Possible Canon Cinema EOS C300 Mark III update [CR2]

Etienne

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 19, 2010
1,380
176
Ottawa Ontario
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

EOS T7i
Feb 15, 2011
81
11
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

I'm New Here
Dec 9, 2019
23
17
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.
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

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,932
553
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
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

EOS 80D
Sep 29, 2018
127
91
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

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
204
177
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

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
204
177
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.
Ah, I see. Very interesting read, thanks for the in depth explanation =)
 
  • Like
Reactions: IWLP

IWLP

EOS T7i
Feb 15, 2011
81
11
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

EOS M50
Jan 4, 2019
32
11
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

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 19, 2010
1,380
176
Ottawa Ontario
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mariosk1gr

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
20
42
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

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,349
246
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: Etienne

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,932
553
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
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

EOS 80D
Sep 29, 2018
127
91
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

I'm New Here
Dec 9, 2019
23
17
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

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
20
42
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 doomed, 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.
 
Feb 15, 2020
36
22
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!
 
  • Like
Reactions: peters

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
204
177
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)
 
Last edited:

Etienne

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 19, 2010
1,380
176
Ottawa Ontario
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.