Great video guys! A better way to transform log into rec 709 is using resolves color management tools. Project settings>Color Management>Color Science>Davinci YRGB color managed>Input to log format specific to camera> Timeline/output space to Rec 709> Tone Mapping to Luminance Mapping> Set nits to whatever your monitor can output> Then enable saturation mapping. This process is nondestructive as compared to a LUT. Hope this helps.
GREAT tip! Thanks for sharing. I've done that in the past, but decided to skip it for this vid. Also trying to incorporate an ACES workflow. So much to learn! Especially when there is so much to shoot. Thanks again - I hope everyone reads your comment. -D
Really i wasn't aware of these potential of EVA-1 in cinematic view. To me, it rivals little bit with Arri Alexa in dynamic range and skin tones. 2500 base iso is also game changer when u need low light shooting. Appreciate ur unbiased work. Thank you.
One of the better reviews of all the cameras. I bought a Ursa Mini Pro to do indie films, commercials. It's not really a run and gun camera, but it was Netflix certified, had timecode, shoots uncompressed RAW, shoots ProRes, interchangeable lens mounts, etc. You have to use lights and it's best to have a focus puller. We are currently using it as a second camera on a Horror Film with a PL lens mount and Cooke Lens. We have successfully matched shots with the Ursa and the Alexa Mini. (The DP was very surprised). So you are 100% right about your needs matched to the right camera. You could use any camera for other situations with workarounds, but it would be more difficult and require extra time and effort.
Andrew Henriques You're right. Ursa Mini Pro is a cinema camera design for films and commercials. Recently did a two camera shoot on a feature. Worked great! People have to choose the camera for their shooting situation.
Really thorough and thoughtful comparison. Bravo! I can add my experience as a C200 owner for the folks currently researching (especially those coming from C100s). Overall, I am thrilled with it as an upgrade to my C100mk2. Here are the important C200 features I appreciate most: larger/brighter/articulated LCD, shotgun holder fits my mic now, handgrip more comfortable and closer to body (less torque on wrist), carry handle doesn't wiggle like the C100mk2, XLR input placement on body vs. handle, waveform and audio levels display simultaneously on LCD (huge win), audio limiter, green/magenta adjustment next to Kelvin selection on LCD (no longer buried in menus), auto focus is marvelous for object tracking/face detection/focus box, ND filters are fast push button (instead of scroll wheel), autofocus target box is adjustable (no longer locked to center of frame), Canon color science still great, button/menu layout, and ergonomics. My biggest disappointments and "almost there" features with the C200 are: 1) 1080p120fps footage is soft (barely adequate when sharpened in post), 2) 4k .mp4 is mushy compared to other cameras in category, 3) no middle codec between RAW and .mp4, 4) RAW workflow is clunky with Canon RAW Development program for PC (image sequence exports from RAW file then link audio in post for each clip). There is also no waveform to make informed decisions in the Canon program before exporting, leaving it up to your eye only and trusting your monitor calibration. I've heard rumor that Premiere Pro might support the RAW files natively in the future. Having said all that, the internal RAW out of the C200 is stunning! For me, if the 120fps was sharp and there was a middle codec between the .mp4 and RAW, it would be the perfect camera for my work. I haven't tried a Atomos yet for recording 10bit 4:2:2 externally, mainly because I like to shoot without rigs and accessories (and most of my work is all web based anyway). Happy researching everyone!
Thanks Rob. I'm also looking at coming from the C100ii route and I'm surprised there isn't more chat about the C200 face detection working on all AF lenses and not just the (bleh) Canon STM's. I'm excited about the prospect of face detect on fast primes or the Sigma 1.8 zooms. Also the fact that you can record up to 4 tracks of audio with differing levels and limiter on/off etc. Now I just need the work to justify the cost :).
Rob Ranney Hello thanks very much for sharing your experience with c200. I am torn between UMP and c200 and like some my heart says UMP and head says c200 but after reading your experience I am now more inclined towards UMP mainly due to its price, features, codecs, cinematic image quality, dual cfast to dual ssd recording, etc. I like c200's DPAF and great low light capabilities and ergonomics but we can't get everything in one camera. I need a good cinema camera for event's and for some narrative film work. I still think UMP will be more than enough. Kindly please advice Thanks & Regards.
nice to see the 2.5 year old fs5 hold up so well to double the price 2017 releases ;) with the raw upgrade and shooting it to my atomos shogun inferno this setup gives me all the options
The Ursa Mini Pro is killer. I own one for a couple of months now and the camera keeps impressing me. I love the cinematic look you get, the dynamic range, usability/design and especially the skin tones and highlight rolloff. The image from this camera is easy to combine and match in a production featuring an Arri Alexa/Amira or RED Camera. You can look at some comparison video's and articles online. I think the Sony FS5 is a cool and versatile camera. The Sony FS5 image looks good, but more "video" to me than the Ursa Mini Pro. That's why I went for the beautiful cinematic look of the Ursa Mini Pro. Nice comparison!
Great shootout as some reviewers had downplayed the FS5 a lot with what it can do in a lot of the videos. But the FS5 looks very good in terms of sharpness as there are a lot of reviewers saying the 4k being soft and also low light as a lot say it isn't good, but the iso5000 being still usable it is enough for a lot of use. Especially when the URSA Mini pro can't even go so high with its ISO. Think the FS5 still a good capable cine camera from the looks of what it can do.
Agreed that the URSA is heavy but sometimes having a heavier camera can really REALLY help with stabilising while using it handheld. Of course you'd have to be holding it better than just gripping the sidegrip but a little weight can be really good. Nice comparrison, nice to see the colour science between them.
Real nice video man, seriously difficult topic to broach with all the optional upgrades, and varying factors to consider - The only thing that I think may have been beneficial to viewers is knowing the codecs you were shooting per-camera as they all have varying levels of in-camera processing. Especially in the case of the c200, where low light, sharpness, skin rendition, etc are heavily influecned by the bit depth & compresssion. I found my FS5 turned into a whole new beast once I grabbed a RAW license & Shogun Inferno, but now it weighs an absolute ton in that configuration, I'd be intruiged to know whether you were shooting rawlight or 8-bit h265 on the c200, as the image seemed quite underwhelming. Thanks again guys!
Thanks for the great comment. You make a very valid point - and that may be something I try to do for one in the future. It's near impossible to "match up" the codecs in these cameras (in terms of bit depth and data transfer rates) but it might be good for viewers to know what image you're getting for the cost in storage or compression.
This was super helpful for me to watch as I'm looking into the Ursa, C200, or EVA1 - lot's to take a way from this video and think about. Thanks for your help!
I can´t help myself but no matter how much you grade the image, the canon colors have something magical that I just love. Maybe from a professional charts comparing point of view they are a bit off, but to my eye is always looks nice and kinda special. Seems like i´m a canon fanboy, really hope they bring 10bit via firmware to the c200
Great Video ! The only thing I have to say is that the ND on the FS5 is the best thing for run and gun, event shooting. When I have to use another camera outside in sunlight I really really miss it !
One of the few best comparison videos I have ever seen. Very helpful, thank you! Covers most of the stuff, and you talked with our language! I know exactly what you are talking about, very thorough! Thank you again!
Love to see you do a 2018 4k Consumer Cam recommendation video. Obviously a professional and a hobbyist would be looking for different results. And most hobbyists won't be doing much post-. These cameras are overkill for non-professionals.
At high ISO operation, the EVA-1 appears to be presenting more actual image detail. The Canon and Sony are both hitting the image with substantial DNR. This can be seen by examining the detail in the bricks and grout on the wall behind the talent, the metal grommets of the shirt, or the mole on the young lady's collar bone. While noise can be toned-down (as desired) in post, actual image detail cannot be recreated if it has been sacrificed in the camera during recording.
Great comparison. Thanks for doing this. I’m not sure if someone already pointed this out, but you can remove the visor from the EVA1 LCD. It doesn’t seem like it will, but it snaps off and on quite easily. Just 4 small clips holding it in place.
Hi GJ, thanks for the comment. I looked everywhere online, (and I swear that I even looked through the EVA1 manual) and found nothing on how to remove it. The only thing I remember finding was another review where the user said you couldn't remove it. I'll have to take another look I guess. Clearly it's a design flaw, because it should be more obvious.
Vistek I know what you mean. My buddy bought a Zacuto Z-Finder for the EVA1, so we knew the sunshade to be removable. It was a matter of slipping a fingernail in the seam where the sunshade meets the LCD. It is in no way obvious that this will work, but it pops free with little effort. Just repeat on all four corners and it pops right off, without any damage to the LCD or the pop up sunshade. It snaps back on even easier. I’m not sure why Panasonic doesn’t make this more clear.
This is an incredible review. I'm not in the market for a cinema camera yet. But I watched this whole video and learned a lot for the future! Thanks guys! Great video!
Great job, guys! Finally, the shootout we've been waiting for! ;) The jury is still out on the EVA. Some frustratingly non-intuitive things about the menu system, but still working at it.
Hi Ben. We're planning on something like that. I can't say more than that right now - we're waiting for product availability and some new releases on the horizon. But we'll be doing something similar, but actually more in-depth. Thanks for the interest!
hey man, thank you very much for such a great and well organized comparison, i'm a total beginner in the field and i want to know if the need to touch a button on eva1 when focusing makes filming hard for someone like me or not? i'm also a big fan of canon cameras but c200 is really expensive specially in Iran with the current economic situation...
Thanks Mohsen. My suggestion with a camera like the EVA is to pull focus manually. I haven't had a great deal of luck with it's autofocus - not in a way that I would rely on it. Thus far, for me - it's a camera to focus manually for best results.
I think by far the C200 beats every camera, but it truly is a huge toss up for me between the Ursa and the C200. I say the C200 because it is probably the most universal of the bunch. Great colors, 8-bit 4:2:0 and RAW 12 bit 4:4:4; amazing low light, Good slow motion, nice compact size, and easy button layout for exposing and such. The Ursa is really good, too, but limiting to the commercial/on-set scene. You'll only really see that camera on long days. But to be honest, each of these cameras work great. At this point, you really don't have an excuse if your videos turn out bad. These cameras stop becoming the 'Top of the Line' cinema cameras and end up becoming a tool. I hate that people tell me my cheapo DSLR is a tool and I need to use it correctly, except for the technical side of it falls apart sooooo fast and is unusable. These cinema cameras, though different in numerous ways, are high-end tools that are very, very, gorgeous and manual. You can do nearly everything with these. (These cameras are better than the RED One, which was an expensive and high end Cinema camera for certain movies just 10+ years back)
Hello, congratulations for the channel, it is a place of reference. I raise a question: if you could choose, for a RUclips channel, to buy a video camera, which one would you choose between the Canon c 200 and the Canon XF705. Taking into account the image quality, functions, handling and similar prices. Thank you for your proposals.
very well done review. I appreciate the fast pace and u did no waste time talking but got right into...Alas which one to get...wish i could combine Eva, Sony and Canon into the perfect 7,000 camera.
Nice review. Man it would be great to take the best bits from each camera and create the perfect tool. In the end I went with the URSA as there is something very special about the picture. I also love being able to shoot in Prores. Autofocus is pretty much useless and it’s damn heavy once you add a vlock and other accessories. I really wanted to love the EVA as the form factor is perfect but I don’t like the image. Canon could have nailed the C200 but giving us a choice between huge RAW files and a highly compressed MP4 is just ridiculous IMO.
Supposedly Canon is adding a middle of the road codec first quarter 2018...maybe around NAB? Who knows. I'm holding out, I really think it would be a perfect cam for the money at that point.
that's a great summary - I still don't feel the perfect camera in this price range exists for me yet. I think I've decided to stay with my GH5 and GH5S for the moment and see how this all pans out with the next round of compact cine cameras...
I heard they will never add 10-bit to the C200 as it would step on the toes of the C300 mkII... But there are Magic Lantern style hacks rumoured at the moment...
Nice comparison, thank you. You definitely need to calibrate your monitor though. Personal preference for me was the Canon all over. Particularly the colour science and general image, very nice.
I really like a lot about the EVA-1, but the sharpness is a bit of killer, which makes it look too Digital. I would love to see footage of the EVA with 1/8 Pro Mist or even 1/4 Pro Mist Filter on.
ocubex - one very important thing to consider is how you shoot. Are you a single shooter and shoot handheld a lot? The sheer weight of the UMP makes it very difficult to hold for hours at a time. It's heavy! The C200 is an amazing camera to shoot with for longs periods of time. The DPAF will change your life...I promise! :-)
Hey NEBlackshirts, at the moment I shoot solo but that's mostly for talking heads and mini shorts for which I use the C100 Mk2 or employ a DP. I am thinking an upgrade for my first feature and won't be doing the cinematography myself but I don't want to get a DP for their gear, I only want to use a DP for their skills. Also I shoot mostly people of Africans and love the look of Black Magic colours (correct spelling - :wink: ) render Afro-Caribbean skin tones. Never really been an auto focus person, even when I use the C100, I've always done things manually and I prefer locked shots.
ocubex Couldn’t have put it better myself. My dilemma is between the FS5+Inferno combo, and the UMP. Similarly, my head says FS5+Inferno, and my heart says UMP. Truthfully, we’re spoilt for choice. But it doesn’t make the decision making process any easier.
Wow, was it just me but the URSA looked the best in all of the categories?? It did seem like you favored the EVA a little bit, but not a big deal since I can look at the footage myself.
Jesse except for low light capability and auto focus... the weight can be an issue for hand held work...however it is probably the best camera for studio and well lit situations.
Thanks for the review. Toward the end you mentioned if run and gun scenario, FS5 and EVA1 but earlier you mentioned that C200 is the best for the auto-focus and monitor and picture not falling apart in low light / high iso which are all part of the run and gun scenario. Can you please clarify? Thanks.
Hi there. Not everyone who is shooting run & gun will want auto focus. That said - every situation is different, in terms of the needs of shooter. All these cameras except for the Ursa would be good for R&G, depending on your preferences.
Are you using the same lens on all 4 cameras? Because, for example, a Zeiss Milvus lens will render skin tone much better than a Canon L lens, and all lenses vary from others in color rendition and sharpness.
Hi Demetri. I think I answered this question a while back in the comments. If I was to shoot RAW on one camera, then I would have to shoot RAW on all of them. Then it's not even a case of one camera versus the other, because everything becomes scene referred at that point (your computer now effectively becomes the camera). So it's not comparable in an anecdotal sense. By comparing the compressed codecs we can see how each camera performs in the most realistic settings. Even though RAW is attractive, the reality is that most users will never shoot with it because of the space requirements and the post production timeline. Yes, the odd user pops up now and then to say "I shoot raw all the time" (like RED or BM users). But the majority of working projects on these cameras are shot in the their native codecs. No client or broadcaster would let you shoot hours of factual or documentary footage in RAW. So comparing compressed codecs is the best way to show you what the camera is actually capable of and not a measure of how powerful your computer or grading abilities are.
Okay question. In post and I guess in settings did you edit each individually to try and make the footage look it's best with individualized settings or did you use the same settings on each camera to get your comparison clips. I'm noticing that across the board the Eva 1 seems to be coming out warmer in comparison. I'm wondering if that's because you used the same settings across and the Eva just shoots warmer or if its warm because of your actions and if that would be an easy thing to get to match the tones of the other clips. I'm just driving into this and know nothing yet so I really appreciate you taking the time to make such an informative video.
Hi Devin - to be honest, it was so long ago, I can't recall what I did. However, based on how my mind works, I suspect that I tried to compare apples to relative apples. So if I was shooting in a hyper gamma, then everyone got a HG, but of course everyone's HG is going to be different in both color and contrast. Same with REC.709, etc. Outside of that, it's hard to remember what I did with my white balance at the time as well. Often I just set cameras to all the same kelvin and call it a day. Sorry I couldn't be more informative than that.
Thanks very much for this great comparison video. I need your advice. I like ursa mini pro 4.6k very much but am torn between UMP, c200 and fs7 1. UMP looks great for price, features, codecs, video quality, dual cfast to dual ssd recording, etc but i'v heard it's not very good in low light and autofocusing but then narrative films need manual focus and lightings but for event and run and gun work c200/fs7 1 seems great, but no prores 10 bit 422 internally and no 2 cfast for backup in c200 which doesn't justify it over UMP or fs7 1. I still think UMP might be good for both events and narrative films for its price/features etc. What do you think please? Thanks & Regards.
I'd hesitate to use the UMP for "events" in so much that most events are poorly lit and could benefit from higher ISOs. It's also a very heavy camera, making quick movement and setups more cumbersome. But yes, the UMP is a great camera for narrative projects.
Vistek | Your Visual Imaging Experts Thanks very much for your kind reply. I have looked very deeply into other camcorders like c200, fs7, c300 ii, Eva 1 and fs5 but UMP's price seems to be the best amongst these and it's the one with great cinematic video quality compared to ARRI & Red, also the codecs seem simpler and easier to use in post and also UMP can record in so many codecs including 4.6k 60 raw internally unlike sony and I think Eva 1 and on much cheaper and faster dual ssd's via cfast for safety and back up as well unlike canon's. I like it's ergonomics and shoulder mount as well as in built 4 inch monitor and additional evf which is not very expensive and I also like it's much less expensive DIY interchangeable lens mount options like pl etc. Yes it's definitely not that great in low lights and autofocusing is total crap (so is red's & arri's) but then it's definitely the best in it's price range for narrative films and I am sure it can easily get away in most events with flying colours either corporate or private with a little planning & preparation. I very much like fs7, c200, 300 ii and Eva as well but UMP might suit my work more. My close friend uses mini 4.6k from last 3 years for weddings to all sort of events and corrects the footage in post in davinci resolve. He loves his mini 4.6k and I personally think UMP will definitely be much better than his old mini 4.6k. Of course no camera is perfect and suitable to all but I think for my use UMP will be good enough at least for now. Kindly feel free to let me know if I am supposed to know more about UMP as I have not used it yet and you have great experience with many professional camcorders. Thanks again. Regards.
Thanks Kylo! That's why I added it to the mix. I wanted to show people what the differences where across the price curve. Great that you were able to extrapolate that from the video! Thanks for the comment.
Great video! Question: Apologies if I missed it, but were the C200 and Ursa shot in RAW? I can tell you the C200 is noticeably sharper in RAW than MP4 (especially when punching in). I've also owned the Ursa, and the difference is less in my experience, probably because of the really high quality ProRes it offers. I ask partially because you mention sharpness settings on the C200, bu those settings don't do anything when shooting RAW. EDIT: I see later in the video it's mentioned that it's MP4.
Correct Fahnon, we didn't shoot any RAW - again there wasn't any time for that. And yes, shooting raw skirts around any compression/codec stuff like sharpness. Something you would manage in post.
Thanks for the reply! I don't want to sound as if I don't appreciate the work that went into this (because I do). I do feel that you should point out prominently that this is for compressed codecs only. There are a lot of folks who will think this represents the quality they can get out of a C200 or Ursa, but you can go a little higher in the Ursa, and a lot higher in the C200; especially on the grading test where the C200 is limited to a DSLR level codec (although it held up very well). The ability to shoot internal RAW is a huge feature IMO, and one that people like myself shoot in pretty exclusively. I guess my point is this comparison will be great for people who aren't interested in shooting RAW, but I don't feel like I know how the C200 (and to a lesser extent the Ursa) compares to the EVA because they weren't used in their highest quality modes. Hope I didn't sound too negative, and thanks for the hard work!
Thanks for your comment Fahnon. I appreciate you perspective and I think your comment will inform others well. Adding a RAW workflow into this video would have been an impossibility for a number of reasons. I hope you can understand. Thanks again!
Completely understood. It's funny; just after seeing this I saw this dvxuser thread that started because of this video: www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?358501-Does-the-C200-Produce-a-Sharp-Image
I agree with Fahnon Bennett. You have to state either in the video title or first thing in the video that this is a shootout involving the highly compressed internal codecs for each camera. It's like having a shootout of expensive DSLRs using different JPEG settings. On top of this listing the specific codec for each camera would be very helpful(if you mention this somewhere in the 30 min video then I missed it). Not to single out this review but it's quite common I see a review without listing crucial info like this. If you could put this in the description it would be great.
Thanks for posting this - really useful. I still don't think the perfect camera for me exists in this price range so while the C200 is tempting I think I'm gonna hold out for awhile and stay with my GH5 and pick up the new GH5S for lower light situations...
This is the video I've been waiting for and you nailed it! Awesome comparison and you've got a new subscriber. BTW, I'm a FS5 user because with the RAW license and my Shogun Inferno I feel it's the best bang for buck including 4K @ 120fps! I'd also be SUPER interested to see a more specific lens comparison between the Rokinon Xeen's, Zeiss CP'S, Lens Baby's, and the new Sigma's. Just an idea.
The FS5 is NOT the best bang for the buck anymore. The Ursa Mini Pro does 2K Lossless raw at 120fps, but I KNOW for a fact that the camera can easily do 4K lossless raw based on the dual CFast card slot bandwidth. Once the 4K lossless raw is added, it will be easily the best slow-motion cinema camera out there. And it does proress 4:4:4 and XQ which are industry standard recording formats. From a purely image standpoint, Ursa Mini Pro is still probably the best value. For single shooters, C200 is probably the easiest to use.
I am new to this. I just tried to do price comparisons, this is what i found online for Australia. C200 $10,923. EVA-1 $9,369. URSA $5309. FS5 $5999. Am i wrong, or are there big differences in price between them? If so, does this reflect quality, branding, or?
Hi Rhett. The comparison between these wildly different priced cameras was intentional. It's so people who won't spend as much as the C200 can see what spending less will give them. It gives them an opportunity to question the merits of a larger investment. Additionally - many things go into the price of a camera. R&D costs, licenses (prores, EF mnt), b predicted sales, currency, cost of materials, etc. Hope this answered your question.
Man I thought , whats Ryan Seacrest from X Factor doing presenting a Camera review? Ha! Great review , I am having Deja Vu as I watched this video in 2018 and I just stumbled across it again today .It's a great review and your presentation style is very relaxed as many of us know its not easy presenting to camera in the way you do.You really should consider a career change and get into acting school or something. Just my two cents (pence) worth from the other side of the pond.
Wonderful job Vistek! completing such a difficult comparison and pleasing everyone will never happen! If you consider image quality as being the most important feature of a camera. Then I challenge anyone to debate how an outdated Canon 4K 8.85 MP throttled sensor can compete with a new Panasonic 5.7K 17.25 MP sensor? Those that argue for canon color science are missing that fact of how soft the image really is! I would have preferred a comparison with the Sony FS7 II instead. On specs the EVA-1 seems soo much better! 5.7K Raw out! this camara will be relevant for a much longer period of time! Ill give canon props on the autofocus capability.... However, look at Canon and how they recently announced a new 5.9K C700 FF!
Upon further investigation, I also noticed that the C200 outputs raw at 12bit. Alternatively, Eva-1 outputs only at 10 bit! Panasonic is also throttling the output. What a big let down!
What are you doing with the hue vs hue in resolve?? Isolating each chip hue and pushing it in very localized way sure seems like a great way to get some wacky grades in resolve. Even with the warnings your methodology and lack of reference monitoring really calls into question the entire comparison.
I'm not going to argue with you, MV. I personally think showing footage online to compare cameras is a zero sum game. It's fodder for entertainment. If you really want to compare cameras in any real way, you need calibrated production monitors and a very competent post production management team. We had neither. Yet, if we don't show footage, everyone cries about it. So take my (or any RUclipsr's) methodology with a grain of salt.
Sure, but if you use a reference monitor then you are grading to a reference. So no matter what I’m watching it on I can expect the same bias that my iPad or phone or computer monitor exhibits for all professionally graded material. But you do make a fair point that it doesn’t really matter because we shouldn’t be comparing cameras on RUclips anyway. What I’m more confused about is what you were doing to the hue vs hue curve at 6:43, it seems like you are using isolated hue adjustments to match the specific hues on the color chips, and I can only imagine what havoc that would wreak upon the color of the image as you are essentially cheating very narrow hue values to match instead of applying global adjustments that bring the card into spec. Am I missing something in my understanding of what your doing there? Always happy to challenge my own assumptions if there is something to learn.
Hi Sigismund, I use Hue vs Hue to line up the colours to the vectorscope targets. This isn't cheating. This is what colourists do. That's what those targets are there for. It allows the colourist to bring every bit of footage to a standard target for each primary and secondary colour. We refer to this as the colour phase, and it can also be done within most broadcast and video cameras. There are many ways to accomplish this, whereas in my example I'm just using hue vs hue. You can also just swing the primary wheels. I'd also alvise to be careful about the term "reference monitor." That's not what I'm saying here. A calibrated monitor is not necessarily a "reference monitor." Calibration means that it is perfectly calibrated to either REC.709 or REC.2020 (HDR) colour space. If it looks different on your tv, to your iPad, and your iPhone, then that's an issue with the calibration of your devices. In the professional/broadcast/cinema world, we need a standard to adhere to. Once the image lands on the viewers doorstep, it's somewhat out of the colourist's control. Walk into a sports bar with multiple TVs and you'll see what I mean. Thus my example is only for "edutainment" and not to be considered the gospel of image quality.
Nice comparison, but for the editing instead of doing it manually which does take time, how about using a color wheel to show truly how much time it takes for you to edit with each camera?
On the low-light test, you say the EVA was shot with a high contrast 709 profile - was this unintentional? It looked noticeably less pleasing and much more video like with an orange tint.(it would be great to see another comparison with a flat profile if possible), The other EVA shots looked much nicer -Thank you for this review -
I don't know if you shot log or not, but LOG color gamuts are not designed for 8 bit as all the information is not contained within the 0-1 range. Even when shooting 10bit prores, a lot of the information will appear "clipped" but it's actually all there. And the color transformations required to convert the log to rec 709 also suffer from being only an 8-bit source. In the early days, log was more a 0-1 thing, but for ease of grading, they've now changed that since cameras have much more dynamic range.
Great review... one note EVA1 one touch focus isn't very good on most lenses and lighting, especial in Vlog shooting. From my tests, the focus will search the full range ( even pass the focus point) and then lock focus. You also can not turn off the auto-focus quickly easily, you either have to wait untill it finds it ( it can take 30 seconds) or turn off the AF swhich on the lens.
Good review - but in the real world on an Ursa I'd need to push the grade to match the higher ISO of the other cameras. It would have been good to see how it looked in a direct shootout in lower light.
Actually what matters me most is ISO Range or how well it performs in a low light shooting. Color and Focus are actually manageable during post-production or from manual setting. I think it is better to shoot in raw if We manage to solve the storage requirement. Proxy can satisfies quick editng requirement and raw can solve color and quality issues. We can actually keep 2 version of the same file -1. Output of raw after color and luma corrections and 2. proxy itself. We can delete raw Video if we are running out of space or adding more cost to production. Moreover, I am waiting for full frame cmos sensor in this form factor. Also they need to come with more stable servo zoom like in big camera. All camera given above has their own merit and Limitations. All 4 are a winner here, but..... I am always a fan of Panasonic, nevertheless feel safe to buy Sony fs52. I think it is balanced in every aspect - focus, color, ergonomics, ISO, Resale value, operation
How come you compare different cameras with different gamma (LUT) settings? The one is flat log and the other camera image is high contrast Rec 709 seems to me footage. And on my opinion it is not giving you any idea of what is the test rules you setting up?
Super wow, for me the fs5 is still incredible all around camera, albeit with some quircks. I was tempted by the c200 but you've helped me in making the decision. may i ask you what lenses and camera you've used in the studio while filming the host of the episode? kudos again :)
Thanks Robert! We shot the stand-up and BTS on C100 mk2s because that's what we have lots of sitting around. Everything was shot with L-series Canon lenses... because, again - we have lots of those. Thanks again for your great comment! - D
I am working with a Sony FS5 to shoot in a web series, documentary, news ... I decided to buy it because of the price, size, and advantages, such as ergonomics and the internal ND variable filter, the best invention especially when using photographic lenses. And the possibility of using lenses of any brand with the convenient adapters Finally, I decided to buy the Sony 18-110. Servo zoom, parfocal, optical steady shot, autofocus ... not bad when you're in a hurry to shoot
I was a bit disappointed the URSA looks like it has some magenta cast. But I still want one because of a great RAW format as well as ProRes and DNx codecs straight out of the box.
I'm just entering a higher level of DoP work. Used the GH4 then to the GH5 but am looking for a cinema camera like one of these 4. Do you have a hands down best camera for "all round"
How's the C200 vs C500?? C500 costs way much cheaper than the C200 here in Sweden atm, 7.500 for C500 vs 12.990 USD for the C200. C500 feels better, any comments on this? :) All the best!! ps Ursa mini looked awesome in the beginning and the clear sharp image, then ofc Sony is nice, liked the 120fps SloMo, also EVA1 is also there! Cheers!
Request if possible a Varicam review. BBC drama series are buying them in bulk and would love to see what all the noise is about. As far as this test goes, the best all around goes to the Sony with the Ursa right behind it as a cinema set tool. Canon would be great for wedding videographers, but the URSA pro pretty much jumped into that game with these latest upgrades.
actually i have the pocket and am deciding which one im getting of those (or Terra from kinefinity). But Yesterday i did camera on a shortfilm on my pocket and realized again that with the right lighting you can really get exciting images out of the pocket and we didn't even shoot RAW.
I rented a c200 for a sizeable chunk of money and was sadly disappointed. I agree that I found the footage very soft even when I upped sharpness. Comparing it to the Sony A7 iii I was shocked. How can Canon say it’s giving 4k? ☹️
Hi, could you reply here what the name of that "beauty" filter that you recommended for the EVA-1 - I couldn't make out the name of what you said. Thanks.
For your log / grading test, on the Sony FS5 you should select sgamut3.cine color space not REC709. You would have far different (and better) results where colours don't saturate as much as luminance increases. I own the F55 and recently got the FS5 as well to see how it performs. More info on my blog www.hingsberg.com
dennis hingsberg A familiar face from FB. Good points well made, Dennis. There’s a lot of negativity about the FS5’s colour science, but I think a lot of it comes down to gamut and profile choices that make the grading process harder. There’s an example floating around on FB that compares an FS5 S-Log3 to an ALEXA LogC clip, and they’re staggeringly similar. If anything, I’d shockingly say the LogC shot had slightly more green cast.
Hi Chris. Thanks! I chose not to add the FS7 to the mix because I wanted to give people options within a price range in the compact market - not cameras of all the same price.
Great video guys! A better way to transform log into rec 709 is using resolves color management tools. Project settings>Color Management>Color Science>Davinci YRGB color managed>Input to log format specific to camera> Timeline/output space to Rec 709> Tone Mapping to Luminance Mapping> Set nits to whatever your monitor can output> Then enable saturation mapping. This process is nondestructive as compared to a LUT. Hope this helps.
GREAT tip! Thanks for sharing. I've done that in the past, but decided to skip it for this vid. Also trying to incorporate an ACES workflow. So much to learn! Especially when there is so much to shoot. Thanks again - I hope everyone reads your comment. -D
Really i wasn't aware of these potential of EVA-1 in cinematic view. To me, it rivals little bit with Arri Alexa in dynamic range and skin tones. 2500 base iso is also game changer when u need low light shooting. Appreciate ur unbiased work. Thank you.
One of the better reviews of all the cameras. I bought a Ursa Mini Pro to do indie films, commercials. It's not really a run and gun camera, but it was Netflix certified, had timecode, shoots uncompressed RAW, shoots ProRes, interchangeable lens mounts, etc. You have to use lights and it's best to have a focus puller. We are currently using it as a second camera on a Horror Film with a PL lens mount and Cooke Lens. We have successfully matched shots with the Ursa and the Alexa Mini. (The DP was very surprised). So you are 100% right about your needs matched to the right camera. You could use any camera for other situations with workarounds, but it would be more difficult and require extra time and effort.
Thank for the great comment Andrew!
Andrew Henriques You're right. Ursa Mini Pro is a cinema camera design for films and commercials. Recently did a two camera shoot on a feature. Worked great! People have to choose the camera for their shooting situation.
Andrew, do you have a trailer or b-t-s of your film?
Really thorough and thoughtful comparison. Bravo! I can add my experience as a C200 owner for the folks currently researching (especially those coming from C100s). Overall, I am thrilled with it as an upgrade to my C100mk2. Here are the important C200 features I appreciate most: larger/brighter/articulated LCD, shotgun holder fits my mic now, handgrip more comfortable and closer to body (less torque on wrist), carry handle doesn't wiggle like the C100mk2, XLR input placement on body vs. handle, waveform and audio levels display simultaneously on LCD (huge win), audio limiter, green/magenta adjustment next to Kelvin selection on LCD (no longer buried in menus), auto focus is marvelous for object tracking/face detection/focus box, ND filters are fast push button (instead of scroll wheel), autofocus target box is adjustable (no longer locked to center of frame), Canon color science still great, button/menu layout, and ergonomics. My biggest disappointments and "almost there" features with the C200 are: 1) 1080p120fps footage is soft (barely adequate when sharpened in post), 2) 4k .mp4 is mushy compared to other cameras in category, 3) no middle codec between RAW and .mp4, 4) RAW workflow is clunky with Canon RAW Development program for PC (image sequence exports from RAW file then link audio in post for each clip). There is also no waveform to make informed decisions in the Canon program before exporting, leaving it up to your eye only and trusting your monitor calibration. I've heard rumor that Premiere Pro might support the RAW files natively in the future. Having said all that, the internal RAW out of the C200 is stunning! For me, if the 120fps was sharp and there was a middle codec between the .mp4 and RAW, it would be the perfect camera for my work. I haven't tried a Atomos yet for recording 10bit 4:2:2 externally, mainly because I like to shoot without rigs and accessories (and most of my work is all web based anyway). Happy researching everyone!
Awesome! Thanks for taking the time to share your experience, Rob!
Thanks Rob. I'm also looking at coming from the C100ii route and I'm surprised there isn't more chat about the C200 face detection working on all AF lenses and not just the (bleh) Canon STM's. I'm excited about the prospect of face detect on fast primes or the Sigma 1.8 zooms. Also the fact that you can record up to 4 tracks of audio with differing levels and limiter on/off etc. Now I just need the work to justify the cost :).
Rob Ranney
Hello thanks very much for sharing your experience with c200.
I am torn between UMP and c200 and like some my heart says UMP and head says c200 but after reading your experience I am now more inclined towards UMP mainly due to its price, features, codecs, cinematic image quality, dual cfast to dual ssd recording, etc.
I like c200's DPAF and great low light capabilities and ergonomics but we can't get everything in one camera.
I need a good cinema camera for event's and for some narrative film work. I still think UMP will be more than enough.
Kindly please advice
Thanks & Regards.
nice to see the 2.5 year old fs5 hold up so well to double the price 2017 releases ;) with the raw upgrade and shooting it to my atomos shogun inferno this setup gives me all the options
The Ursa Mini Pro is killer. I own one for a couple of months now and the camera keeps impressing me. I love the cinematic look you get, the dynamic range, usability/design and especially the skin tones and highlight rolloff. The image from this camera is easy to combine and match in a production featuring an Arri Alexa/Amira or RED Camera. You can look at some comparison video's and articles online. I think the Sony FS5 is a cool and versatile camera. The Sony FS5 image looks good, but more "video" to me than the Ursa Mini Pro. That's why I went for the beautiful cinematic look of the Ursa Mini Pro. Nice comparison!
Thanks for your great comment Mick. Great that you love your UMP! It is indeed a great camera.
Great shootout as some reviewers had downplayed the FS5 a lot with what it can do in a lot of the videos. But the FS5 looks very good in terms of sharpness as there are a lot of reviewers saying the 4k being soft and also low light as a lot say it isn't good, but the iso5000 being still usable it is enough for a lot of use. Especially when the URSA Mini pro can't even go so high with its ISO. Think the FS5 still a good capable cine camera from the looks of what it can do.
Thanks for great review. Image quality looks great on EVA1.
Thanks Alex!
Very thorough and well put together. Thanks for this.
Thanks Gerald!
Agreed that the URSA is heavy but sometimes having a heavier camera can really REALLY help with stabilising while using it handheld. Of course you'd have to be holding it better than just gripping the sidegrip but a little weight can be really good. Nice comparrison, nice to see the colour science between them.
Real nice video man, seriously difficult topic to broach with all the optional upgrades, and varying factors to consider - The only thing that I think may have been beneficial to viewers is knowing the codecs you were shooting per-camera as they all have varying levels of in-camera processing. Especially in the case of the c200, where low light, sharpness, skin rendition, etc are heavily influecned by the bit depth & compresssion.
I found my FS5 turned into a whole new beast once I grabbed a RAW license & Shogun Inferno, but now it weighs an absolute ton in that configuration, I'd be intruiged to know whether you were shooting rawlight or 8-bit h265 on the c200, as the image seemed quite underwhelming. Thanks again guys!
Thanks for the great comment. You make a very valid point - and that may be something I try to do for one in the future. It's near impossible to "match up" the codecs in these cameras (in terms of bit depth and data transfer rates) but it might be good for viewers to know what image you're getting for the cost in storage or compression.
This was super helpful for me to watch as I'm looking into the Ursa, C200, or EVA1 - lot's to take a way from this video and think about. Thanks for your help!
Thanks Greg!
which one did you get?
I can´t help myself but no matter how much you grade the image, the canon colors have something magical that I just love. Maybe from a professional charts comparing point of view they are a bit off, but to my eye is always looks nice and kinda special. Seems like i´m a canon fanboy, really hope they bring 10bit via firmware to the c200
Great Video ! The only thing I have to say is that the ND on the FS5 is the best thing for run and gun, event shooting. When I have to use another camera outside in sunlight I really really miss it !
One of the few best comparison videos I have ever seen. Very helpful, thank you! Covers most of the stuff, and you talked with our language! I know exactly what you are talking about, very thorough! Thank you again!
Thank you Bun! Super appreciate the comment. - D
Love to see you do a 2018 4k Consumer Cam recommendation video. Obviously a professional and a hobbyist would be looking for different results. And most hobbyists won't be doing much post-. These cameras are overkill for non-professionals.
At high ISO operation, the EVA-1 appears to be presenting more actual image detail. The Canon and Sony are both hitting the image with substantial DNR. This can be seen by examining the detail in the bricks and grout on the wall behind the talent, the metal grommets of the shirt, or the mole on the young lady's collar bone. While noise can be toned-down (as desired) in post, actual image detail cannot be recreated if it has been sacrificed in the camera during recording.
Great comparison. Thanks for doing this. I’m not sure if someone already pointed this out, but you can remove the visor from the EVA1 LCD. It doesn’t seem like it will, but it snaps off and on quite easily. Just 4 small clips holding it in place.
Hi GJ, thanks for the comment. I looked everywhere online, (and I swear that I even looked through the EVA1 manual) and found nothing on how to remove it. The only thing I remember finding was another review where the user said you couldn't remove it. I'll have to take another look I guess. Clearly it's a design flaw, because it should be more obvious.
Vistek I know what you mean. My buddy bought a Zacuto Z-Finder for the EVA1, so we knew the sunshade to be removable. It was a matter of slipping a fingernail in the seam where the sunshade meets the LCD. It is in no way obvious that this will work, but it pops free with little effort. Just repeat on all four corners and it pops right off, without any damage to the LCD or the pop up sunshade. It snaps back on even easier. I’m not sure why Panasonic doesn’t make this more clear.
Thanks GJ! I wish I knew this earlier!
This is an incredible review. I'm not in the market for a cinema camera yet. But I watched this whole video and learned a lot for the future! Thanks guys! Great video!
Thank you Tyler!
And all this info will be outdated by the time any of us can buy a cinema camera. Ha!
Great job, guys! Finally, the shootout we've been waiting for! ;) The jury is still out on the EVA. Some frustratingly non-intuitive things about the menu system, but still working at it.
Thanks TS!
I'd love to see this video revisited with the latest firmware builds and versions of these cameras. (EVA-1 Fimware 3.0, URSA G2, FS5 mk2)
Hi Ben. We're planning on something like that. I can't say more than that right now - we're waiting for product availability and some new releases on the horizon. But we'll be doing something similar, but actually more in-depth. Thanks for the interest!
Looking forward to the new vid!
One of the best overall comparisons I've seen so far. Thanks!
The fs5's base iso is "3200" in Slog-2 and Slog-3, but when you overexpose it 2 stops (what sony recommends) it's more like 800 iso.
Thanks for the review! Helped me inch closer to making the decision between the c200 and EVA 1
Thanks Michael!
That was amazing... so helpful. I'm prepping for a short film and watching this was what I needed... Thank you. k
Thanks Kacper!
hey man, thank you very much for such a great and well organized comparison, i'm a total beginner in the field and i want to know if the need to touch a button on eva1 when focusing makes filming hard for someone like me or not? i'm also a big fan of canon cameras but c200 is really expensive specially in Iran with the current economic situation...
Thanks Mohsen. My suggestion with a camera like the EVA is to pull focus manually. I haven't had a great deal of luck with it's autofocus - not in a way that I would rely on it. Thus far, for me - it's a camera to focus manually for best results.
good to see a fellow Iranian filmmaker
Thank you for such an in-depth comparison. Outstanding work.
One of the Best Comp on RUclips. Thank you ! I‘ll get my C200 soon 😍
Thank you Optimus Films!
I think by far the C200 beats every camera, but it truly is a huge toss up for me between the Ursa and the C200. I say the C200 because it is probably the most universal of the bunch. Great colors, 8-bit 4:2:0 and RAW 12 bit 4:4:4; amazing low light, Good slow motion, nice compact size, and easy button layout for exposing and such. The Ursa is really good, too, but limiting to the commercial/on-set scene. You'll only really see that camera on long days. But to be honest, each of these cameras work great. At this point, you really don't have an excuse if your videos turn out bad. These cameras stop becoming the 'Top of the Line' cinema cameras and end up becoming a tool. I hate that people tell me my cheapo DSLR is a tool and I need to use it correctly, except for the technical side of it falls apart sooooo fast and is unusable. These cinema cameras, though different in numerous ways, are high-end tools that are very, very, gorgeous and manual. You can do nearly everything with these. (These cameras are better than the RED One, which was an expensive and high end Cinema camera for certain movies just 10+ years back)
Hello, congratulations for the channel, it is a place of reference. I raise a question: if you could choose, for a RUclips channel, to buy a video camera, which one would you choose between the Canon c 200 and the Canon XF705. Taking into account the image quality, functions, handling and similar prices. Thank you for your proposals.
This review video helped make me understand the future of my camera purchases. Thanks Vistek!
This comparison video is epic, bomb, classic... "The Shiznit!"
Thank you Andre!
very well done review. I appreciate the fast pace and u did no waste time talking but got right into...Alas which one to get...wish i could combine Eva, Sony and Canon into the perfect 7,000 camera.
Thank you John! Don't we all wish this!
I like that James Blunt here also knows about cameras, not only singing :) :D
That might be the best comment of the video. Ha ha ha ha Thanks. -D
Nice review. Man it would be great to take the best bits from each camera and create the perfect tool. In the end I went with the URSA as there is something very special about the picture. I also love being able to shoot in Prores. Autofocus is pretty much useless and it’s damn heavy once you add a vlock and other accessories. I really wanted to love the EVA as the form factor is perfect but I don’t like the image. Canon could have nailed the C200 but giving us a choice between huge RAW files and a highly compressed MP4 is just ridiculous IMO.
Thanks for the great comment, LSR!
i guess theres no love for the fs5 :s. welp my a6500 still rock though
Supposedly Canon is adding a middle of the road codec first quarter 2018...maybe around NAB? Who knows. I'm holding out, I really think it would be a perfect cam for the money at that point.
that's a great summary - I still don't feel the perfect camera in this price range exists for me yet. I think I've decided to stay with my GH5 and GH5S for the moment and see how this all pans out with the next round of compact cine cameras...
I heard they will never add 10-bit to the C200 as it would step on the toes of the C300 mkII... But there are Magic Lantern style hacks rumoured at the moment...
Nice comparison, thank you. You definitely need to calibrate your monitor though. Personal preference for me was the Canon all over. Particularly the colour science and general image, very nice.
Thanks Realitytunnel!
Great in depth comparison! Tysm! Subscribed!
Thank you for the comment!
I really like a lot about the EVA-1, but the sharpness is a bit of killer, which makes it look too Digital. I would love to see footage of the EVA with 1/8 Pro Mist or even 1/4 Pro Mist Filter on.
Really good detailed comparison, I'm stuck deciding between UMP & C200... Head says C200, heart say UMP.
Thank you Ocubex! Yes, I understand your dilemma!
ocubex - one very important thing to consider is how you shoot. Are you a single shooter and shoot handheld a lot? The sheer weight of the UMP makes it very difficult to hold for hours at a time. It's heavy! The C200 is an amazing camera to shoot with for longs periods of time. The DPAF will change your life...I promise! :-)
Hey NEBlackshirts, at the moment I shoot solo but that's mostly for talking heads and mini shorts for which I use the C100 Mk2 or employ a DP. I am thinking an upgrade for my first feature and won't be doing the cinematography myself but I don't want to get a DP for their gear, I only want to use a DP for their skills. Also I shoot mostly people of Africans and love the look of Black Magic colours (correct spelling - :wink: ) render Afro-Caribbean skin tones. Never really been an auto focus person, even when I use the C100, I've always done things manually and I prefer locked shots.
ocubex Couldn’t have put it better myself. My dilemma is between the FS5+Inferno combo, and the UMP.
Similarly, my head says FS5+Inferno, and my heart says UMP.
Truthfully, we’re spoilt for choice. But it doesn’t make the decision making process any easier.
Wow, was it just me but the URSA looked the best in all of the categories?? It did seem like you favored the EVA a little bit, but not a big deal since I can look at the footage myself.
Jesse except for low light capability and auto focus... the weight can be an issue for hand held work...however it is probably the best camera for studio and well lit situations.
Thanks for the review. Toward the end you mentioned if run and gun scenario, FS5 and EVA1 but earlier you mentioned that C200 is the best for the auto-focus and monitor and picture not falling apart in low light / high iso which are all part of the run and gun scenario. Can you please clarify? Thanks.
Hi there. Not everyone who is shooting run & gun will want auto focus. That said - every situation is different, in terms of the needs of shooter. All these cameras except for the Ursa would be good for R&G, depending on your preferences.
Are you using the same lens on all 4 cameras? Because, for example, a Zeiss Milvus lens will render skin tone much better than a Canon L lens, and all lenses vary from others in color rendition and sharpness.
Yes. I agree lenses do make the biggest difference. I used L series EF lenses on all cameras because it is what I had 4 exact pairs of.
finally a very serious and very well done comparison! compliments! very good!
Thanks Matteo!
A great video, but why shoot C200 in 8bit when it can record 12bit RAW? This seems a bit unfair to the camera...
Hi Demetri. I think I answered this question a while back in the comments. If I was to shoot RAW on one camera, then I would have to shoot RAW on all of them. Then it's not even a case of one camera versus the other, because everything becomes scene referred at that point (your computer now effectively becomes the camera). So it's not comparable in an anecdotal sense. By comparing the compressed codecs we can see how each camera performs in the most realistic settings. Even though RAW is attractive, the reality is that most users will never shoot with it because of the space requirements and the post production timeline. Yes, the odd user pops up now and then to say "I shoot raw all the time" (like RED or BM users). But the majority of working projects on these cameras are shot in the their native codecs. No client or broadcaster would let you shoot hours of factual or documentary footage in RAW. So comparing compressed codecs is the best way to show you what the camera is actually capable of and not a measure of how powerful your computer or grading abilities are.
For broadcast work I would rather the Ursa mini pro
Which camera do you recommend for corporate video work where run and gun isn't important?
Okay question. In post and I guess in settings did you edit each individually to try and make the footage look it's best with individualized settings or did you use the same settings on each camera to get your comparison clips.
I'm noticing that across the board the Eva 1 seems to be coming out warmer in comparison. I'm wondering if that's because you used the same settings across and the Eva just shoots warmer or if its warm because of your actions and if that would be an easy thing to get to match the tones of the other clips. I'm just driving into this and know nothing yet so I really appreciate you taking the time to make such an informative video.
Hi Devin - to be honest, it was so long ago, I can't recall what I did. However, based on how my mind works, I suspect that I tried to compare apples to relative apples. So if I was shooting in a hyper gamma, then everyone got a HG, but of course everyone's HG is going to be different in both color and contrast. Same with REC.709, etc. Outside of that, it's hard to remember what I did with my white balance at the time as well. Often I just set cameras to all the same kelvin and call it a day. Sorry I couldn't be more informative than that.
When I'm shooting with the URSA Mini in cold weather I carry a AAA battery and use that like a stylus on the touch screen.
Brilliant!
Thanks very much for this great comparison video.
I need your advice.
I like ursa mini pro 4.6k very much but am torn between UMP, c200 and fs7 1.
UMP looks great for price, features, codecs, video quality, dual cfast to dual ssd recording, etc but i'v heard it's not very good in low light and autofocusing but then narrative films need manual focus and lightings but for event and run and gun work c200/fs7 1 seems great, but no prores 10 bit 422 internally and no 2 cfast for backup in c200 which doesn't justify it over UMP or fs7 1.
I still think UMP might be good for both events and narrative films for its price/features etc.
What do you think please?
Thanks & Regards.
I'd hesitate to use the UMP for "events" in so much that most events are poorly lit and could benefit from higher ISOs. It's also a very heavy camera, making quick movement and setups more cumbersome. But yes, the UMP is a great camera for narrative projects.
Vistek | Your Visual Imaging Experts
Thanks very much for your kind reply.
I have looked very deeply into other camcorders like c200, fs7, c300 ii, Eva 1 and fs5 but UMP's price seems to be the best amongst these and it's the one with great cinematic video quality compared to ARRI & Red, also the codecs seem simpler and easier to use in post and also UMP can record in so many codecs including 4.6k 60 raw internally unlike sony and I think Eva 1 and on much cheaper and faster dual ssd's via cfast for safety and back up as well unlike canon's.
I like it's ergonomics and shoulder mount as well as in built 4 inch monitor and additional evf which is not very expensive and I also like it's much less expensive DIY interchangeable lens mount options like pl etc.
Yes it's definitely not that great in low lights and autofocusing is total crap (so is red's & arri's) but then it's definitely the best in it's price range for narrative films and I am sure it can easily get away in most events with flying colours either corporate or private with a little planning & preparation.
I very much like fs7, c200, 300 ii and Eva as well but UMP might suit my work more.
My close friend uses mini 4.6k from last 3 years for weddings to all sort of events and corrects the footage in post in davinci resolve.
He loves his mini 4.6k and I personally think UMP will definitely be much better than his old mini 4.6k.
Of course no camera is perfect and suitable to all but I think for my use UMP will be good enough at least for now.
Kindly feel free to let me know if I am supposed to know more about UMP as I have not used it yet and you have great experience with many professional camcorders.
Thanks again. Regards.
Great video, I'm impressed how well the FS5 follows the competition, considering the price difference.
Thanks Kylo! That's why I added it to the mix. I wanted to show people what the differences where across the price curve. Great that you were able to extrapolate that from the video! Thanks for the comment.
Great video! Question: Apologies if I missed it, but were the C200 and Ursa shot in RAW? I can tell you the C200 is noticeably sharper in RAW than MP4 (especially when punching in). I've also owned the Ursa, and the difference is less in my experience, probably because of the really high quality ProRes it offers. I ask partially because you mention sharpness settings on the C200, bu those settings don't do anything when shooting RAW.
EDIT: I see later in the video it's mentioned that it's MP4.
Correct Fahnon, we didn't shoot any RAW - again there wasn't any time for that. And yes, shooting raw skirts around any compression/codec stuff like sharpness. Something you would manage in post.
Thanks for the reply! I don't want to sound as if I don't appreciate the work that went into this (because I do). I do feel that you should point out prominently that this is for compressed codecs only. There are a lot of folks who will think this represents the quality they can get out of a C200 or Ursa, but you can go a little higher in the Ursa, and a lot higher in the C200; especially on the grading test where the C200 is limited to a DSLR level codec (although it held up very well). The ability to shoot internal RAW is a huge feature IMO, and one that people like myself shoot in pretty exclusively.
I guess my point is this comparison will be great for people who aren't interested in shooting RAW, but I don't feel like I know how the C200 (and to a lesser extent the Ursa) compares to the EVA because they weren't used in their highest quality modes.
Hope I didn't sound too negative, and thanks for the hard work!
Thanks for your comment Fahnon. I appreciate you perspective and I think your comment will inform others well. Adding a RAW workflow into this video would have been an impossibility for a number of reasons. I hope you can understand. Thanks again!
Completely understood. It's funny; just after seeing this I saw this dvxuser thread that started because of this video:
www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?358501-Does-the-C200-Produce-a-Sharp-Image
I agree with Fahnon Bennett. You have to state either in the video title or first thing in the video that this is a shootout involving the highly compressed internal codecs for each camera. It's like having a shootout of expensive DSLRs using different JPEG settings. On top of this listing the specific codec for each camera would be very helpful(if you mention this somewhere in the 30 min video then I missed it). Not to single out this review but it's quite common I see a review without listing crucial info like this. If you could put this in the description it would be great.
Thanks for posting this - really useful. I still don't think the perfect camera for me exists in this price range so while the C200 is tempting I think I'm gonna hold out for awhile and stay with my GH5 and pick up the new GH5S for lower light situations...
Thanks for the great comparisons
Thank you for the great comment EposVox!
This is the video I've been waiting for and you nailed it! Awesome comparison and you've got a new subscriber. BTW, I'm a FS5 user because with the RAW license and my Shogun Inferno I feel it's the best bang for buck including 4K @ 120fps! I'd also be SUPER interested to see a more specific lens comparison between the Rokinon Xeen's, Zeiss CP'S, Lens Baby's, and the new Sigma's. Just an idea.
Thanks Lane! I definitely want to be doing some lens tests down the road, time permitting. - D
The FS5 is NOT the best bang for the buck anymore. The Ursa Mini Pro does 2K Lossless raw at 120fps, but I KNOW for a fact that the camera can easily do 4K lossless raw based on the dual CFast card slot bandwidth. Once the 4K lossless raw is added, it will be easily the best slow-motion cinema camera out there. And it does proress 4:4:4 and XQ which are industry standard recording formats. From a purely image standpoint, Ursa Mini Pro is still probably the best value. For single shooters, C200 is probably the easiest to use.
I am new to this. I just tried to do price comparisons, this is what i found online for Australia. C200 $10,923. EVA-1 $9,369. URSA $5309. FS5 $5999. Am i wrong, or are there big differences in price between them? If so, does this reflect quality, branding, or?
Hi Rhett. The comparison between these wildly different priced cameras was intentional. It's so people who won't spend as much as the C200 can see what spending less will give them. It gives them an opportunity to question the merits of a larger investment. Additionally - many things go into the price of a camera. R&D costs, licenses (prores, EF mnt), b predicted sales, currency, cost of materials, etc. Hope this answered your question.
Man I thought , whats Ryan Seacrest from X Factor doing presenting a Camera review? Ha!
Great review , I am having Deja Vu as I watched this video in 2018 and I just stumbled across it again today .It's a great review and your presentation style is very relaxed as many of us know its not easy presenting to camera in the way you do.You really should consider a career change and get into acting school or something. Just my two cents (pence) worth from the other side of the pond.
Wonderful job Vistek! completing such a difficult comparison and pleasing everyone will never happen! If you consider image quality as being the most important feature of a camera. Then I challenge anyone to debate how an outdated Canon 4K 8.85 MP throttled sensor can compete with a new Panasonic 5.7K 17.25 MP sensor? Those that argue for canon color science are missing that fact of how soft the image really is! I would have preferred a comparison with the Sony FS7 II instead. On specs the EVA-1 seems soo much better! 5.7K Raw out! this camara will be relevant for a much longer period of time! Ill give canon props on the autofocus capability.... However, look at Canon and how they recently announced a new 5.9K C700 FF!
Thanks Sarang! Yes, the C700 FF looks amazing!
Upon further investigation, I also noticed that the C200 outputs raw at 12bit. Alternatively, Eva-1 outputs only at 10 bit! Panasonic is also throttling the output. What a big let down!
What are you doing with the hue vs hue in resolve?? Isolating each chip hue and pushing it in very localized way sure seems like a great way to get some wacky grades in resolve. Even with the warnings your methodology and lack of reference monitoring really calls into question the entire comparison.
I'm not going to argue with you, MV. I personally think showing footage online to compare cameras is a zero sum game. It's fodder for entertainment. If you really want to compare cameras in any real way, you need calibrated production monitors and a very competent post production management team. We had neither. Yet, if we don't show footage, everyone cries about it. So take my (or any RUclipsr's) methodology with a grain of salt.
Sure, but if you use a reference monitor then you are grading to a reference. So no matter what I’m watching it on I can expect the same bias that my iPad or phone or computer monitor exhibits for all professionally graded material. But you do make a fair point that it doesn’t really matter because we shouldn’t be comparing cameras on RUclips anyway.
What I’m more confused about is what you were doing to the hue vs hue curve at 6:43, it seems like you are using isolated hue adjustments to match the specific hues on the color chips, and I can only imagine what havoc that would wreak upon the color of the image as you are essentially cheating very narrow hue values to match instead of applying global adjustments that bring the card into spec. Am I missing something in my understanding of what your doing there? Always happy to challenge my own assumptions if there is something to learn.
Hi Sigismund, I use Hue vs Hue to line up the colours to the vectorscope targets. This isn't cheating. This is what colourists do. That's what those targets are there for. It allows the colourist to bring every bit of footage to a standard target for each primary and secondary colour. We refer to this as the colour phase, and it can also be done within most broadcast and video cameras. There are many ways to accomplish this, whereas in my example I'm just using hue vs hue. You can also just swing the primary wheels. I'd also alvise to be careful about the term "reference monitor." That's not what I'm saying here. A calibrated monitor is not necessarily a "reference monitor." Calibration means that it is perfectly calibrated to either REC.709 or REC.2020 (HDR) colour space. If it looks different on your tv, to your iPad, and your iPhone, then that's an issue with the calibration of your devices. In the professional/broadcast/cinema world, we need a standard to adhere to. Once the image lands on the viewers doorstep, it's somewhat out of the colourist's control. Walk into a sports bar with multiple TVs and you'll see what I mean. Thus my example is only for "edutainment" and not to be considered the gospel of image quality.
Nice comparison, but for the editing instead of doing it manually which does take time, how about using a color wheel to show truly how much time it takes for you to edit with each camera?
On the low-light test, you say the EVA was shot with a high contrast 709 profile - was this unintentional? It looked noticeably less pleasing and much more video like with an orange tint.(it would be great to see another comparison with a flat profile if possible), The other EVA shots looked much nicer -Thank you for this review -
Yes - I wanted to do a majority of the testing in 709 because of time constraints and many users are conforming to 709, 2020, or RGB for output.
I don't know if you shot log or not, but LOG color gamuts are not designed for 8 bit as all the information is not contained within the 0-1 range. Even when shooting 10bit prores, a lot of the information will appear "clipped" but it's actually all there. And the color transformations required to convert the log to rec 709 also suffer from being only an 8-bit source. In the early days, log was more a 0-1 thing, but for ease of grading, they've now changed that since cameras have much more dynamic range.
Thanks Mo. Very good point to make. Thanks for sharing your knowledge & experience!
Verry interesting. Can you doing the same test for 2021. Thanks.
We are planning on it! Hopefully in early spring. Thanks!
Great review... one note EVA1 one touch focus isn't very good on most lenses and lighting, especial in Vlog shooting. From my tests, the focus will search the full range ( even pass the focus point) and then lock focus. You also can not turn off the auto-focus quickly easily, you either have to wait untill it finds it ( it can take 30 seconds) or turn off the AF swhich on the lens.
Good review - but in the real world on an Ursa I'd need to push the grade to match the higher ISO of the other cameras. It would have been good to see how it looked in a direct shootout in lower light.
Thanks Prestige Pictures! I don't think it would have held up very well. Pushing in post a stop or two beyond its limit likely would have been messy.
Sure. But that's part of the story methinks. I'm going off to do my own tests tomorrow ........
so I shall see!
Great comparison, very helpful, thank you for posting!
Thank you Marcel! We really appreciate you taking the time to comment!
Actually what matters me most is ISO Range or how well it performs in a low light shooting. Color and Focus are actually manageable during post-production or from manual setting. I think it is better to shoot in raw if We manage to solve the storage requirement. Proxy can satisfies quick editng requirement and raw can solve color and quality issues. We can actually keep 2 version of the same file -1. Output of raw after color and luma corrections and 2. proxy itself. We can delete raw Video if we are running out of space or adding more cost to production. Moreover, I am waiting for full frame cmos sensor in this form factor. Also they need to come with more stable servo zoom like in big camera. All camera given above has their own merit and Limitations. All 4 are a winner here, but..... I am always a fan of Panasonic, nevertheless feel safe to buy Sony fs52. I think it is balanced in every aspect - focus, color, ergonomics, ISO, Resale value, operation
Thanks for your comment Krish!
Awesome comparison!thank you
Thank you Victor!
didnt expect the EVA-1 to be my favorite.
Great test, I noticed a lot of green shift in your manual grade of the V-log footage. Especially in the bricks on the left side of frame.
Hi Christian, yeah they were fast grades - not comprehensive in any way. So...yeah... take my colorist skills with a grain of salt. :)
How come you compare different cameras with different gamma (LUT) settings? The one is flat log and the other camera image is high contrast Rec 709 seems to me footage. And on my opinion it is not giving you any idea of what is the test rules you setting up?
Thanks, good concise job breaking it down reasonably
Idk why you said the FS5 is the only one with the variable ND filter, the canon c200 now has that as well.
no it does not. The one on the fs5 is all digital
Super wow, for me the fs5 is still incredible all around camera, albeit with some quircks. I was tempted by the c200 but you've helped me in making the decision.
may i ask you what lenses and camera you've used in the studio while filming the host of the episode? kudos again :)
Thanks Robert! We shot the stand-up and BTS on C100 mk2s because that's what we have lots of sitting around. Everything was shot with L-series Canon lenses... because, again - we have lots of those. Thanks again for your great comment! - D
I am working with a Sony FS5 to shoot in a web series, documentary, news ... I decided to buy it because of the price, size, and advantages, such as ergonomics and the internal ND variable filter, the best invention especially when using photographic lenses. And the possibility of using lenses of any brand with the convenient adapters Finally, I decided to buy the Sony 18-110. Servo zoom, parfocal, optical steady shot, autofocus ... not bad when you're in a hurry to shoot
Omg. Brilliantly done video. Informative and thorough!
Thank you very much TCO!
What about the fs7ii ?? How does that compare?
I've been thinking about this camera
Michael Frymus what about the black magic Pocket cam
I was a bit disappointed the URSA looks like it has some magenta cast. But I still want one because of a great RAW format as well as ProRes and DNx codecs straight out of the box.
I'm just entering a higher level of DoP work. Used the GH4 then to the GH5 but am looking for a cinema camera like one of these 4. Do you have a hands down best camera for "all round"
Sadly there is no such thing. It's more of a "best at X."
I'm in the EXACT same shoes
Very good review! Watched the whole thing!
Thank you Javier! I wish viewers got a prize for getting to the end.
Hi. The URSA Mini Rec709 and ONE SHOT LUTs look amazing. Is there a way do get them for myself?
You just need to buy a DSC Labs One-shot chart and have the free version of Resolve installed (and working) on your computer.
Great thanks for the response.
Good review .. very practical! Thanks!
I wish you show us external zoom controls . How zooms works on tripod . But your video was great.
Is the Panasonic EVA1 better than Sony A7S III?
Fantastic comparison - thank you!
How's the C200 vs C500?? C500 costs way much cheaper than the C200 here in Sweden atm, 7.500 for C500 vs 12.990 USD for the C200. C500 feels better, any comments on this? :) All the best!! ps Ursa mini looked awesome in the beginning and the clear sharp image, then ofc Sony is nice, liked the 120fps SloMo, also EVA1 is also there! Cheers!
Request if possible a Varicam review. BBC drama series are buying them in bulk and would love to see what all the noise is about. As far as this test goes, the best all around goes to the Sony with the Ursa right behind it as a cinema set tool. Canon would be great for wedding videographers, but the URSA pro pretty much jumped into that game with these latest upgrades.
If I can get a Varicam, I'd do it! There might be something like that coming to the channel in the summer. Stay tuned.
Hey PP. Would love to - but unfortunately as a retail store we don't sell the Kinefinity brand so we can't include it in our reviews. - D
BMPCC THE BEST FUKA !!! (Just kiddin' I can't afford these cams ;( )
actually i have the pocket and am deciding which one im getting of those (or Terra from kinefinity). But Yesterday i did camera on a shortfilm on my pocket and realized again that with the right lighting you can really get exciting images out of the pocket and we didn't even shoot RAW.
Jura Nicolas May I see your short film?
lol
Jura Nicolas True!
I rented a c200 for a sizeable chunk of money and was sadly disappointed. I agree that I found the footage very soft even when I upped sharpness. Comparing it to the Sony A7 iii I was shocked. How can Canon say it’s giving 4k? ☹️
Great comparison test. Thanks!
Thank you Marlon!
This is the most detailed comparison video I've ever seen. Great work! Thank you so much
Thank you Yichuan!
didnt think id like the eva1 but it was my favorite in this video!
Excellent comparison, thanks sir
Excellent review, some very helpful information there!
Thanks MYOF!
Wow. This is the review I've been waiting for!
Thanks CLMF!!
Hi, could you reply here what the name of that "beauty" filter that you recommended for the EVA-1 - I couldn't make out the name of what you said. Thanks.
Tiffen Black Pro-Mist. Some DPs will just stick a 1/8th pro-mist on every lens for every shot. It's a very popular filter.
Thanks!
This video is so well done my goodness
Thank you Unidrw!!
For your log / grading test, on the Sony FS5 you should select sgamut3.cine color space not REC709. You would have far different (and better) results where colours don't saturate as much as luminance increases. I own the F55 and recently got the FS5 as well to see how it performs. More info on my blog www.hingsberg.com
dennis hingsberg A familiar face from FB. Good points well made, Dennis.
There’s a lot of negativity about the FS5’s colour science, but I think a lot of it comes down to gamut and profile choices that make the grading process harder.
There’s an example floating around on FB that compares an FS5 S-Log3 to an ALEXA LogC clip, and they’re staggeringly similar. If anything, I’d shockingly say the LogC shot had slightly more green cast.
what a great video
Thanks Rudy! Great guitar playing, btw! Shredder!
thanks!
Thank you So So Much for this comparison Video.
Thanks Ravi!
Very beautiful model
Considering the prices here, I'm surprised the FS7 isn't part of the lineup. Excellent video though 👍
Hi Chris. Thanks! I chose not to add the FS7 to the mix because I wanted to give people options within a price range in the compact market - not cameras of all the same price.
Vistek | Your Visual Imaging Experts
I see. That makes perfect sense.