# Possible Canon Cinema EOS C300 Mark III update [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 30, 2020)

> Update: New information in bold.
> I have been told that the next Cinema camera Canon announces is likely called the “Cinema EOS C300 Mark III”.
> *Canon Cinema EOS C300 Mark III information:*
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Architect1776 (Mar 30, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Looks like Canon is stepping things up on all fronts. Very good.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 30, 2020)

I keep hoping without hope that there will be a new C100, but I suppose the upcoming R5 is intended to be the baby cinema camera going forward.
I hope that the R5 has a decent audio solution, including level adjustment while shooting, levels on screen, and hopefully they release a shotgun mic with physical level controls and a digital connection to the R5, like the new Sony mic for the A series.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Mar 30, 2020)

Etienne said:


> I keep hoping without hope that there will be a new C100, but I suppose the upcoming R5 is intended to be the baby cinema camera going forward.
> I hope that the R5 has a decent audio solution, including level adjustment while shooting, levels on screen, and hopefully they release a shotgun mic with physical level controls and a digital connection to the R5, like the new Sony mic for the A series.


I wish for the same too! Im stuck with a c100 mark ii since 2015 and still waiting and waiting for the replacement. If it doesn't come this year then c200 is one way road...


----------



## Arod820 (Mar 30, 2020)

So... false colors and 4k120? That’s it? I hope the C300 mkii’s price drops dramatically.


----------



## robotfist (Mar 30, 2020)

Would really like to see a 444 option in XFAVC mode like the C300 II has. Raw is too much for most clients and transcoding sucks.


----------



## herein2020 (Mar 30, 2020)

Etienne said:


> I keep hoping without hope that there will be a new C100, but I suppose the upcoming R5 is intended to be the baby cinema camera going forward.
> I hope that the R5 has a decent audio solution, including level adjustment while shooting, levels on screen, and hopefully they release a shotgun mic with physical level controls and a digital connection to the R5, like the new Sony mic for the A series.


Personally I think that is a bad (read proprietary) way to go. If they are going to do anything about professional audio for the R5 then it needs to be an XLR module like Panasonic did and like Canon did for the XC-15 so that all of the current XLR mics, adaptors, receivers, etc work with it vs. a proprietary solution that limits you to whatever limited options are available or some 3rd party workaround.

Sony loves proprietary implementations which is just one more reason on a long list of reasons why I will probably never own a Sony camera.


----------



## IWLP (Mar 30, 2020)

Etienne said:


> I keep hoping without hope that there will be a new C100, but I suppose the upcoming R5 is intended to be the baby cinema camera going forward.
> I hope that the R5 has a decent audio solution, including level adjustment while shooting, levels on screen, and hopefully they release a shotgun mic with physical level controls and a digital connection to the R5, like the new Sony mic for the A series.



SoundDevices MixPre 3 is awesome if you need XLR ins. We use them on our EOS Rs, and they are great - hardware limiters, great sounding pres, tons of routing options, and yes, you can run audio back into the camera with a 1/8" stereo cable if you don't want to mess with syncing files later. Works great as a pre or recorder or both. 

I honestly don't know that anything Canon would come up with would convince me to use anything else right now.

$.02


----------



## felipeolveram (Mar 30, 2020)

So does that mean no build in evf like the c500? What about 4k 60fps raw, other codecs? Release date, not much new information on this post...


----------



## mb66energy (Mar 30, 2020)

Etienne said:


> I keep hoping without hope that there will be a new C100, but I suppose the upcoming R5 is intended to be the baby cinema camera going forward.
> I hope that the R5 has a decent audio solution, including level adjustment while shooting, levels on screen, and hopefully they release a shotgun mic with physical level controls and a digital connection to the R5, like the new Sony mic for the A series.



And if Canon doesn't deliver & Mono is fine for you, the Rode videomic NTG is a very fine tool. I wanted to buy some NTG4 or maybe the NTG5 but I was not shure if an XLR solution was the right thing for me (to bulky) and then came the videomic NTG: It has a physical level control (Knob without any (mechanical) steps) , no digital connection to the camera (except the camera has a USB port which accepts such devices) - but it can be used as a USB microphone on a PC too.

I am new in audio but I think I know a little bit about what it has to sound and this is the first microphone where I accept my own voice  Sound is clean, rich and without any artificial "spoken through a tube" artifacts.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 30, 2020)

Ok so Full Frame starts at the C500 level then. With the C300 Mk3 being crop... there's little to no room left for Both a C100 and C200. 

C500 @ $16k
C300 @ $10k (?)
C200 @ $7k
C100 @ $5k

It's getting pretty squashed down under the $10K level. Doesn't seem like there's enough room for 3 of them. Further if the C300Mk3 comes in at $12-13k then why not drop the extra $3-4k and the C500 with FF? We're talking about full time pros here, and a couple thousand one way or another on a camera body at this level is relatively meaningless. Just thinking out loud here trying to decipher where Canon is going with this. Huge price drop on C200? Goes to $5-6k (for the kit) new? If so, the C100 like goes bye-bye.


----------



## herein2020 (Mar 30, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Ok so Full Frame starts at the C500 level then. With the C300 Mk3 being crop... there's little to no room left for Both a C100 and C200.
> 
> C500 @ $16k
> C300 @ $10k (?)
> ...


The big question for me is when does an RF mount show up in their cinema line. I want to get the R6 to replace my GH5 (if the final specs don't disappoint), and I want a cinema camera to go with it but without an RF mount I'll be stuck with two lens systems. Canon has to know that this will be a problem for their Cinema customers going forward.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 30, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> The big question for me is when does an RF mount show up in their cinema line. I want to get the R6 to replace my GH5 (if the final specs don't disappoint), and I want a cinema camera to go with it but without an RF mount I'll be stuck with two lens systems. Canon has to know that this will be a problem for their Cinema customers going forward.



Well as of now the answer is "Buy EF Glass and adapt it to your RF body". I don't see Canon going RF with Cinema bodies unless/until they decide to make RF Cinema Glass.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Mar 31, 2020)

Was really hoping for a full frame sensor but 4K only. But Super35 with 4k raw up to 120fps sounds pretty great as well. If only Canon made a high-end 16-55mm f2 IS or f2.8 IS for the Super35 sensor, then we'd be in business. 

Still hoping this is RF Mount compatible. Easy to make an RF Mount removable and replace it with an EF or PL Mount. Hopefully they do that here. Would love to use those RF zooms with great stabilization on a Cinema EOS body.


----------



## peters (Mar 31, 2020)

IWLP said:


> SoundDevices MixPre 3 is awesome if you need XLR ins. We use them on our EOS Rs, and they are great - hardware limiters, great sounding pres, tons of routing options, and yes, you can run audio back into the camera with a 1/8" stereo cable if you don't want to mess with syncing files later. Works great as a pre or recorder or both.
> 
> I honestly don't know that anything Canon would come up with would convince me to use anything else right now.
> 
> $.02


How exactly is your workflow? What is the MixPre doing? Do you record the audio with the MixPres SD card option? Or do you give the signal out and record it into the camera? If so, dont you lose the 3 channels which are combined into one channel? So in case you have 3 microphones, you only have one line which you can edit?


----------



## peters (Mar 31, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Well as of now the answer is "Buy EF Glass and adapt it to your RF body". I don't see Canon going RF with Cinema bodies unless/until they decide to make RF Cinema Glass.


Which is an PERFECT option in my opinion. There is an adapter with a adjustable nd filter inside! Which means the R5 will have not only IBIS, 10bit 4k but also an stepless INTERNAL ND filter if you use EF. Thats excellent for filmmakers. Its just soooooooooo bad to hussle with different front ND Filters.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Mar 31, 2020)

peters said:


> Which is an PERFECT option in my opinion. There is an adapter with a adjustable nd filter inside! Which means the R5 will have not only IBIS, 10bit 4k but also an stepless INTERNAL ND filter if you use EF. Thats excellent for filmmakers. Its just soooooooooo bad to hussle with different front ND Filters.


Good way of looking at it, lot's of positives! But that RF glass is just so good


----------



## peters (Mar 31, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Good way of looking at it, lot's of positives! But that RF glass is just so good


Ha, thats true :-D 
Though I allready own a lot of EF glass - so I guess the transition to the R5 with the adapter and the ND Filter Adapter will be very smooth for me. 

I cant wait for this camera... currently I have such a mixed equipment list: (Canon 5D for photos, 1D for video), but mostly Lumix S1H and Gh5 for video and the Sony A7R IV for photo. If the R5 delivers, I can easily sell the 5D, the 1D, the S1H, Gh5 and A7R IV and just replace all of this stuff with just 2 camera bodys. Its ideal <3


----------



## Etienne (Mar 31, 2020)

mariosk1gr said:


> I wish for the same too! Im stuck with a c100 mark ii since 2015 and still waiting and waiting for the replacement. If it doesn't come this year then c200 is one way road...



I'm waiting on the R5 details. I really want small and lightweight. The Sony A7s III may offer something compelling as well.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 31, 2020)

IWLP said:


> SoundDevices MixPre 3 is awesome if you need XLR ins. We use them on our EOS Rs, and they are great - hardware limiters, great sounding pres, tons of routing options, and yes, you can run audio back into the camera with a 1/8" stereo cable if you don't want to mess with syncing files later. Works great as a pre or recorder or both.
> 
> I honestly don't know that anything Canon would come up with would convince me to use anything else right now.
> 
> $.02



I've had my eye on the SoundDevices for sure. The MixPre 6 is only a little more expensive. But an in Camera option with fewer pieces to bolt on is best for me. All of these extra bolt-ons tend to get loose and flop around. I hate that.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 31, 2020)

mb66energy said:


> And if Canon doesn't deliver & Mono is fine for you, the Rode videomic NTG is a very fine tool. I wanted to buy some NTG4 or maybe the NTG5 but I was not shure if an XLR solution was the right thing for me (to bulky) and then came the videomic NTG: It has a physical level control (Knob without any (mechanical) steps) , no digital connection to the camera (except the camera has a USB port which accepts such devices) - but it can be used as a USB microphone on a PC too.
> 
> I am new in audio but I think I know a little bit about what it has to sound and this is the first microphone where I accept my own voice  Sound is clean, rich and without any artificial "spoken through a tube" artifacts.



The Rode Videomic NTG looks very interesting. I like the look of Sony's proprietary shotgun for the A7 series because it eliminates the flimsy 3.5mm connection, and it sends a digital signal to the camera, making it the sound much cleaner. This setup makes for a more robust compact setup.
But the Rode looks like the next-best option.
Cheers


----------



## IWLP (Mar 31, 2020)

peters said:


> How exactly is your workflow? What is the MixPre doing? Do you record the audio with the MixPres SD card option? Or do you give the signal out and record it into the camera? If so, dont you lose the 3 channels which are combined into one channel? So in case you have 3 microphones, you only have one line which you can edit?



Usually the MixPre is serving as an audio adapter and sometimes as a recorder. We run Mics (usually one or two) into the MixPre, then run the MixPre's stereo out into the camera - single channel summed for one mic or two separate channels for two mics.

Sometimes I'll record on the MixPre, but often I won't - I'll just use the audio the camera recorded from the MixPre's stereo out. There is a small increase in sound quality when using the MixPre file compared to using the camera audio (which was fed into the camera with the MixPre). Even when I record with the MixPre, I will still feed the audio into the camera for a clean sync track as well as for archival purposes - where I work, there's no guarantee the off-camera audio file will exist in years/decades to come, so a clean audio track is always good.

The advantages of adding the MixPre into my workflow are chiefly:

Excellent audio level meters that are easy to read and see at a glance. The rings that light up around each channel knob let me easily check levels when I'm working solo.
Real hardware limiters, so my audio doesn't clip. Yes, you can hear the limiters if you're hitting them all the time, but they're there to buy insurance, not be idiot-proof.
Excellent knobs for setting levels on-the-fly and making adjustments during an interview or shoot.
Really good audio quality - the preamps are wonderful, and they have enough gain to use an SM7b for voiceover work. The audio quality style reminds me of a Grace M901 preamp - very, very clean in character.
Very scalable for a variety of jobs. I use it for a handheld audio recorder as well as for video production work.
I have not yet recorded three channels of audio, but if I did, then, yes, I would have to record onto the MixPre only or make do with a mixdown.

It's honestly a piece of gear that just makes me happy whenever I use it. But be aware - because it is very scalable, there are a _ton_ of ways to set it up. But once it's set, it's good to go.

And I'm not holding out for a native camera option, unless it were to be battery-grip-style. While the MixPre requires extra cables and whatnot, that's just the way of video production, IMO.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Mar 31, 2020)

IWLP said:


> Usually the MixPre is serving as an audio adapter and sometimes as a recorder. We run Mics (usually one or two) into the MixPre, then run the MixPre's stereo out into the camera - single channel summed for one mic or two separate channels for two mics.
> 
> Sometimes I'll record on the MixPre, but often I won't - I'll just use the audio the camera recorded from the MixPre's stereo out. There is a small increase in sound quality when using the MixPre file compared to using the camera audio (which was fed into the camera with the MixPre). Even when I record with the MixPre, I will still feed the audio into the camera for a clean sync track as well as for archival purposes - where I work, there's no guarantee the off-camera audio file will exist in years/decades to come, so a clean audio track is always good.
> 
> ...



Love my MixPre-3 but have never used it to feed audio directly into the camera. Will definitely try this during this downtime. 

On your last note, I'm very surprised that some manufacturer has not made a dual XLR battery grip adapter for some of these cameras. I really liked how Video Devices did it with their Pix-E video recorder series. Pretty brilliant. The positioning of the XLRs would be the most important aspect, but could easily just be mix-xlrs. And you would still need to have a room inside for an extra battery (since your main battery port would be blocked). Would be interesting. 

BUT, still think the hot-shoe XLR adapter that Panasonic has is still the best option.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 31, 2020)

peters said:


> Which is an PERFECT option in my opinion. There is an adapter with a adjustable nd filter inside! Which means the R5 will have not only IBIS, 10bit 4k but also an stepless INTERNAL ND filter if you use EF. Thats excellent for filmmakers. Its just soooooooooo bad to hussle with different front ND Filters.


And that's an excellent point I didn't even consider. I think it's $300 for the adapter with the filter?


----------



## jvillain (Mar 31, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Love my MixPre-3 but have never used it to feed audio directly into the camera. Will definitely try this during this downtime.



If you have a premix 3 you are recording on and your running a line to the camera why not run time code instead?


----------



## peters (Mar 31, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> And that's an excellent point I didn't even consider. I think it's $300 for the adapter with the filter?


I guess, something like that.
Compared to a good ND filter for the front of the lense, its realy a steal.
I am realy not happy with ND-Filters. The variable ones for 50 bugs are realy crap, totaly green color shift, flares or even an X. Even with the 200€ more expensive models which I own you always have some color shift and sharpness loss.
Also it realy sucks if you dont use Cinelenses - photo lenses have most of the time different front sizes, so you need step up rings or you have to buy multiple filters. With an internal ND Filter it can be used with any lense. Also you can easily use the lens hood, which usualy dont work with front ND-Filters. Its realy a very neat option <3


----------



## peters (Mar 31, 2020)

IWLP said:


> Usually the MixPre is serving as an audio adapter and sometimes as a recorder. We run Mics (usually one or two) into the MixPre, then run the MixPre's stereo out into the camera - single channel summed for one mic or two separate channels for two mics.
> 
> Sometimes I'll record on the MixPre, but often I won't - I'll just use the audio the camera recorded from the MixPre's stereo out. There is a small increase in sound quality when using the MixPre file compared to using the camera audio (which was fed into the camera with the MixPre). Even when I record with the MixPre, I will still feed the audio into the camera for a clean sync track as well as for archival purposes - where I work, there's no guarantee the off-camera audio file will exist in years/decades to come, so a clean audio track is always good.
> 
> ...


Ah, I see. Very interesting read, thanks for the in depth explanation =)


----------



## IWLP (Mar 31, 2020)

jvillain said:


> If you have a premix 3 you are recording on and your running a line to the camera why not run time code instead?



I've run timecode before, which can work. The audio feed into the camera is because that way I have high-quality audio baked into the in-camera file, which is never a bad thing to have. We're talking about just one audio cable, so for my workflow, it's a no-brainer for some quick "oh, crap, I didn't push the record button on the MixPre" insurance.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Mar 31, 2020)

Etienne said:


> I'm waiting on the R5 details. I really want small and lightweight. The Sony A7s III may offer something compelling as well.


Im waiting also for the R5. No matter the specs, the R5 will amaze the camera industry. As a photographer I will propably buy it and use it also as a b cam! but its not a cinema camera and the ergonomics of my c100 mark ii are unbeatable against any photo camera body. That being said.. my hopes for a c100 replacement are still on...


----------



## Etienne (Mar 31, 2020)

mariosk1gr said:


> Im waiting also for the R5. No matter the specs, the R5 will amaze the camera industry. As a photographer I will propably buy it and use it also as a b cam! but its not a cinema camera and the ergonomics of my c100 mark ii are unbeatable against any photo camera body. That being said.. my hopes for a c100 replacement are still on...



I've been waiting years, but I don't think there will ever be a C100 mk III. They've dropped the small, light, affordable idea from the Cinema camera line and are going after the high end market primarily.
The closest I think we'll get from Canon is the upcoming R5, and if they create an attachable audio module, then it will have to do. The R5 is going to go head to head against the upcoming Sony A7s mk III.


----------



## herein2020 (Apr 1, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Well as of now the answer is "Buy EF Glass and adapt it to your RF body". I don't see Canon going RF with Cinema bodies unless/until they decide to make RF Cinema Glass.


I look at it the opposite way, I think the C200 Mk II will be the first to get an RF mount because it makes the most sense. It will appeal to the small production houses, independent film makers, and run and gun shooters since we probably won't use cinema lenses anyway, and if you have an RF mount you can always adapt EF glass. 

Canon is moving to the RF mount and wants to sell RF glass; the R6, R5, and C200 MK II all in an RF mount would be the perfect trifecta of video options; would let you use RF or EF glass, and would be future proof; meaning you can go all in on RF. Expecting a run and gun shooter to buy a EF mount Cinema camera then have to keep EF glass for the next 6yrs alongside native RF glass makes no sense.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 1, 2020)

Etienne said:


> The Rode Videomic NTG looks very interesting. I like the look of Sony's proprietary shotgun for the A7 series because it eliminates the flimsy 3.5mm connection, and it sends a digital signal to the camera, making it the sound much cleaner. This setup makes for a more robust compact setup.
> But the Rode looks like the next-best option.
> Cheers



I haven't known that Sony has such a mic, sounds very logical to avoid cables around the camera or in front of ultra wide angles.
Another drawback of 3.5mm connectors is the fact that they might block the display if you are filming yourself. The worst case is a connector which sticks out 5cm - an angled (is it correct?) male 3.5mm connector with a very flat profile would help. EOS RP has the mic and headphone connectors "on the wrong position"!
Michael


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 1, 2020)

Etienne said:


> The Rode Videomic NTG looks very interesting.



I just ordered one. I have quite a few Rode products and they are all absolute top quality pieces of equipment. It floors me how much quality and value they can cram into the prices they sell their products for. I have a Rode NTG3 now that is unbelievably good and then several other Condender mics including the NT1A, the K2 Tube condenser, and a pair of NT5 pencil condensers. I'm never buying another brand again. Exceptional sound quality, built like tanks, and cost much less than comparable rivals


----------



## jvillain (Apr 1, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I think the C200 Mk II will be the first to get an RF mount because it makes the most sense.


I agree, but they will have to bring more to the party than just an RF mount. They need to get the auto focus up to at least the standard of the M series cameras and beef up their 4k. Adding an option to record to SSDs would be a real boon to the people that use the C200 as well.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Apr 1, 2020)

Wonder what the C200 can bring to the table that won't be very close to these proposed C300 III specs. Was hoping they would make the C300 III full-frame but without the 6k to differentiate it from the C500 II so the C200 can remain Super35 and get the 10-bit middle-codec added in.

But if the C300 III is Super35, is 4k, has raw, will definitely have the 10-bit codec, that doesn't leave much room for a C200. Maybe just drop the 120fps, but a lot of people would want to save $4k+ dollars more than they would want 120fps. 

The C500 II is amazingly beefed up, but with expectations these days, the C300, C200, and C100 could start crowding each other out...


----------



## herein2020 (Apr 2, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Wonder what the C200 can bring to the table that won't be very close to these proposed C300 III specs. Was hoping they would make the C300 III full-frame but without the 6k to differentiate it from the C500 II so the C200 can remain Super35 and get the 10-bit middle-codec added in.
> 
> But if the C300 III is Super35, is 4k, has raw, will definitely have the 10-bit codec, that doesn't leave much room for a C200. Maybe just drop the 120fps, but a lot of people would want to save $4k+ dollars more than they would want 120fps.
> 
> The C500 II is amazingly beefed up, but with expectations these days, the C300, C200, and C100 could start crowding each other out...


I've been thinking that too, I definitely think the C100 is *******, but without the C200 there is too big of a gap in the product line. The R5 will probably replace the C100, but that still leaves the C200 in an odd place. The only thing I can think of is they drop the EF mount and make it an RF mount, drop internal RAW, and give it the 10 bit codec. The problem is, the current C200 already does internal raw so dropping internal raw would upset the users who have gotten used to it.

They may even come out with a whole new modular MILC body with an RF mount in an XC-15 type form factor but with no XLR or ND filters, etc on board to make it a viable gimbal option. Something like that could replace the C100 and C200 and make buyers go with a C300 if they want a cinema camera. We live in very confusing yet exciting times.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Apr 2, 2020)

peters said:


> Ha, thats true :-D
> Though I allready own a lot of EF glass - so I guess the transition to the R5 with the adapter and the ND Filter Adapter will be very smooth for me.
> 
> I cant wait for this camera... currently I have such a mixed equipment list: (Canon 5D for photos, 1D for video), but mostly Lumix S1H and Gh5 for video and the Sony A7R IV for photo. If the R5 delivers, I can easily sell the 5D, the 1D, the S1H, Gh5 and A7R IV and just replace all of this stuff with just 2 camera bodys. Its ideal <3


Sounds like you would not only save money but would also benefit from the convenience of having only one system. Sounds perfect. Let's hope the R5 is as good as we all hope!


----------



## peters (Apr 2, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Sounds like you would not only save money but would also benefit from the convenience of having only one system. Sounds perfect. Let's hope the R5 is as good as we all hope!


Jeah, absolutly. The EF to E adapter works pretty solid on the Sony a7R IV, at least in photo. In Video its not ideal. But anyway, I realy dislike the colors of the sony, its realy cumbersome to match its footage to canons or panasonics. For photos workable, though not perfect.
The Panasonic S1H is an incredible video camera at this pricepoint with an incredible imagequality. Its colors are close to the GH5 and therefor very close to canon. Though I cant use the canon glass so well at the S1H and the missing AF is sad. Al.so I only have one of this camera, so its not ideal for quite some shooting situations.
Having only 2 or 3 Canon EOS R5 would cover EVERYTHING I do. Wedding photos, videoproductions, productphotos. Its so great to have this camera at the horizon.
With the Specs they allready released I have ZERO doubt that this camera will fit perfectly in my workflow. I just cant imagine anything that could be a problem. It got a high resolution for any kind of photohgrapy, especialy landscape, product, wedding. It got 20fps even for action-photography and a silent shutter for weddings or wildlife. 4k60 with DPAF on the fullframe, IBIS, 10bit and dualcards for all important shoots... its so incredible perfect... (only thing tha could be a dealbreaker would be a crazy bug like on the 1DX II which randomly froze if an HDMI cable was connected. This happend for the first 2 years after release, until the fixed it via firmware. this would be a dealbreaker, since we need the HDMI out, not way around it)


----------



## Etienne (Apr 2, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> I just ordered one. I have quite a few Rode products and they are all absolute top quality pieces of equipment. It floors me how much quality and value they can cram into the prices they sell their products for. I have a Rode NTG3 now that is unbelievably good and then several other Condender mics including the NT1A, the K2 Tube condenser, and a pair of NT5 pencil condensers. I'm never buying another brand again. Exceptional sound quality, built like tanks, and cost much less than comparable rivals


I have several Rode mics as well, one of which broke when I dropped it, the Rode M3. It was a little heavy but was a very useful all-purpose mic, which could be powered by battery if needed. Some of the others I own are a little weakly contructed : the VideoMic, MideoMic Pro, and Video Micro. All perform well, but the construction is not that strong.
Another favorite of mine is the Sennheiser MKE 600. Decent sound, powered either by battery or phantom, and well constructed.
But that VideMic NTG will probably be in my bag soon.


----------



## Sharlin (Apr 2, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> 4K up to 120p with Dual Pixel AF, 2K up to 150p



Only 150p?? Everybody knows that 120fps at 4K should translate to 480p at 2K because MATH says so! Canon is CRIPPLING this one to protect the C700!!


----------



## Gazwas (Apr 2, 2020)

Considering this was supposed to be anounced last year at NAB 2019, the twelve months wait for this has to be something more that 4K 120! The 'developed from scratch' sensor must have some tricks up its sleave or the intoduction price much lower than previous C300's?

If not, a highly discounted C300 MKII would make a nice buy and would make a lovely camera if they got as low a £6000.


----------



## sanj (Apr 2, 2020)

I like the *bold! *


----------



## herein2020 (Apr 2, 2020)

A really cool trick up its sleeve would be an RF, EF, PL interchangeable mount. That would open up all kinds of possibilities.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Apr 2, 2020)

Gazwas said:


> Considering this was supposed to be anounced last year at NAB 2019, the twelve months wait for this has to be something more that 4K 120! The 'developed from scratch' sensor must have some tricks up its sleave or the intoduction price much lower than previous C300's?
> 
> If not, a highly discounted C300 MKII would make a nice buy and would make a lovely camera if they got as low a £6000.



Well, I would expect it to have these major improvements:
- 120fps in 4K (C300 II tops out at 30fps)
- Cinema Raw Lite up to 120fps in 4K (C300 II only has 10-bit)
- All of the same internal 10-bit codecs (and maybe even 12-bit that isn't raw?)
- The MUCH MUCH BETTER body and ergonomics of the C500 II (and all the new accessories). 
- Much improved AF with touchscreen
- Digital stabilization that many report is pretty great in C500 II and 1DX III 
- XLRs on the body and not the terrible clamshell design

Those seem like pretty massive updates to me. Put this around $10-12k and, outside of a full-frame sensor, this thing blows the FX9 out of the water. But Canon really needs to release an under 1kg 16-55mm f2.8 lens (with STABILIZATION) to go with it. Their Supers35/APS-C lenses are not great and their 17-55mm f2.8 can't even cover a DCI 4K image. 

This thing could be sweet.


----------



## Gazwas (Apr 3, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> This thing could be sweet.


I’m really looking forward to this announcement just as much as the R5 and can’t wait to see what Canon has done.


----------



## rontele7 (Apr 3, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Those seem like pretty massive updates to me. Put this around $10-12k and, outside of a full-frame sensor, this thing blows the FX9 out of the water. But Canon really needs to release an under 1kg 16-55mm f2.8 lens (with STABILIZATION) to go with it. Their Supers35/APS-C lenses are not great and their 17-55mm f2.8 can't even cover a DCI 4K image.



It's pretty rare I agree 100% with someone on the internet, but this is my exact sentiment! 

If Canon releases a proper S35 Cine lens with a new C300, that'll keep a LOT of people happy.

The FX9 can't do AF at 60p, and it can't do 4K FF higher than 30p. So if this C300 comes out with 4K 120p, *with* autofocus, then it will absolutely blow up the FX9.

Combined with the fact that the R5 is an excellent B-Cam (Sony has no b-cam to the FX9) and it'll be an easy choice to pick the C300 over the FX9.


----------



## cinemanimal (Apr 4, 2020)

In one sense I think this would be a fantastic camera (based on the rumors) and in another its a touch disappointing. Red did 4k 120fps raw in 2011. 9 years ago! It has been too long of a road for others to catch up and for the price to come down. Also if it is EF that’s a slight buzz kill. 240fps would be something to get excited about and many doc makers would love that, but compressed raw gets dicey with RED. And, on the subject of compression it would be great if Canon let you choose compression ratios up to the limit of Red’s patent (I think 5:1). I’m curious where they will go with the lens. I want more AF cine lenses but it seems odd to come out with an EF one at this point when RF is the way forward. As someone mentioned their first two AF cine lenses left a lot to be desired. Canon please give me a 19-90 (or similar)T2.9 (constant) AF S35 proper cine lens that I can do AF or proper Cine focus, and I’d be even more interested in this camera for certain projects. That said kudos to Canon for the 1dx3 and the R5 (hopefully). Seems like the sleeping giant id waking up.


----------



## RunAndGun (Apr 5, 2020)

cinemanimal said:


> I’m curious where they will go with the lens. I want more AF cine lenses but it seems odd to come out with an EF one at this point when RF is the way forward. As someone mentioned their first two AF cine lenses left a lot to be desired. Canon please give me a 19-90 (or similar)T2.9 (constant) AF S35 proper cine lens that I can do AF or proper Cine focus, and I’d be even more interested in this camera for certain projects. That said kudos to Canon for the 1dx3 and the R5 (hopefully). Seems like the sleeping giant id waking up.




That lens sorta already exists: the Canon 17-120. From 17-91 it’s a constant T2.95 and has a built-in servos for focus, iris and zoom. All you have to do is engage the focus servo while it’s on a camera(like the 300/II) that has DPAF and have that turned on. I have a client with a couple 300/II’s and I’ve had my 17-120 on them and just for fun and curiosity I turned it on. It’s kind of crazy to see a focus barrel that large spinning around on its own without something like a typical external FIZ motor attached.


----------



## cinemanimal (Apr 5, 2020)

RunAdGun thanks! I had no idea. Ive used that lens once. I like the range but felt like the fuji 19-90 was much better optically. I guess I want a cross between the 17-120 Lens and the 18-80 cine AF from canon. That lens is a deal breaker because its 4.4 and has no hard stops for focus. But I love that it has IS. Canon, please give us 2.8 version with hard stops maybe go 18-90. "ultra 35" coverage would be nice too, and let it play nicely with other brands of cameras. I wonder if canon will make a full frame zoom to go with the C500II? Also will there be a C700 successor? Something to really take on the high end of Arri and Red? I'd like to see that( but with a smaller form factor similar to a mini or RED).


----------

