# Canon Cinema EOS C300 Mark II First Impressions



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 1, 2015)

```
LensRentals.com has published their first impressions with the brand new Canon Cinema EOS C300 Mark II.</p>
<p>Ryan Hill says:</p>
<blockquote><p>Surprisingly, the thing that impressed me most in my time with the Canon C300 Mark II had nothing to do with resolution, bit rate, or dynamic range. Digital video technology has improved so much in just the last few years that those specs, while enormously important, aren’t enough on their own to make me choose one camera over the other. There are simply so many great digital cinema cameras on the market right now that it takes a wholly original feature to make a camera stand out. In the case of the <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/video/cameras/canon/canon-eos-c300-mark-ii-dual-pixel-ef" target="_blank">Canon C300 Mark II</a>, that feature is autofocus. Sure, if possible, you’re always going to be better off with a dedicated focus puller. That’s not always an option, though, especially for solo operators like me who value mobility and speed over precision. On the documentary side of things, you can’t reset and try again if your focus is off, and that means having reliable continuous autofocus is invaluable.</p></blockquote>
<p>Below is some test footage that is graded and ungraded. You can read the rest of the article over at <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/canon-c300-mark-ii-first-impressions" target="_blank">LensRentals.com/Blog</a></p>
<p><iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/140935195" width="728" height="390" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/140935059" width="728" height="390" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Preorder: </strong><strong><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134579-REG/canon_0635c002_eos_c300_mark_ii.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">Canon EOS C300 Mark II EF</a>| <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134580-REG/canon_0635c009_c300_markii_cinema_eos.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">Canon EOS C300 Mark II PL</a> Rent: <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/video/cameras/canon/canon-eos-c300-mark-ii-dual-pixel-ef" target="_blank">LensRentals.com</a></strong></p>
```


----------



## Etienne (Oct 1, 2015)

"it takes a wholly original feature to make a camera stand out ... that feature is autofocus. Sure, if possible, you’re always going to be better off with a dedicated focus puller."

How many times have the armchair experts claimed that "no professional videographer will ever use autofocus" ? I'm sure they will be back again. 

I can't wait until they get the full sensor DPAF onto the C100 mk III. This feature would be invaluable for when I am doing an interview with no cameraman. It is extraordinarily difficult to watch focus and pay attention to the interview at the same time.


----------



## DanThePhotoMan (Oct 1, 2015)

Yeah, from the tests I've watched, the autofocus is seriously impressive. The footage looked great too considering all the compression in the Vimeo upload. I seriously hope he missed focus on the slow motion shot though. It looked absolutely atrocious.


----------



## leGreve (Oct 2, 2015)

DanThePhotoMan said:


> Yeah, from the tests I've watched, the autofocus is seriously impressive. The footage looked great too considering all the compression in the Vimeo upload. I seriously hope he missed focus on the slow motion shot though. It looked absolutely atrocious.



That's just the thing... he didn't... it is THAT soft, which more or less makes slow mo in the C300 II useless.

Another camera from Canon to rent in when needed, for all round work it's not good enough to be owned (depending on your type of work, but for my type, I would get more use out of a Sony than the C300 for a smaller price point)


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 2, 2015)

Is it just me, or does the majority of the test footage look soft?


----------



## Tiderace (Oct 2, 2015)

Lens Rental is a great group with very few axes to grind. So LR have you seen the controversy here regarding the low dynamic range alleged in this camera and the high noise in the shadows? Can you shed some light on this issue, PUN intended? 

Fifteen thousand dollars is allot of money and Cannon's reputation is on the line here stating 15 stops of dynamic range and if is is three or more less this is a serious reputation breaker. 

This camera is touted by them as a major improvement in image quality along with autofocus in a very integrated and useful small package that can be used for many different production environments. 

But if they are massively overstating its ability I for one would be seriously disturbed by Canon's lack of honesty. I am hoping that this is not so.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Oct 2, 2015)

So the footage looks like every other camera priced $1000-$15,000. The only thing noticeable was the lack of motion artifacts on the quick pans.


----------



## Etienne (Oct 2, 2015)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> So the footage looks like every other camera priced $1000-$15,000. The only thing noticeable was the lack of motion artifacts on the quick pans.



The test footage is not graded. Video straight from every pro camera shot for high DR looks like crap until it's graded


----------



## CanonGuy (Oct 2, 2015)

This footage looks like worse than what my 5d3 can produce!!! WOW! 15k?! I know it's still too early to make any concluding remark... but still!


----------



## bgoyette (Oct 2, 2015)

leGreve said:


> DanThePhotoMan said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, from the tests I've watched, the autofocus is seriously impressive. The footage looked great too considering all the compression in the Vimeo upload. I seriously hope he missed focus on the slow motion shot though. It looked absolutely atrocious.
> ...



this 120 fps feature is still a mystery. Look at philip blooms piece and it doesn't look particularly soft, and check out film riot's test and it looks phenomenal. The little clip in Trick Shot looks fine. Then there is this one, and a few others, that look seriously OOF or plain soft. I don't know what's going on...but it's not always crazy soft like this video.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Oct 2, 2015)

Etienne said:


> HurtinMinorKey said:
> 
> 
> > So the footage looks like every other camera priced $1000-$15,000. The only thing noticeable was the lack of motion artifacts on the quick pans.
> ...



They provide both graded and ungraded footage. It's also weird that they choose to use shots that were mostly low contrast (not taking advantage of the DR). 

But my point is that you can't really tell much of a difference in the image.  There are other features that matter, features that help sell this camera. But the gap between the high end and the porosumer in video IQ has all but disappeared in the past five years.


----------



## andrewflo (Oct 3, 2015)

leGreve said:


> DanThePhotoMan said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, from the tests I've watched, the autofocus is seriously impressive. The footage looked great too considering all the compression in the Vimeo upload. I seriously hope he missed focus on the slow motion shot though. It looked absolutely atrocious.
> ...



Agreed that the slowmo clip looked unbelievable soft... also hoping it was a fluke :|


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Oct 3, 2015)

andrewflo said:


> leGreve said:
> 
> 
> > DanThePhotoMan said:
> ...



Only the slow-motion footage? The whole thing looks soft to me. Maybe it's 'net compression.


----------

