Jones
Director/Producer/Writer/Editor
469

No kidding on the acting and script. Jeez...

April 13, 2015 at 5:33PM

0
Reply

There is nothing special .. oversaturated colors .. obvious weakness in the high-lights ..Sharpness is not as it should .. It's a good overall .. But i will not spend 16k For this camera

April 13, 2015 at 4:32PM

6
Reply
Arthur
202

Looks like video, as expected. Anything from Blackmagic blows this image away, with it's beautiful filmic, dreamy, cinematic image. I love the Sony cameras, but the image also screams "video" IMO.

April 13, 2015 at 4:55PM

0
Reply

I don't know what you guys are moaning about, but this camera seems to perform leaps and bounds over the C300 image. Sure the color isn't bleeding and saturated, which shows that the depth of color this camera has is much deeper than expected. The skin tones are good. The highlight roll off is phenomenal. Maybe the scene isn't lit to some people's taste, but that doesn't take away the fact that if you watch this a few times and focus on areas like the window to the outside during the game, the desert scene, and the shot of the waitress at the end, you'll see that the camera is quite nice. Sure this won't shoot the next 200 million dollar film, but I can see this doing quite well on TV. The DP shot House M.D., and that was one of the best shot shows of its time. He was also the one to shoot a whole episode on the 5D Mark II. I don't know how many of you make a living off of shooting professionally, but a camera like this will be used by many a production company for commercials, corporates, etc. I'm not on the Canon band wagon anymore, and went to Sony myself, but this camera looks quite nice. It's only a tool to tell the story you need, so, it'll find its place.

April 13, 2015 at 4:56PM

7
Reply
avatar
Mason Hunsicker
DP, Writer, Director
139

If they're not complaining, people run out of things to talk about.

April 14, 2015 at 10:02AM

10
Reply
avatar
Taylor Russ
Director of Photography
654

Not feeling the grading and the way most everything is in focus makes it feel a bit low-budget / pocket cinema-ish.

Looking forward to the next one, or maybe I just get to not feel bad about finding a way to lease this thing.

April 13, 2015 at 4:59PM

2
Reply
avatar
geoff webb
Director, Producer, DOP, Editor
147

I Know Cameras Are Tools Just Like Pencil is To Paper...but I'm Not Paying 17,000 Unless I'm Getting My Worth. Canon Wants 17,000 Coins When The FS7..BMD..Kinefinity and Panasonic..Samsung Out Perform This Camera..ITs a Wrap Canon...Stick To Photos and Printers..Unlesss U Drop Your Prices..

April 13, 2015 at 5:46PM

0
Reply
avatar
CABLE (X-FORCE)
DP/EDITOR/DIR
271

Performance means different things to different people. I understand exactly where you are coming from. When the cameras you mentioned can be had for less, and all shoot 4K or higher, remember that quality of performance is important.

I was on a shoot for a big energy company. We were making a corporate video, but hired a DP, grip truck, gaffer, all the things necessary to create a solid video that would be taken seriously to the higher ups. It was shot on a Canon 1DC. Now, you may think that the camera performs as necessary, but it lacked some things and abilities that cameras need on set. A solid build with the right inputs and outputs is key to have when you have a sound mixer on set having trouble with the camera accepting his wireless receiver. The lack of a monitor, eye-piece for the DP, and the codec that it had.

Now, when you say Samsung, I assume the NX1, and Panasonic, I assume the GH4, two cameras that shoot 4K, but really lack audio inputs, which the 1DC lacked. These cameras shoot nice, but the workflow pipeline isn't really as professional as it needs to be.

Moving on to the FS7, BMD, and the Kinefinity, they have their ups and downs. The early BMDs were the same as using DSLRs, a pain on set. The FS7 is actually a great camera, and you have a good argument that Canon shouldn't have to boost it's price so high. Those two might be good in competition. The Kinefinity on the other hand isn't as tried and true. It may have everything necessary, the inputs, the sensor, the build, but it lacks global support. Having a camera break down on set is always a fear, and if the Kinefinity died on set, who are you going to call? That is a big issue.

I feel that the Canon serves a purpose for video professionals in many different areas of the industry, and not just for indie filmmakers, or hobbyists. It has a well thought out design when it comes to being handled by professionals, and supports many of the gear that professionals use. Down the road, images will slip out from this camera by many different people, and when they do, I won't be surprised to find that Canon knocked it out of the park when it comes to imaging. I think it will give Sony and Arri a run for its money in the television market after seeing this short. As far as the cameras you mentioned out performing this camera, I highly doubt it. The only thing Canon screws up on is price, but everyone I know who used the C300 loved it, and many advertisement companies requested it.

April 13, 2015 at 6:09PM

0
Reply
avatar
Mason Hunsicker
DP, Writer, Director
139

The story and overall vibe of the short is terrible, but where not critiquing the production team - we're looking at the image and usability of a camera.

If you can't see from a number of these shots that this camera will making shooting an easier process, then you're not really paying attention to the right bits.

- 15 stops of DR is wonderful when you don't have a whole lot of light control.
- Low noise hold in the shadows is unimaginably helpful when shooting - (again, when you don't have a whole lot of light control)
- If you have shot with the C300, you understand it's a tried a true piece of equipment for a massive amount of DP's and Operators - Hence the enormous success of the camera and the fact it's rarely on the shelf at a hire company.
- You also understand the build quality is great, it can take a beating and keep rolling.
- The data is almost always safe, unless the camera is incinerated haha - This cannot be said for a lot of cameras i.e BMD
- Dual recording modes is awesome for a clean post workflow and on set media redundancy

So many wins!

I would happily pay an extra few Pesos for reliability, customer/product support, redundancy and of course many stops of ND's, awesome low light capability and enormous DR!

April 13, 2015 at 8:35PM

0
Reply
avatar
Lloyd Will
Film maker
168

The grading is not optimal on this - down right awful for the flashbacks - and while the constant use of a sunny window for a backdrop does show of the latitude, it's not a very good creative decision. Makes for needlessly busy compositions. Overall the cinematography is competent, not much more. As for the camera characteristics - there is nothing to fault here, and those that do find fault with it are confusing creative decisions with technical merit. That said, I would like to see a higher resolution version, and have a feeling those desert landscapes are really going to sing when we do.

That very first shot with the sun in the frame has really smooth highlight roll-off, and throughout the many (clearly intentionally) blown highlights go from clip to color in a much more pleasing way than the old C300. And even with the somewhat aggressive grade you can see the consistency in the skin tones; you've got old, wrinkly guys, facial wounds, blotchy skin and a smooth young woman, in all sorts of light, but no weird separation of certain reds or yellows as often happens with RED (MX) and Sony (particularly when the grade is aggressive).

In the end, most new cameras are more than technically competent, making the final evaluation very subjective. For me, this showcase makes me optimistic, despite some dodgy creative choices. I'd really like to see more.

April 13, 2015 at 6:03PM

6
Reply

Agreed.

April 13, 2015 at 6:11PM

4
Reply
avatar
Mason Hunsicker
DP, Writer, Director
139

Good point. It's quite difficult to see what the camera is capable of when the grade is so rough. I'd love to see what Canon Log 2 looks and grades like in the hands of a skilled colorist.

April 13, 2015 at 7:31PM

0
Reply

Well said Einar!
All the people are complaining about the quality but this is a Vimeo video so... Why?
The camera seems very good and has very nice dark capabilities. Just don't like the price, but everything else for me is a Win.

April 14, 2015 at 4:56AM

4
Reply

Kinda funny how people are blasting the look of this when it's obviously been colour corrected. Can't really break down a camera's true image value without getting hands on with the raw footage.

And let's be TRULY serious. Any one of the cinema cameras on the market can make GREAT looking films. The differences are practically microscopic, especially if you're outputting to external media and bypassing internal compression. It's really kind of ridiculous to argue over which camera looks better when the only way you can tell is by placing frames over top each other and toggling off and on. This camera was going to produce beautiful imagery because of course it is - it's 2015, every cinema camera should and does!

The issue with this thing is the insane overprice. It is nowhere near worth double the cost of the Fs7. And that BM Ursa Mini just proves the point even more. Now the BMUM, Fs7 and CION are all fully viable options well worth the money over the C300ii. It's ridiculous how high Canon's got their heads in the clouds. Slash the price on this thing and make it competitive and you've got a real kick-ass camera on your hands. Until then, Canon can watch their install base continue to drop I guess. Maybe they'll finally learn.

April 13, 2015 at 6:50PM, Edited April 13, 6:50PM

0
Reply
Jeremy Abbott
Video Producer/Independent Filmmaker
234

The colors were definitely not impressive...hopefully that was more so the colorist, because Canon is supposed to be known for its color - which is also the only reason some folks didn't cross over to the A7s ( though i find the A7s color to be great once you understand the camera). Anyone else notice how messed up the reds looked? The blood on the son's head looks damn near violet as he is coming out of the building towards the end. hmmmmmmm

April 13, 2015 at 7:07PM

0
Reply
avatar
Jeremy Dulac
Director/Cinematographer/Editor
147

It's pretty obvious the DP and Colorist did not have a lot of time to do tests with Canon Log 2 footage. The color timing is all over the place...which I believe is what people are reacting to the most...it does look like a student film due to inconsistency - and the exterior shots look boring...there are a few pretty shots but most are..meh. But this was the case with Laforet's Mobius...I'm betting the next demo video looks much better. Jonathan Yi's second demo for the Mark I which came out after Laforet's demo was a sigh of relief. Crossing my fingers that someone at Canon gives it to Yi, or someone like Yi, who is more in alignment with their target audience (independent producers and shooters). Having said that - the price is just too high given today's options. I own a rental shop so I'll buy a couple - but right now I don't see myself standing by it for clients the way I do for the Mark I version.

April 13, 2015 at 8:31PM, Edited April 13, 8:31PM

0
Reply

Saw the film in Canon's theatre at NAB today. A couple of things. I felt the grade and the lighting were a little (maybe a lot) over baked, certainly for something that is essentially a camera demo. Not at all indicative of what we saw from the camera in the demo booth. Regarding the dp not having time to test, that's not true, they did extensive tests with the camera prior to shooting. I think perhaps though that there wasn't time to do a nuanced grade. That on top of the script and the acting made this film a disappointment.

As for the camera, I went back to the booth 3 times during the day and got a good look at a lot of gamma's and looks from the camera. Color rendering seems quite improved, and frankly a new outlook. Skintones have a decidedly "alexa" look and the highlight range on this camera is a thing to marvel at. It was really hard to get the skin tones to clip even when we'd overexposed the shot by 3-4 stops. At a "normal" exposure I panned up to the lights on the "jungle" set, and there was full detail in the lens and housing of the light. The only thing we saw that raised an eyebrow was some nasty pattern noise in the deepest blacks in the image....visible at virtually all iso's. This "could" have been the monitor, and the canon guy didn't have an answer for what was causing it other than..."this isn't the final camera". Realistically this would be crushed in the grade most likely, but I really doubt canon would release this camera with a problem as glaring as that....and...for what it's worth, we didn't see any unusual noise in the "Trick Shot" film on the big screen.

April 13, 2015 at 9:20PM

0
Reply

Way too expensive :( It's crushingly high for the little guys. Like you said, competition is setting the bar and Canon is refusing to bow to it. I hope it hurts them and their pride finally gives in to realism. At $12,000 this would be an amazing camera...sigh.

April 17, 2015 at 2:41AM

0
Reply
Jeremy Abbott
Video Producer/Independent Filmmaker
234

The original C300 was used to shoot the award-winning Blue is the Warmest Colour, definitely no issue with this camera's ability to output a cinematic image. The only issue you can really fault it for is the price, which will come down if it under-performs.

April 13, 2015 at 8:35PM

0
Reply
avatar
David Doel
Director, Camera Operator, Editor
177

Oh the Canon look... :')

April 13, 2015 at 9:52PM

7
Reply
avatar
Terma Louis
Photographer / Cinematographer / Editor
1171

The way the camera/lenses handle red is quite atrocious as seen in the opening desert scenes and most of the scenes with the red car, and that's after color grading. I'm surprised the featured item/object of the video is red which appears to be the weakest part of the video and more so that they allowed that to go out.

April 13, 2015 at 11:06PM

0
Reply

I would LOVE to own this camera... But the problem is that it is double the money from the FS7 and even more from the URSA Mini.

I'd rather spend that extra money on some really nice lights (and a mattebox for the URSA Mini).

April 14, 2015 at 3:37AM

1
Reply
avatar
Viktor Ragnemar
Director/Cinematographer
1136

Lets be totally honest here, the new c300 mark 2 looks OK, its not amazing in any way. I have owned a c300 for two years and I like for Documentary / TV work but for commercial, cinema & fashion work it just comes up FLAT to me. I was considering the c300 mark 2 as a potential upgrade but after seeing this there is NO way I would buy this camera. For nearly the same price I could get TWO new BM Ursa's & ONE BM Ursa mini for the same price!!!! Sorry Canon but BlackMagic just slaughtered your hopes of holding it down. On the flip side Im going to upgrade my Dragon to a Weapon and call it a day - end of story.

Also - message to CANON....Next time you release a new camera DONT SLASH PRICE of the old one a week before NAB. You TOTALLY KILLED the resale value of the C300 TO HALF which really seemed like a BIG F#CK YOU to all of your existing owners.

April 14, 2015 at 4:26AM

0
Reply
Matt Bass
FILMMAKER
81

Yup. My thoughts exactly. Red did it too, both with the Red One Battle Tested, and the Epic/Scarlet. It may give them short term advantages (staying competitive, losing old inventory), but the long term effects have been ignored (losing the good will of your customers, giving the impression that your product was way over priced, because otherwise, how could you have cut the price so much?) Ultimately, these strategies lose customers because you know that your high priced camera will not have much resale value.

April 14, 2015 at 1:54PM

0
Reply
avatar
Daniel Mimura
DP, cam op, steadicam op
2254

The image smells very much of the RED-MX sensor.

April 14, 2015 at 4:45AM

1
Reply
avatar
Patricijus Petrukonis
Cinematographer
95

Honestly, I don't see the large benefits of going 4K. It 'could be' the future, okay. But right now, it doesn't seem the right gear for as well broadcasting as for indie-filmmakers, seen by the obsceen workflow is has (HUGE amounts of data, but whyyyyy?). Sorry for being sceptic.

Purely based on the image-quality; The short has something in common with blockbuster films, seems to be graded with some Magic Bullet-kinda software (graded too epic perhaps). Indeed the sharpness looks off, but could be the lens chose. I think the details in low-light environment look good, especially in the "boss's office", the tiles look pretty good. But after all, seems overpriced though. Seen better quality for less money.

April 14, 2015 at 4:51AM

0
Reply
avatar
Michiel Eskens
Director & Editor
276

OYG, the acting from the son and dad is so fucking bad I forgot what camera this was shot on.

April 14, 2015 at 4:51AM, Edited April 14, 4:51AM

1
Reply
avatar
Lesly Leon Lee
Director of Photography
95

Haha, I thought the exact same thing. Especially the boy. The girl with the phone seems to be the best actor, with great punchlines.... not...

April 14, 2015 at 4:54AM

0
Reply
avatar
Michiel Eskens
Director & Editor
276

Amazing camera with 4K and 15 stops of DR...

First shot has blown-out highlights and the video is 720p...

April 14, 2015 at 9:38AM

0
Reply

The Canon C300 MKII's new tag line... "Overpriced and Underwhelming".

April 14, 2015 at 11:32AM

0
Reply
avatar
Devin Bousquet
Director-DP-Editor
89

Exhibit #91,668: All the sweet-ass tech in the world can't make up for terrible writing and acting.

April 14, 2015 at 12:32PM

0
Reply

A lot of hate over the $16k price point. I don't see what people are so up in arms about. Wasn't the C300 the same price when it first came out. Other than pricing, it seems like Canon has listened to every single criticism out there and make the appropriate changes to the MKII. Yes, there are other cameras with similar features and functionality that are priced lower, but people forget that those lower-priced cameras usually come out of the box with a ton of problems that need to be fixed later by firmware upgrades etc. Even the FS7, which is undeniably the main competitor to the C300 MKII, has a lot of issues for a camera that was supposed to "get out of the way" -- it's built as a single-op ENG rig but the weighting is all off, so you'll likely need rigging anyway, the viewfinder is awkward, the arm, while helpful in some ways, is often a nuisance in other ways, plus that electronic iris dial on the grip was awful when I worked with the FS7 (not sure if they fixed that yet). I know these can all be lumped under nitpicking, especially since it's a sub $10K. But when it comes to Canon, you know that you can take it out of the box on the first day and be ready to shoot, with little to no work-arounds needed. To have that level of confidence in the quality of your rig is worth spending something extra, in my opinion. Yeah, $16k is a bit much for what it is, but the same complaint was made about the C300, and that thing became a friggin' workhorse, the go-to for a lot of productions, so it obviously did a lot right, in spite of the price point.

April 14, 2015 at 1:52PM

0
Reply

Few physical improvements to the design of this Mark II. That top handle is the worst! It's so tall, especially given the camera's super short length. At least they redesigned the knob that screws it onto the camera...on the old one you would have to re-tighten that thing down every few minutes. The play in it was so bad, it drove me crazy...no matter how hard you tighten it, it would come loose...partly because the thing is so damned tall there is too much leverage in it. And that flip out monitor mounted on top of that is awkward. It's spreads out the mass in a way that makes it more unwieldy that a relatively light camera should be. It's my least favorite popular workhorse camera to balance on steadicam. (Alexa, as you would expect, is the best.). And the hand strap...it's just a little too heavy a camera for that, excluding grabbing a quick insert or something...anyone who has ever used a Canon Scoopic 16mm camera knows what I'm talking about. Also, they still haven't given any thought to the buttons...it's so hard to find the various buttons by feel. On most night shoots, or live show in a theater where you're basically in the dark, that tactile quality is important. I hate touch screens, but at least you can see what you're doing on an Epic/Scarlet/Weapon. The Red One was great, all the buttons work by feel except the power and record buttons felt the same (which is probably partly why they redesigned it into one button) the new ones don't have that really solid click feel, which was really nice. Again, when it comes to tactile feel and the usability of buttons, Alexa is king again. Canon ergonomics are the worst.

April 14, 2015 at 2:24PM

0
Reply
avatar
Daniel Mimura
DP, cam op, steadicam op
2254

I must say I enjoyed the short..... now guys the short was not about the acting or story telling, this was about showing off the camera, and they did a great job..... The lighting was great in the inside shots, colors on the outside was a close most get to a real color..... I can't afford this camera but I'll bet my bottom dollar TV stations and TV movie production folks are going to buy this like crazy....... Canon has made the next big thing......... don't forget the build quality and button placement also......

April 14, 2015 at 7:19PM

0
Reply
avatar
Alvin Nyemah
Director, DP & Editing (Filmmaker)
254

I love that in the behind the scenes everyone talks about the autofocus. Also who buys ef cine primes/zooms? I was a little surprised that their large zooms come in EF. That doesn't seem like a very good investment to me.

April 16, 2015 at 8:55AM, Edited April 16, 8:55AM

1
Reply

Great film! But why...

This is a perfect example of a script so strong nothing can hurt it. None of the weaker elements (some OK acting and music issues, few other things) could bring it down. IN FACT if shot on a c100 - same exact reslult! Same emotional response from audience - same movie. Extra lines of resolution I would suggest would have no aesthetic impact on the final product.

The honors here go to the writer R. Scott Shields not Canon.

That said I can imagine a wild life film where the extra lines may have an aesthetic impact. All depends on the integration of the parts and their effect or lack there of, on each other.

I hope I make a film this good one day. Great Job all around.

June 9, 2015 at 5:39PM

0
Reply
avatar
sheldon norton
Indie Filmmaker \ In-house Producer at Rogers Comm
83

I actually liked the story and totally forgot about the look of the film. Good stuff Canon. Doesnt matter what it looks like if you don't have a decent story. Keep shooting guys!

July 20, 2015 at 1:24PM

6
Reply
avatar
Joe Gonzalez
Filmmaker/Editor/Photographer
133