April 15, 2015
NAB 2015

Get to Know Canon's New 4K Powerhouse, the C300 Mark II

The newly-announced Canon C300 Mark II is on display at NAB 2015, and we ask Jesse Mineo at Canon about the new features.  Specs and pricing info are below.

Canon C300 Mark II
  • 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
Canon C300 Mark II with LCD
  • 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 
  • 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

In case you missed it, Canon also showcased a short film shot on the C300 Mark II earlier in the week. Check it out here. The camera is available for pre-order from B&H if you feel so inclined. Lastly, be sure to check out our comprehensive post with up to date information about all NAB 2015 announcements.


No Film School's complete coverage of NAB 2015 is brought to you by Color Grading Central, Shutterstock, Blackmagic Design, and Bigstock.

No Film School's coverage of NAB is brought to you by Color Grading Central, Shutterstock, Blackmagic Design, and Bigstock

Your Comment

67 Comments

Put all that inside my electric toothbrush and I will forgive you Canon.

I still feel betrayed. I also believe the 5D M4 will have a C on it's name, it is a way to say ML don't touch it. >:( You ghouls.

April 15, 2015 at 11:34PM, Edited April 15, 11:34PM

6
Reply
avatar
Edgar More
All
1185

Hahhahah.... electric toothbrush!

April 16, 2015 at 12:58PM

10
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
1127

It's gonna be a workhorse no doubt but still a shame cameras (the $16000 ones) still need an external recorder for Raw and anything over 10bit.

April 15, 2015 at 11:34PM

5
Reply
avatar
Anthony F. Marino III
produce shoot edit
333

The C300mkII is recording 12 bit internally.

April 16, 2015 at 12:33AM

6
Reply
avatar
Alan Dembek
Camera Assistant
245

In 2k mode only, but still that is a nice feature.

I don't understand why everyone is complaining about RAW this RAW that. TBH Raw is a bit of a hassle in most cases and adds extra time both on set and in post. The Alexa does 10bit 4:2:2 and you don't see people complaining about that. In fact a lot of people record to prores 4:2:2 (myself included) for fast turn around jobs. RAW is more of an insurance policy for nervous producers than it is a tool for DP's. I would say 80% of the jobs I do are shot in a compressed codec. That other 20% are shot in ARRIRAW or on the RED Dragon.

This little camera seems like it will be a solid workhorse for a lot of small productions. The c300 was a good camera. There is no reason why this one won't be just as good. Get the camera that can fill in that 80% marker if you really feel the need to invest in one.

April 16, 2015 at 9:13AM

23
Reply

I agree. It's going to continue its legacy, I love the new AF etc though I am a little surprised to see we need an external recorder. Maybe with $25,000 canon we won't

April 16, 2015 at 8:58PM

3
Reply
avatar
Anthony F. Marino III
produce shoot edit
333

That AF presentation at 5:28 -- the most intelligent solution for AF I've seen so far. In general listening to the presenter I formed an opinion that those who buy this camera will get their moneys worth.

April 16, 2015 at 1:01AM

8
Reply
avatar
Alex Zakrividoroga
Director
4039

Unless you want the 60 FPS that everyone else seems to offer. :/

April 16, 2015 at 7:41AM

0
Reply

Not to knock that AF feature, though, that was incredible....

April 16, 2015 at 6:16PM

0
Reply

That definitely blew my mind.

April 16, 2015 at 8:44AM, Edited April 16, 8:44AM

5
Reply

I'm so impressed by this. Does anyone know if the C100ii has the same feature?

April 16, 2015 at 1:09PM

0
Reply

This camera sounds pretty nice, but the price... well. If I had the money I would probably buy the 15stop Blackmagic URSA Mini 4.6K ($4995) or the "only" 12stop Blackmagic URSA Mini 4K ($2995). Thats about 1/3rd or 1/5th of the price.

Also, the price drop they made on the C300 mkI makes me a bit afraid of knowing I will just throw away $8000.

April 16, 2015 at 1:56AM

0
Reply
Joakim
326

I totally agree. I think canon has a much bigger name, and more people to pay. BlackMagic just seems to have great cameras at a fraction of the cost. I shoot mainly on my bmpcc now, and in raw with good glass, it's incredible.

April 16, 2015 at 1:59AM

0
Reply
avatar
Caleb Price
Director
446

If you are a videographer for hire I think ''Canon'' sounds more professional to me as a client. ''Blackmagic''? Weird name. So I think the perception (to clients) of professionalism that the Canon name brings will justify the higher price. More clients more money. Plus I read somewhere that they have service centers around the world? For people who work as videographer this is a big plus. Sony is also good and cheaper but I read that people don't like the color of it vs the ''Canon color''. So what I'm saying is that for hobbyist like myself, I only care about price vs specs (quality). While people who use the camera as a workhorse, they care about what clients think and want vs what they think is best. Canon fits that balance. Red and Arri are more rental cameras I think. I own a gh4 btw.

April 16, 2015 at 4:19AM

0
Reply
luc bees
154

BM cameras have too many problems to be considered a serious professional tool. They are great for hobbyists or film students wanting to break into the market with some pro features at a pretty cheap price.

The fact of the matter is that Canon and Sony cameras will be rented more for almost every application. They are more versatile in the shooting conditions that they can tackle and are way more reliable. That is why they are the better investment for your business.

April 16, 2015 at 9:30AM, Edited April 16, 9:30AM

1
Reply

I've never once had a client ask me what model my camera is. Using a Canon hasn't earned me any more jobs than if I was using something else. Canon just overcharges for the brand name. This camera is just too damn expensive for what it offers and perhaps more importantly, what it still doesn't offer that the competition does.

April 18, 2015 at 11:44PM

0
Reply
Jeremy Abbott
Video Producer/Independent Filmmaker
365

It's not that I disagree with you, I totally agree with you on paper, just not in the real world. While the URSA mini does everything that the C300 does (pretty much) at a much lower price point, it's also geared at different market; while I see the c300 being used in run n gun doc style shooting and in studio work, I only see the URSA minor used as an in studio camera. I think the big price jump has to do with ergonomics and ease of use. I don't really think you could use the URSA mini out of the box while the c300....

April 17, 2015 at 12:50AM

0
Reply
avatar
Facundo Rodrigo Campos
Wearer of Multiple Hats
314

I might be wrong, but... canon will have a camera twice the price, not available until months away for nearly exactly the same thing Sony is doing long time now with the fs7????? and I repeat.... HALF the price

April 16, 2015 at 2:23AM

0
Reply

have people seen the blackmagic ursa footage yet? Looks pretty great.
Scroll down half the page.
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicursa

April 16, 2015 at 2:58AM, Edited April 16, 2:58AM

0
Reply
avatar
Vincent Gortho
none
950

It looks okay

April 16, 2015 at 9:31AM

0
Reply

It honestly looks better than Alexa, pending low-light footage, I don't know what you're looking at. It really is amazing.

April 16, 2015 at 4:32PM

0
Reply

If that is what you think that's fine by me. I will still shoot on the Alexa because it is without a doubt a better camera.

The day Roger Deakins starts shooting on a BM Ursa then I will eat my words, till then dream on.

April 16, 2015 at 6:28PM

0
Reply

Ursa just isn't the same type of camera this one is. Its not reliable, terrible in low light and heavy as ****.

April 16, 2015 at 1:03PM

3
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
1127

If you use Canon EF glass for any type of handheld or shoulder mounted work, the C300 will work much better than the URSA mini its being compared to in some of these comments. Blackmagic doesn't tell us in the specs, but it's been confirmed that the Ursa side handle can only control the iris with a single auto button. There is no manual iris control of EF glass from the side handle. In comparison, the Canon C100/C300 can control EF glass iris manual with an easy control wheel. This is a huge difference if actually getting the shot is worth anything to you. I love the image from Blackmagic cameras, but they still aren't giving any consideration to ergonimics even with this new crop of cameras. Canon may cripple their codec options and limit the recording options to the less than the lovely compressed RAW Blackmagic offers, but Canon has put a great deal of thought into making their cameras help you get great stable in focus shots. The combination of internal ND, easy iris control, plus a great Auto focus, and then adding image stabilized EF lenses like the fantastic 70-200, lets you easily grab stable and focused handheld shots that would be impossible to get on any Blackmagic camera.

April 16, 2015 at 4:59AM

0
Reply
Jamie LeJeune
Director of Photography
278

No consideration to ergonomics? The Ursa Mini looks like a cousin to the Sony FS7. With the EVF you can toss it right on your shoulder pretty much out of the box. The C300, while a great camera, has terrible ergonomics. If you hold it for very long by the side handle it tweaks the heck out of your wrist, and if you want to put it up on your shoulder, the only option is to spend thousands of dollars on rigging as if it were a large DSLR. And the more stuff you put on it the more it grows vertically which is a very bizarre shape for a camera to have. It can get unwieldy very fast.

April 16, 2015 at 11:42AM

3
Reply

Looks are deceiving. It is not a cousin to the FS7. If you use Canon EF lenses you cannot just "toss the URSA mini on your shoulder" and shoot because there is absolutely no manual iris control offered by Blackamagic, only an auto iris button. Plus there is no internal ND filter. In comparison, the C300 (or the FS7) side handle gives you full manual control of Canon EF lenses, plus (with Canon) the tracking auto focus, plus image stabilization if you use an image stabilized lenses and then there are internal ND filters. I'm not talking about sheer comfort here, I'm talking about the fact that Canon and Sony are including the tools you need to get a properly exposed, properly focused, and steady shot on the fly. I agree that the color and record codecs Blackmagic offer superior images, but for any type of run and gun shooting they fall short. I wish Blackmagic would stop assuming everyone is going to be using only manual primes and a mattebox for every shoot. For documentary shooting it just doesn't cut it and I find myself having to use the C100/C300 or an FS7 because I can't risk losing a shot. My Blackmagic cams only get pulled out for interviews or scripted scenes when I have time and crew to deal with its limited controls.

April 16, 2015 at 3:15PM

0
Reply
Jamie LeJeune
Director of Photography
278

I shoot weddings with BMPCC's. I also use lenses that are fully manual and non-parfocal. I still manage to "get the shot." For 12 hours straight, in fact. Maybe you do ENG only? The lack of a perfect Canon AF button shouldn't be the limiting factor to a camera purchase otherwise. IMHO.

April 16, 2015 at 6:09PM

1
Reply

I wasn't talking about manual lenses. With manual lenses the URSA mini will work fine. I was pointing out that it will ONLY work well with manual lenses when shooting on the shoulder. Canon EF lenses, with their required electronic control, will only allow auto iris when shooting shoulder mounted. I find it a limitation of the design. Manual glass is wonderful, but the image stabilization in Canon EF lenses that offer it really helps improve image stability and URSA mini shooters won't be able to use those lenses and control their iris when handheld and it's a shame. That's all I'm saying here folks.

April 16, 2015 at 10:21PM

0
Reply
Jamie LeJeune
Director of Photography
278

That's all fine but it's apples and oranges. I already stated that the C300 is a great camera. I very specifically replied to your comment that Blackmagic cameras have poor ergonomics, presumably compared to a C300. Nobody will argue that BMs earlier cameras are ergonomically designed, but the design of the Ursa Mini, with the shoulder pad, EVF, and drop handle, clearly invites comparison to the FS7. I said it "looks like" not "was."

Regardless of the features of a C300, it has a terrible shape. I have access to BMs and C300s and I choose to shoot on a C300 every time because of the features and quality of the image. But I have to rig the crap out of it to make it useful for my needs.

April 17, 2015 at 3:25AM

1
Reply

C300mkII + Odyssey7Q+, 4Kraw60P capture. WANT IT.

April 16, 2015 at 5:25AM

0
Reply

You can want all you want, but I'm afraid 4K at 60 FPS is reserved for the C500. Makes sense. /s

April 16, 2015 at 7:38AM

0
Reply

Wrong. The 7Q will record 60fps at 4K raw from the C300 mkii: http://nofilmschool.com/2015/04/convergent-designs-firmware-updates-powe...

April 16, 2015 at 11:50AM

6
Reply

I'm pretty sure they didn't check their facts. The C300 II only does 4K at 30 FPS and 4K in RAW externally at 30 FPS. I'd like to be wrong but I'm 99% sure on that.

April 16, 2015 at 6:14PM

0
Reply

I'm still trying to figure out if there's a 120 fps 1/2 raw 4k option via the sdi outs like there is for the C500. Theoretically, those dual digic V's make this a more powerful camera than the C500, so it only stands to reason that the option would be there. Plus, I was looking on Odyssey's site and it listed it under options for C500/C300 Mk II. Could be a mistake as I would think they would tout it a little more. If I can get 120 fps from the C300 at 4k, even with a recorder, I'll never buy another camera as long as I live.

April 16, 2015 at 6:36PM

0
Reply
Derek Olson
Directomatographeditor
614

April 16, 2015 at 6:55PM

0
Reply
Derek Olson
Directomatographeditor
614

Sorry to keep posting on this, but here's the sentence where it is subtly implied.

"We currently offer the only device in the world that can record 4K/UHD60p RAW, 4K/UHD60p Apple ProRes, 4K120p "half RAW", 1080p120 Apple ProRes, and 12-bit 4:4:4 RGB up to 60p, all from the Canon C300 mkII."

April 16, 2015 at 6:58PM

0
Reply
Derek Olson
Directomatographeditor
614

They should let Canon know then because they aren't marketing it as being capable of 4K 60P. Look at the specs on B&H, or even the video that this article has embedded.

I agree with everyone, this camera should do 4K at 60P. It also should do it internally. And it also shouldn't require an ergonomically awkward and partly redundant $2,000 device.

April 16, 2015 at 8:56PM

2
Reply

Really guys? Comparing this to the Black Magic Ursa Mini? Wow...

April 16, 2015 at 7:31AM

0
Reply
avatar
James Davis
Freelancer
88

It's a shame about the price, but I guess Canon know people will pay it... I'm already looking at my bank account, tentatively considering ;-)

April 16, 2015 at 7:55AM, Edited April 16, 7:55AM

0
Reply
avatar
Matt Carter
VFX Artist / Director / DP / Writer / Composer / Alexa Owner
575

I'm contemplating as well. Sucks the price is so high tho. I think they'll sell a lot of them at the current price, but if they had just came out the gate with a tag of $9,999 they would have taken back the market and sold a gazillion of these. Even tho I'm excited about this camera I can't help but think that I can buy two FS7's for the exact same price lol.

April 16, 2015 at 1:08PM

0
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
1127

Keep in mind that if they sold a gazillion of them, every dingleberry with a C300 II would be out there in the marketplace offering his services and camera for $200 bucks a day, and then you would be expected to do so as well. Sometimes the separation is a good thing, and you can pay off over the next couple years, then sell it and use that as a chunk toward your next one. Market over saturation is the enemy sometimes.

April 16, 2015 at 6:41PM

0
Reply
Derek Olson
Directomatographeditor
614

Say both cameras were $10K, am I the only one that'd pic the Sony? Better codecs, the ability to use almost any lens(!) - and full frame lenses with an electronic speed booster. There's also 4K and 2K at higher frame rates. And the ability to put it in your shoulder without messing around with buying a bunch more gear. People who say the Canon image is better than the Sony image simply don't know what is possible in a color grade with files at but rates this high.

Rarely is an out of the camera look going to be kept or not messed with in post.

The 24-120mm $2,500 cinema lens that Sony brought out is amazing. How much for Canon's equivalent? $18,000? Do they even have an equivalent lens for this market?

April 16, 2015 at 9:02PM, Edited April 16, 9:02PM

3
Reply

The FS7 is a very nice camera. I use one regularly on smaller shoots. Unless I see something that drastically changes my mind I will still use it over the c300MkII. Slog3Cine is almost identical to Arri Log, it allows me to work with a lot of the looks that I have already created and use on higher budget projects.

I would recommend renting the 28-135 zoom first if you are interested in purchasing. Its a good lens but has a few hangups that annoy me. The internal zoom controller is completely servo controlled so it can be slow to zoom in (no smash zooms). Focus is nice as is the aperture ring. The lens is reasonably sharp when stopped down to 5.6 at 4 it can be a little soft. Its hard to complain for the price though.

April 17, 2015 at 9:20AM

0
Reply

Are the codecs actually better on an FS7? I feel like this is something people have been neglecting to note with the C300 mkII. At equal frame rates and resolution the C300 is shooting approx double the bit rate of the Sony internally. Unless I'm missing something...

April 17, 2015 at 2:49PM

0
Reply

I am sure the codec is similar but given the data rate I would assume that the c300 MKII has a significantly more robust iteration. What this means for practical applications is yet to be seen. I have yet to see any artifacting or other compression related issues with the FS7. So perhaps even cleaner footage?

Honestly I just prefer the Slog3 curve and the ergonomics on the FS7. I will still use the C300mkII given the opportunity!

April 17, 2015 at 6:54PM

0
Reply

Can't understand people who bitch about the price. If you are a serious pro working on a high-end projects, 16k for this camera is really cheap.

April 16, 2015 at 8:11AM, Edited April 16, 8:11AM

8
Reply
avatar
Einar Gabbassoff
D&CD at Frame One Studio
1287

I totally agree! I have lenses that cost as much as this camera.

April 16, 2015 at 9:35AM

0
Reply

Is this camera worth $9,000 more than the original C300?

April 16, 2015 at 1:09PM

10
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
1127

....Yes.

April 16, 2015 at 2:34PM

0
Reply

....No.

April 19, 2015 at 12:00AM

0
Reply
Jeremy Abbott
Video Producer/Independent Filmmaker
365

I can't understand why people come to a site titled NoFilmSchool to make arrogant comments regarding the price of a camera that, for the site's audience, is actually quite high-- especially given its features (or lack of them).

April 16, 2015 at 6:05PM

1
Reply

Um I didn't go to filmschool and I am doing well enough to afford these kinds of cameras no problem. I don't really see how that is arrogant.

April 16, 2015 at 6:35PM

0
Reply

If you are a working professional, you factor it into your business cost and write off the depreciation. If you are a hobbiest filmmaker, just rent one or get a GH4. Shooting on this camera wouldn't help you be a better filmmaker anyways.

April 16, 2015 at 6:44PM

6
Reply
Derek Olson
Directomatographeditor
614

Exactly! The tools at your disposal hardly make you a better artist. If something is outside of your budget then don't use it/buy it.

April 16, 2015 at 6:54PM

0
Reply

Exactly!!!

April 17, 2015 at 5:14AM

0
Reply
avatar
Einar Gabbassoff
D&CD at Frame One Studio
1287

You've missed the point. But whatever. Congrats on your success.

April 16, 2015 at 9:05PM

0
Reply

No, I understood your point. Making broad judgments as to the demographics of who uses this site is a bit presumptuous don't you think? There are plenty of working professionals, such as myself, who come here and view it as a news source. I have frequented this site for many years. There are a lot of people from all walks of life on here, that is why I like it. But choosing to call someone arrogant because they have the means to use whichever equipment that they please is a bit uncalled for. You will likely get there someday if you keep at it. There will always be people with nicer toys.

April 17, 2015 at 9:11AM, Edited April 17, 9:11AM

3
Reply

I think he called him arrogant because he kinda comes across of "I can afford it, not my problem you can't" which I have to agree with the arrogant comment there. This camera is not even close to being high-end enough to justify that price point.

April 18, 2015 at 11:50PM

0
Reply
Jeremy Abbott
Video Producer/Independent Filmmaker
365

Because no, it is not really cheap. How can you actually defend its price point? It offers next to nothing that outdoes the competition. That isn't to say it isn't worth more than the competition, I 90% agree that it is. But this should be a $12K camera.

Comparing it to the Fs7, the most expensive of its competitors..It has an AMAZING autofocus feature set, really great stuff there. It has a very nice screen. I'm in the crowd that prefers the Canon look, so I'll give it that too. 12-bit 2K is pretty great for anyone doing greenscreen/serious VFX work that doesn't need to be handled in 4K, though you're making a trade-off there with the resolution that might ultimately make it a moot point, direct testing would be the only way to tell. But that's pretty much where the advantages end, and those are not nearly enough to justify being double the price.

Disadvantages...no way to use it off the shoulder out of the box. No way to reposition the handle out of the box. No way to shoot highspeed without cropping the sensor (while cropping is a nice option to eliminate bad moire/aliasing, it should still be an OPTION - a >2x crop is pretty huge). Highspeed framerates that pale in comparison.

I fully admit I'm jealous of anyone who can afford this camera, the fact is I couldn't afford an Fs7 either. My C100 isn't being replaced any time soon. But there's just no way this thing is worth $16K when all the competition surrounding it is so, so close and in some ways better. Canon is being stubborn and ignorant as always with this price point. They could've doubled if not tripled their profits and sales if they released it at $12K, it really makes no sense.

April 19, 2015 at 12:00AM

0
Reply
Jeremy Abbott
Video Producer/Independent Filmmaker
365

Just a question: Is nfs aware Weapon has been confirmed to be 8K? Thought I'd find a post on here about it as it was confirmed 4 days ago. But you guys may have posted about it already and I have overlooked it.

April 16, 2015 at 10:13AM, Edited April 16, 10:13AM

16
Reply
Gene Nemetz
live streaming
1785

Yep, Joe was on that announcement like white on rice!

http://nofilmschool.com/2015/04/red-8k-full-frame-vista-vision-weapon-dr...

April 16, 2015 at 11:11AM

0
Reply
avatar
Rob Hardy
Founder of Filmmaker Freedom
4796

Howd I miss it!

April 16, 2015 at 10:15PM

0
Reply
Gene Nemetz
live streaming
1785

Canon sure knows how to get that 90´s video look. Could be good for certain projects.

April 16, 2015 at 2:20PM

3
Reply

You mean like a 90s music video that was shot on film? Or are you suggesting it looks like a standard definition tape camcorder from the 90s?

April 16, 2015 at 6:47PM

0
Reply
Derek Olson
Directomatographeditor
614

Video definitely shot on video my son ;)
What is film?

April 16, 2015 at 11:53PM, Edited April 16, 11:53PM

4
Reply

Its a great camera and Im defiantly putting my order in. but i wasn't happy when they dropped the price in half for Mark I. We as rental business lost lots of money because of that.

April 23, 2015 at 1:46PM

3
Reply
avatar
ontariocamera
CEO & Founder - Ontario Camera Rentals
81

looks like an awesome camera. canon has covered most of the bases - just wait till the price comes down. its already 12k on b&h. the blackmagic has similar specs but there are serious reliability problems with their camera (while we know the canon will be a tank) and after shelling out for the blackmagic viewfinder, battery, battery mount, shoulder kit, etc, you're spending close to the same anyway. you wont have the codec problems of the sony fs5, the overheating and battery problems of the a7s/a7r series. im still sticking to my gh4 and soon gh5 as im invested in the lenses and accessories (internal 422 10-bit will be plenty!!) but maybe down the road when i'm making more money.

January 17, 2017 at 8:30AM

0
Reply
aubrey jackson
director of photography
74