Canon Cinema EOS: Which Camera?

[airdog07]

Canon Cinema EOS: Which Camera?

Written by Pete Bauer on March 31st, 2014
Last autumn and winter I had the opportunity to shoot with both the Canon C100 and 300 cameras. Not surprisingly, I now want to join the ranks of Cinema EOS owners. So which model should I buy? It turned out that the decision wasn’t as straightforward as I’d initially thought it would be. Sort of like deciding on cake, pie, or ice cream for dessert – hey, I’d have ‘em all if I could. Yet, alas no, reality dictates that I pick just one for now. Should I get the 1D C to cover both still shots and up to 4K in-camera, or the very affordable and easy to use C100? Should I step up to the C300 so I can plug into multi-cam shoots, or really go for it with the C500 to get up to 120fps HD, not to mention 4k? It took some study and thought to sort through the details. In case it might help someone else, I’ve collected and dressed up my notes to become this article.
As I studied, it became apparent that each of the four cameras that carry the Cinema EOS label has its own unique capabilities. Rather than simply adding features as the price point climbs, it appears that Canon specifically engineered each model for a particular market segment. Since I wanted to be capable of shooting in a wide variety of situations, well, therein lay my quandary.

I’ll address the Canon EOS 1D C first, even if briefly. It is not to give short shrift to a great camera, but only because it is quite different from the remainder of the Cinema EOS line that I’m addressing it separately. Whereas the body shapes of the C100, 300, and 500 have some general resemblance to a DSLR, their menus and features unquestionably point to an XF lineage. The 1D C is not only of EOS DSLR heritage in both menu structure and form factor, it is in fact a DSLR. It shoots 5182×3456 pixel RAW still images, and also records video quite nicely, thank you.
In fact, the 1D C is the only one of the four Cinema EOS cameras that records in greater than 1080p30 to an onboard card. Among its abilities are 4K 24/25p in 8bit 4:2:2 MJPEG MOV files and 1080p50/60 in 4:2:0 MPEG-4 recorded to a fast Compact Flash card. As with other DSLRs, it can record external stereo audio, but through a 3.5mm jack rather than XLR. In addition to supporting the Canon Wireless Transmitter WFT-E6 that the C300 and C500 also can use, it has a 1D X feature that none of the other Cinema cameras has: A gigabit Ethernet jack that allows you to connect to a network (DHCP supported) and FTP your files. This feature also allows you to set up a master/slave system with multiple cameras. If a DSLR that does onboard HD and 4K for about $12,000is what you need, this is your camera.
The tables below are not exhaustive by any means but cover most of the significant differences between the other three cameras that, taken altogether, I felt made each camera the best choice of the three for a given type of shooting environment. Caveat: I’ve tried to keep up with the various recent firmware update announcements but if I’ve gotten something wrong, please post a correction in our Cinema EOS forum.

C100 Overview

The C100 leaves a light footprint. It is built on a smaller frame than the other two and is distinctly easy to handle. It even uses the same smaller CA930 to power the camera and charge the battery, whereas the other cameras have separate and heavier adaptors and battery chargers.

While it lacks the ability to jam timecode, and it records AVCHD rather than MXF, the C100 has more ENG / run-n-gun features like Auto White Balance, the newly released optional Dual Pixel continuous autofocus, and a built-in microphone in case you want sound but don’t particularly need to set up external XLR microphones. My subjective experience was similar to what others have reported on the forum: I liked the button layout of the C100 even better than the C300, although I must admit that I missed having default headphone volume buttons as the C300 does. Not a big deal, though, as that is one of many functions that can be assigned to a button.
Many others have complained about the small viewfinder. Yes, it is a bit of a step down from the bigger one in the other cameras. I have mixed feelings about the rear-mounted LCD. In some situations, it worked well whereas at other times I would have preferred the modular, adjustable C300/C500 display and handle setup. Then again, others have complained about the C300/500 LCD because they didn’t want to use it in the first place but had to attach it anyway because that’s where the XLR jacks are. Since the LCD is rear-mounted on the C100 camera body, the handle/XLR attachment is small and handy.
One nit that I think must be due to the AVCHD recording format is that there is no menu function to set a custom file naming sequence as can be done with the cameras that use MXF. In the XF cameras or C300, I found it handy before a shoot to set the file names to start at say, PB0001. I don’t see a way to do that in the C100.
Of course, many folks choose to add an external monitor/recorder to their setup. Either out of the box or dressed up, at just $5000 ($5500 with Dual Pixel), it is the one to choose for one or two camera non-broadcast production.

C300 Overview

Moving to a price point of $14,000, the C300 has become a popular go-to camera where MXF files, jamming timecode, or plugging in to a multi-cam HD-SDI setup are called for. However, like the C100, 30fps or 59.97i and 4:2:2 is the most you can get out of this camera at 1080 resolution, even with external recorder.
It is physically bigger and heavier than the C100 but still fine for handheld shooting. Neither the C300 nor the C500 have any sort of built-in microphone. If you want sound, you’ll need to attach an XLR mic.

Although to a somewhat lesser degree than the C500, this camera’s design gives a nod to the assumption that the filmmaker will set up the shooting environment. For example, the operator must choose either a preset white balance or set a custom color temperature; there is no Auto White Balance. I’m pleased to see that the Dec 2013 firmware revision added Lens Exchange via any menu-assignable button. I wouldn’t think that my mentioning the need for this to a Canon rep in October had any effect on it being added to a firmware release just two months later, in December, but I’m glad to see that Canon provided this feature, as I think it is likely more valued in the C300 than the C500. Canon is continuing to improve the cameras, promising that the optional Dual Pixel continuous autofocus will come to the C300 in May 2014.

C500 Overview

Even though it is built on the same main body as the C300, the C500 is overall a little heavier and wider. In place of the removable handgrip that is part of the other two cameras, the area where the handgrip attaches to the C300 body is instead populated by dual 3G-SDI, two external monitor BNCs, and what I am assuming is a little extra internal space for the associated 4K electronics. The handgrip from a C100 or C300 can be plugged in to a terminal on the C500, but is not an “in the box” accessory and does not affix firmly to the camera body to allow for handheld use as with the other cameras.
This belies the tradeoff: In exchange for “big-movie” abilities; this camera is not really optimized for grabbing a run-n-gun clip. From connecting external 4K recording to custom color temperature to setting manual iris to pulling manual focus to setting custom LUTs using a dedicated button, it is all about the prepared shot.
This is the one camera that has a dedicated Lens Exchange button, allowing lens to be changed without powering off the camera and losing accuracy on a jammed timecode (see further discussion on that in this post).
Even 4K aside, though, the C500’s ability to send HD up to 120p (actually 4096 x 1080 cropped RAW) out to an external recorder can be tempting. I can imagine that would be tremendously useful for sporting events. The cost of entry is high for smaller shops, though, at $20,000 for the camera plus whatever your external recording system costs.

Summing It Up

All of these cameras are great in low light and allow Super 35 shallow depth of field. To review, what are the “big rock” differences?

• 1D C: At $12K (plus a $2k discount as of Apr. 2014) this is the lowest cost way to get either above 1080p resolution, or greater than 30p frame rate, in the Cinema EOS line… and it does so to an onboard CF card. Your only other choice for those capabilities is the C500 with an external recorder. For some folks the DSLR form factor and feature set might be limiting.
• C100: The least expensive in the lineup by far, even if you go with an external recorder. And probably the easiest to use (in fairness, I haven’t used the 1D-C but extrapolating from the 5D Mark II, the C100 is in another league in all respects…except shooting stills, of course). Having only HDMI Out, it won’t fit into typical broadcast type of environments. Great for one or two camera shops.
• C300: Studio and field production HD workhorse and multi-cam environment capable. There would be nothing wrong with using it in, say, an indie film. But if you won’t be using the BNC connectors, you can get the same image quality with a C100 and an external recorder for less than half the cost.
• C500: If your production has the need and budget for beautiful 2K/12-bit, or 4K/10bit imagery, or higher frame rate 4096×1080 RAW, this’ll do nicely. When you’re budgeting, though, take the time to think through everything you’ll need to get the most out of your purchase. You may need to get a lot of stuff like heavier tripods, a new editing box, etc. but most importantly, this camera needs an external recorder. Without one, you won’t get any more image quality than with a C300, and actually a few less ease-of-use features.

Yep, I still want one of each!

About the Author

Pete Bauer at the Soyuz TMA-17 rollout, Baikonur Cosmodrome, Kazakhstan, prior to its mission to the International Space Station in Dec. 2009.

As he grew up along the Great Snowy Northern border of Minnesota, Pete Bauer’s innate passion for filmmaking and photography was evident very early. Well before Pete was ten years old, his grandfather frequently found his Bell & Howell 8mm film camera unavailable for his own use because it was on loan to his eldest grandson.Although life took his professional pursuits in other directions, Pete never lost that passion. Since his retirement from the U.S. Air Force as a flight surgeon, his civilian practice of Aerospace Medicine in the Houston area has afforded him greater time and opportunities to re-ignite that old flame.
Starting as a DV Info Net lurker in 2002, Pete quickly became a daily presence on the forum and has been one of the site’s stable of Wranglers and a DVi Contributing Editor since early 2004.
Written by: Pete Bauer on March 31, 2014.

[airdog07]

A Hands-on Experience with the ARRI AMIRA
In cameras, as in life, you get what you pay for

By Justin Aguirre | March 30, 2014

The opportunity to head up to the ARRI headquarters in Burbank for a one-on-one experience with its prototype AMIRA camera made me feel like a kid who found out I was going to Disney World.

From its classic 16mm cameras to the current ALEXA, ARRI has always had a special place in my heart. I remember way back in film school when I first got my hands on an ARRI SR 16mm camera, it was a well-built camera that had all the controls in all the right places, and when it was combined with the school’s Zeiss 10-100 T3.1 zoom lens, it made for some incredible images. Fast forward to today where I’m working with the ALEXA on commercial and narrative, the company has kept the same well-built qualities and an easy to navigate menu system. These are the cameras DPs want to use.

Jim Davis, product specialist at ARRI, took the time to show me just about every detail around the AMIRA features and answered every question I had during my visit. And I had plenty, so we talked for a while. Jim set the AMIRA up for me in ARRI’s warehouse where we went through the menu system and the new features of the AMIRA, which are a major step up from the current production family. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t just a little nervous after Jim mentioned this was one of only three AMIRAs in the world, but I am proud to say the camera did not suffer any irreparable damage during my visit.

The new ARRI AMIRA camera. A wonderfully balanced camera with both the top handle (also EVF & LCD) and the shoulder mount are fully adjustable so the operator can achieve perfect balance. There are lots of physical buttons for the op as well and you can see the LCD next to the EVF allowing quick and easy access to the camera’s system menu.



Now, I don’t want to dive too deep into the tech specs on the AMIRA. There are tons of articles and videos that talk through all those details, although I can give you a quick rundown:

Super 35mm 16:9 Sensor (Exact Sensor as other 16x9 ALEXAs)
2k/1080 Rec 709/Log C using ProRes LT, 422, 422GQ, or 444 codecs
Up to 200fps
Records to CFast 2.0 (new Compact Flash card standard)
1280x1024 OLED Viewfinder and Separate LCD Monitor
Internal ND filters
4-Channel PCM Audio: 48KHz 24-bit
Selectable 3D LUTs can be recorded
Aimed at Documentary, TV Magazines, Trailers, Corporate, Factuals, and Live Events
Interchangeable Lens Mounts: PL, PL Broadcast, B4, and Canon EF

So of course, the camera looks great on paper. It’s not perfect, but that’s kind of an impossible standard, isn’t it? ARRI builds cameras for camera people and the AMIRA is no exception. And with ARRI’s great customer service, which I know personally from its lighting department and its commitment to future firm wire updates, the AMIRA will only continue to improve as the camera gets into the hands of productions.

What I want to focus on is where this camera is going and what productions should be or will be choosing it over some of the 4K competitors from the likes of RED or Sony. While Jim did hint at possible 4K cameras in the future, these would require a whole new sensor and we’d see that most likely in a newer ALEXA first then the lower-priced ENG AMIRA.

The AMIRA is ARRI’s first venture into an ENG style camera and shares the same sensor as the ALEXA. With the camera’s combined swappable lens mount, the very easy to use CFast 2.0 memory cards and a well-balanced feel on the shoulder, my first thought was that I could take it anywhere, and I have no doubt this is exactly what the company was going for. It didn’t take me long to have visions of traveling with the camera to the desert and mountains, which was kind of odd since I’m more of a narrative film guy.

Those are the possibilities you start thinking about though. It made me think about the more run-and-gun style narrative productions and using it on second unit teams for larger shows. It made me think about fast-paced productions like protests, nature shoots or even hostile areas where I can only rely on myself. The AMIRA would give me the filmic quality footage that the ALEXA sensor would give, but the AMIRA can and would be able to handle those environments in a way the ALEXA never could.

AMIRA has a lot of great things going for it. It records to CFast 2.0 cards, which is critical, since multiple companies have announced plans to release these cards. Not being locked into proprietary gear is always a plus. It also has different specs you can unlock if you agree to purchase one of its operating licenses either on a permanent or a temporary basis.

Here you can see the multiple connectors. You have 2 12v power outlets, 2 SDI outputs, 1 SDI input, time code, and battery input. And since it’s an ENG camera it has 3 XLR inputs with corresponding switches for giving the individual lines phantom power as well as a volume control for headphones.

As of this writing, the camera only records to ProRes 422, 422 (LT) and 422 (Proxy) in Rec 709. If you were to get a higher license you would have access to ProRes 4444, 422 (HQ) and the addition of Log C. The camera also boasts Bluetooth and WiFi capabilities for future applications. I asked if that included wireless video village, and apparently that’s something that may be developed in the future. That was a bit disappointing, but the WiFi and Bluetooth capabilities that are in development are more along the lines of remote camera operation. Since the model I was shown was a prototype, I couldn’t experience this feature firsthand.

The one thing I won’t have to wait to see on the final product is the sheer ruggedness of the camera. I was able to get my hands on it so I have a really good idea of how it’s going to handle. And I can tell you that it’s a solid camera that can take a pounding from demanding productions. It has vents parallel to each other on either side of the all-metal body of the camera, so if you peer through one side you see right through the camera. That feature, along with the placement of critical camera functions, keeps the AMIRA from overheating in extreme environments. I’m hoping to have an opportunity to take the AMIRA out to the Mojave Desert to get a firsthand account on the operating reliability, and I was assured this was the sort of thing the AMIRA was built for.

The one elephant in the room when it comes to the AMIRA is the price. At $40,000 USD and around an additional $38,000 USD for the lens I saw paired with it, we are talking about some serious cash for a camera that tops out at 2K resolution. I can already hear producers balk at the rental costs when a RED Epic or Canon C300 will be more wallet-friendly. And that’s without even considering the additional cost of the license to shoot in the 2K resolution, or the additional 100 fps to bring it to the advertised 200 fps the AMIRA can do.

I’ve already heard the comments from the online filmmaking community saying the price alone has killed the camera before it’s even been released. They cite the fact that this is the age of the Panasonic GH4 and Blackmagic 4K cameras all for under $5,000 USD. With the estimated daily rental rate of the AMIRA over $1,000 USD, where does the AMIRA fit?

It fits where it’s intended to fit, on a higher level.

Think about this for a minute. ARRI is letting the low-end market eat itself and is not even making an attempt to fight in those crowded waters. And if you think about it, it makes perfect sense. ARRI’s background has always been and will always be major Hollywood productions. It’s in the company’s blood. It makes the cameras that people drool over and are able to use once they “make it.” At the 2014 Academy Awards, three of the five best cinematography nominations and six of the nine best picture nominations used an ALEXA.

The AMIRA probably isn’t going to be the choice for too many film productions, but it’s not intended to be. It’s going to be the camera you use when you’re traveling through the desert or out on the open water and you want a fantastic film look with an easy post workflow. Networks like Travel, Discovery, History, and bigger budgeted documentaries should be counting down the days to when the AMIRA is released. The cameras are going to make their shows look amazing without the hassle of adapting cinema cameras for the ENG environment.

At the same time, I also see the low-budget crowd choosing the AMIRA for the simple fact that it’s basically a stripped down ALEXA. If combined with the Canon EF mount, the AMIRA could be looked at as a cost-effective choice for productions that want to shoot with the ALEXA. And that’s no small feat, especially at a price-point that makes sense in your budget.

We won’t know for sure how well the AMIRA will do in the real world until it’s released, but just because it’s a higher priced camera doesn’t mean it’s going to be ignored. I remember when the Canon C300 was released, I had a DP friend of mine swear up and down it would be a failure based on its limitations and high price point, but he had to eat a slice of humble pie when he was proved wrong. One way or another, the AMIRA will find its place.

Will it be something I can realistically use on a lower budget project? It all depends, but I’m certainly going to try. How and where this will fit into the market and people’s budgets remains to be seen, and the price point will have a big effect on how all of that shakes out. I happen to think productions can and should use a significant percentage of their budget on the cameras, but maybe I’m being naïve.

The old saying “you get what you pay for” comes to mind, and more and more production folks are finding that out at the end of their project. The AMIRA will let you find that out at the start of your project, which might not be pleasant but is always preferable.