Dustin, before I say anything else, I just want to tell you just how fantastic your channel is and how helpful you are to me. As someone that has been in the advertising business for decades, I am now making a transition out of commercial work and into full-time documentary filmmaking. Frankly, your practice looks a lot like what I am stepping away from and you come across with the PERFECT blend of knowledge, expertise and overall perspective. I feel very lucky to have found you! As a relatively new (within the last year) C500 mark 2 owner myself, I was really happy to see that you had done this video. For a quick second, I started to think that, first, maybe I need to immediately bail on my C500, if for no other reason than to protect my investment, since this new camera will devalue my camera. I bought the thing - which, Dustin, only had THIRTY FIVE hours on it, a fully paid up and transferable extended warrantee thru 25) at a package price of $9500. This purchase included a bunch of accessories (including the the 4 channel expansion unit, a full Bright Tangerine cage, Wooden Camera mattbox and a kitchen sink full of other gear - all in pristine condition) that exceed $5000 in value. Dude, I hit the freaking lotto on this purchase! But now here comes this new kid, flaunting her stuff down the block. I started to ruminate about whether leveraging my purchase before it loses value by jumping into the C400 would be the cheapest way to get the entire feature list the camera flaunts. After watching your video, I’ve decided to hold on to C500 m2! Thanks for such an amazing job!!
Thanks so much for the very kind words, I greatly appreciate them. I do these videos for fun, but also in the hope that they're helpful or at least mildly entertaining for people, so it's nice to hear the feedback. It sounds like you got a very good deal on an extremely high end camera that will be useful until clients are asking for beyond 6k delivery, in my opinion. Yes, there will always be new cameras and new tech, but those are just excuses for camera companies to sell you something that you probably don't need to make great work. I do realize, though, it all depends on your perspective of how your tools are valued and used. For me a camera is just a tool that is used to make the money. It's not an investment in itself. Eventually it will be worthless as tech advances. I have no expectation of selling it down the road for anywhere close to what I paid for it. In some ways I consider it the same way a carpenter approaches a hammer or a saw. I wonder if they buy a saw thinking, "how much can I sell this saw for in 5 years after I've been using it?" Happy shooting!
Yep, this. ^ I'm happy to get a C400...once they go down in price in a year or two, like you said. It technically is smaller than my C500II and has almost the same capabilities across the board. But until the need arises, I'll most likely be sticking with my C500 II.
I never got on the C70 train, but I did shoot with a C300 III for a couple of years. I thought it was a fantastic camera. The C400 should have many years in front of it.
C400 is probably the best value and most well-rounded cinema camera ever released by Canon, except for R5c. However, this camera alone won't drastically change Sony's dominance in the video camera market. Canon needs to put a lot more work in opening RF mount, releasing more mid- and low-end RF video bodies, improving the accessory ecosystem.
Yeah, Canon really does need something else on the RF side of things for cinema cameras. Even a C70 mark II or something on the higher end than the C400 would be a good start at rounding things out in the same way that Sony has.
Sony has still a better camera line up : FX3 - FX6 - FX9 - Burano - Venice. Still, the C400 looks great for Canon shooters! But for my part, I won't switch brand again this time (I did that too many times and it's just a big waste of money). I have a FX3 + FX6 at the moment and will get someday a Burano, or perhaps a second hand ARRI AMIRA, or Komodo X.
@@frankfeng2701 Yeah it's amazing that they very quickly released the C80. It's a great, slightly cheaper option than the C400. I guess you could call out the R5C as Canon's answer to the FX3, but they definitely don't have an FX30 competitor at the moment.
@@JS_Leger Yep, understood. I definitely like two identical cameras for matching in Multicam if you can, but it's usually pretty achievable to match things up nowadays with most digital cameras. Having something large and small can be helpful when rigging out cameras in different ways, but in this case the C400 is small enough it could probably be both your "large" (when rigged out) and "small" camera.
@@dustinschmidtphoto all Sony Cameras looks pretty identical to be honest. It's really easy to match them. And if you struggle to do it, there is a plugin called "cinematch" that allows you to match any cameras. I use it all the time when I use other brands (RED, Canon, Blackmagic, Panasonic,...) with my Sony cameras. A lot of big video productions compagnies use Sony cameras for live events, mixing FX3, FX6, FX9, Burano,.. But if you think you ll prefer the C400, I guess go for it! I'm pretty sure it will be perfect for your needs :-)
Great question. I do occasionally rent camera bodies or lenses if I have a job that requires some sort of special need (high speed, macro, etc.) beyond what my current gear can provide. But those situations are niche. If I can accomplish a shoot with what I have and own, then I'll use that. The C400 doesn't really offer any features over what I currently own that I can't make happen in some way. I imagine I'll get a C400 in a few years when it's up on the used market.
I think people get carried away by the whole 8k over hype but honestly if you are shooting 4k at the XFAVC All I that Scales so well to 6k and is more than enough for most jobs and I'm thoroughly enjoying that on the R5C. People will hate on the C400 just like they did with the C70 but it will turn out to be a work horse for most productions besides the unhappy "RUclips filmmakers" who just do gear & setup videos.
Totally agree. I don’t know too many people actually shooting 8k across any number of camera systems that can do it. Eventually when computers catch up I’ll probably lean more into the 8k raw that the R5C can do and then it will be a whole new camera again. But 4k is going to carry over for a long time as an acquisition format. And yeah, the C400 is going to be a total workhorse just like the C70 is. Big difference between hype and specs and actual usability and working pros.
@@dustinschmidtphoto If this resolution came in conjunction with say a 3:2 open gate sensor , now that would be great. It would mean I could then use that combination to get high res square footage which can then be adapted to 1:1 , 16:9 and 9:16 which honestly where content is right now. Unless you are doing mainstream content you are more likely to do Multi format delivery.
@@karanshetty2530 Agreed. More 3:2 sensors would be a great option at 8k. But you're right that most camera companies aren't making cameras for multi format delivery. They're focused on cinema.
Well, they definitely have to kill the whole cinema line because of the lack of RF mounts. I’m looking forward to see more photo slash cinema lenses like the new RF 35mm that just came out! At the end of the day these are tools and the EF mount cameras can still get the job done, as a canon shooter I prefer RF lenses but you can definitely start a legit production company with the EF cinema cameras for a low price !
Yep, this ^. Eventually the tech will force a move to RF, but you can still make a killing with EF lenses and cameras. I think we're still a long ways away from that ceasing to be true.
The C400 will do what the FX6 did to FX9 - it will kill all the other ”higher end” models. Take this from an FX9 user - sell your C500 II while you can, when the C400 drops it will be worthless more or less. No one wants to buy my FX9 now because of the FX6.
I agree with you. The C400 most likely will cannibalize everything else in that range for them. Personally I'll continue to shoot with my C500 II until it dies though. I'm not concerned with it from a resale perspective, it's been a depreciating asset from the moment it was purchased. It's just a light proof box that captures the images that make me money.
@@dustinschmidtphoto True, good perspective there. Here´s my situation: I got an FX9 brand new last year with two Sigma lenses, also new. With time I realised how much I hated its weight, power consumtion, size, and the fact that you must crop in on the sensor to get any form of slow motion. FF is only up to 30p. Also, in slow mo you get no AF. So in 1 year I´ve lost about 4000 dollars. It has an amazing image but that dosen´t do it.
I agree. At $11k launch price, FX9 is the worst value camera body that carries the IMX410 sensor. I'm surprised FX9II is still not out yet, which should carry the a9iii GS sensor.
I could be wrong but I don’t think Arri raw is all that compressed? That’s where I think RED raw excels. Compressed to useable file sizes on media that you can actually afford. (Doesn’t arri raw require codex drives?)
@@dustinschmidtphoto yes arri do,. but it's the best, but you are right red is maybe best & affordable raw, canon is too heavy on machine, even though it's just 12bit compare to 16bit redraw.
I think they put next to no R&D into this camera, especially given the time to release. I have the R3, C70 and C500 II and it seems they basically just took the C500II body, the motors/ND from the C70 and the sensor from the R3 and slammed it all together. I dont know which camera this is meant to be replacing? C70 or C500? or is it a new addition? Would love to see some comparison footage of C400 to C500, because if it's the R3 sensor the image out of that is nothing even close to the C500.
image quality looks sharper than the C70 and on par with the C500 and C300...I think the difference between that and the C500 is a few functions. I also think if they went 8k RAW it would have been a C500 Mk III and would have been competing with RED
It's interesting because Canon said that the C400 technically slots in between the C300 III and C500 II. But it has features that beat both, and then some things where it isn't as adaptable. All things considered, I'd go for a C400 at the moment if I was starting from scratch.
A truly great 8K raw from Canon would be a big leap. The 8K out of the R5C is pretty good, but not on par with the C500 II's raw image. 8K is definitely coming though, no doubt.
I posed this same comment already. Canon is just too late. Canon as company just baffles me, just screw your customers for no reason. Never give your customers the much need things. while we waited for them to catch up. It started with no 10 bit for the C200 so people moved onto the Sony, black magic, red, ZCAM and Kinefinity. They have lost the cinema race. Move over to the new RF mount for mirrorless, lockdown out the mount. Then didn’t provide lens or cameras with good dynamic range. Holding back a good log curve. So they lost lens mount race and mirrorless camera race. People have invested into other systems. Very few people will move back to canon. New system is too expensive and they era a generation behind. Their RF glass is more noisy than the third party lens and finally a full size HDMI. They have destroyed the Canon name. They’re more known as “canon cripple hamer”. They chose to wear that badge for a decade and proudly. Segmented their cameras to useless models. They are so out of touch with their customers base, to the point of going out of business. Wow!! How only 3 worthy cameras can’t keep them a float. Sad just sad.
I'm not sure if this is public knowledge but the C400 is the current Canon Flashship, because Canon is allowing people who purchase multiples of the C400 to also get a FREE C500 MK2 or C300 MK3 with their purchase, buyer's choice. so the C500 MK2 is no longer their flagship if they are giving it away...under the right purchasing circumstances.
That’s certainly interesting, I hadn’t heard about that promo. I primarily put the C500 II at the top purely based on pricing, but there’s no doubt the C400 packs more into a smaller and cheaper package. Aside from a couple of niche features that the C500 II has, the C400 is an arguably better camera for most things. I’m sure Canon is chomping at the bit to move fully over to RF but they probably need to unload their EF inventory first.
Supposedly the word from Canon is that the C400 has similar dynamic range to the C500 II and just a touch less than the C70 and the C300 III since those have dual gain output sensors and perform better in the shadows. Personally having shot with both the C500 II and the C300 III, I prefer the C500 II image. We will have to wait and see how the C400 performs.
@@dustinschmidtphoto Canon also tells the story of 15 or 16 stops DR even if every test shows an absolute maximum of 13. Its just marketing. And I bet the c400 is going to flood the used market even faster then the c200 did.
@@740intercoolerevery camera company aside from Arri inflates their DR numbers. The C400 will be on par with the best that Canon can offer. Plenty of usable range for the type of work most of us do, but yes, not a true 15-16 stops most likely. I hope they do go on the used market soon! If they do I’d probably pick one up!
Dustin, before I say anything else, I just want to tell you just how fantastic your channel is and how helpful you are to me. As someone that has been in the advertising business for decades, I am now making a transition out of commercial work and into full-time documentary filmmaking. Frankly, your practice looks a lot like what I am stepping away from and you come across with the PERFECT blend of knowledge, expertise and overall perspective. I feel very lucky to have found you!
As a relatively new (within the last year) C500 mark 2 owner myself, I was really happy to see that you had done this video. For a quick second, I started to think that, first, maybe I need to immediately bail on my C500, if for no other reason than to protect my investment, since this new camera will devalue my camera. I bought the thing - which, Dustin, only had THIRTY FIVE hours on it, a fully paid up and transferable extended warrantee thru 25) at a package price of $9500. This purchase included a bunch of accessories (including the the 4 channel expansion unit, a full Bright Tangerine cage, Wooden Camera mattbox and a kitchen sink full of other gear - all in pristine condition) that exceed $5000 in value. Dude, I hit the freaking lotto on this purchase!
But now here comes this new kid, flaunting her stuff down the block. I started to ruminate about whether leveraging my purchase before it loses value by jumping into the C400 would be the cheapest way to get the entire feature list the camera flaunts. After watching your video, I’ve decided to hold on to C500 m2! Thanks for such an amazing job!!
Thanks so much for the very kind words, I greatly appreciate them. I do these videos for fun, but also in the hope that they're helpful or at least mildly entertaining for people, so it's nice to hear the feedback.
It sounds like you got a very good deal on an extremely high end camera that will be useful until clients are asking for beyond 6k delivery, in my opinion. Yes, there will always be new cameras and new tech, but those are just excuses for camera companies to sell you something that you probably don't need to make great work.
I do realize, though, it all depends on your perspective of how your tools are valued and used.
For me a camera is just a tool that is used to make the money. It's not an investment in itself. Eventually it will be worthless as tech advances. I have no expectation of selling it down the road for anywhere close to what I paid for it. In some ways I consider it the same way a carpenter approaches a hammer or a saw. I wonder if they buy a saw thinking, "how much can I sell this saw for in 5 years after I've been using it?"
Happy shooting!
The C400 is very tempting. But I may go the used camera route for a C500 M2. If the C400 drops in price in the next year or two, I'll get one.
Yep, this. ^ I'm happy to get a C400...once they go down in price in a year or two, like you said. It technically is smaller than my C500II and has almost the same capabilities across the board. But until the need arises, I'll most likely be sticking with my C500 II.
I got one coming in September! I will get rid of a C70. It's gonna give me mileage for years. I got a ton of use from the C70.
I never got on the C70 train, but I did shoot with a C300 III for a couple of years. I thought it was a fantastic camera. The C400 should have many years in front of it.
Great video, thank you!
Thanks for watching. Hope it was helpful or mildly entertaining.
@ It was! That goes for both of course haha.
I'm just watching the used market to see where the C300 mkiii is going to land in all this.
It would be a fantastic pick up for sure. I've seen them going used for anywhere between $3500 - $5500 depending on accessories.
C400 is probably the best value and most well-rounded cinema camera ever released by Canon, except for R5c. However, this camera alone won't drastically change Sony's dominance in the video camera market. Canon needs to put a lot more work in opening RF mount, releasing more mid- and low-end RF video bodies, improving the accessory ecosystem.
Yeah, Canon really does need something else on the RF side of things for cinema cameras. Even a C70 mark II or something on the higher end than the C400 would be a good start at rounding things out in the same way that Sony has.
Sony has still a better camera line up : FX3 - FX6 - FX9 - Burano - Venice. Still, the C400 looks great for Canon shooters! But for my part, I won't switch brand again this time (I did that too many times and it's just a big waste of money). I have a FX3 + FX6 at the moment and will get someday a Burano, or perhaps a second hand ARRI AMIRA, or Komodo X.
@@dustinschmidtphoto They released C80 right after, but that's still on the expensive side.
@@JS_Leger Don't forget FX30, an entry-level compact body that is popular among beginners and prosumers.
@@frankfeng2701 Yeah it's amazing that they very quickly released the C80. It's a great, slightly cheaper option than the C400. I guess you could call out the R5C as Canon's answer to the FX3, but they definitely don't have an FX30 competitor at the moment.
Sony Burano vs 3 C400s for multicams?
Certainly comparable in price is all I’m saying. But should anyone buy 3 C400’s? Probably not if you’re a solo operator. That’s a bit overkill.
I'd choose a Burano for my part, but mostly because I already have a FX3+FX6. Otherwise if you don't have anything, why not 3 C400 ;-)
@@dustinschmidtphoto he talked for muticams
@@JS_Leger Yep, understood. I definitely like two identical cameras for matching in Multicam if you can, but it's usually pretty achievable to match things up nowadays with most digital cameras. Having something large and small can be helpful when rigging out cameras in different ways, but in this case the C400 is small enough it could probably be both your "large" (when rigged out) and "small" camera.
@@dustinschmidtphoto all Sony Cameras looks pretty identical to be honest. It's really easy to match them. And if you struggle to do it, there is a plugin called "cinematch" that allows you to match any cameras. I use it all the time when I use other brands (RED, Canon, Blackmagic, Panasonic,...) with my Sony cameras.
A lot of big video productions compagnies use Sony cameras for live events, mixing FX3, FX6, FX9, Burano,..
But if you think you ll prefer the C400, I guess go for it! I'm pretty sure it will be perfect for your needs :-)
Will you rent the C400 and throw the cost into future jobs just to use it?
Great question. I do occasionally rent camera bodies or lenses if I have a job that requires some sort of special need (high speed, macro, etc.) beyond what my current gear can provide. But those situations are niche. If I can accomplish a shoot with what I have and own, then I'll use that. The C400 doesn't really offer any features over what I currently own that I can't make happen in some way. I imagine I'll get a C400 in a few years when it's up on the used market.
I think people get carried away by the whole 8k over hype but honestly if you are shooting 4k at the XFAVC All I that Scales so well to 6k and is more than enough for most jobs and I'm thoroughly enjoying that on the R5C. People will hate on the C400 just like they did with the C70 but it will turn out to be a work horse for most productions besides the unhappy "RUclips filmmakers" who just do gear & setup videos.
Totally agree. I don’t know too many people actually shooting 8k across any number of camera systems that can do it. Eventually when computers catch up I’ll probably lean more into the 8k raw that the R5C can do and then it will be a whole new camera again. But 4k is going to carry over for a long time as an acquisition format. And yeah, the C400 is going to be a total workhorse just like the C70 is. Big difference between hype and specs and actual usability and working pros.
@@dustinschmidtphoto If this resolution came in conjunction with say a 3:2 open gate sensor , now that would be great. It would mean I could then use that combination to get high res square footage which can then be adapted to 1:1 , 16:9 and 9:16 which honestly where content is right now. Unless you are doing mainstream content you are more likely to do Multi format delivery.
@@karanshetty2530 Agreed. More 3:2 sensors would be a great option at 8k. But you're right that most camera companies aren't making cameras for multi format delivery. They're focused on cinema.
Well, they definitely have to kill the whole cinema line because of the lack of RF mounts. I’m looking forward to see more photo slash cinema lenses like the new RF 35mm that just came out! At the end of the day these are tools and the EF mount cameras can still get the job done, as a canon shooter I prefer RF lenses but you can definitely start a legit production company with the EF cinema cameras for a low price !
Yep, this ^. Eventually the tech will force a move to RF, but you can still make a killing with EF lenses and cameras. I think we're still a long ways away from that ceasing to be true.
The C400 will do what the FX6 did to FX9 - it will kill all the other ”higher end” models. Take this from an FX9 user - sell your C500 II while you can, when the C400 drops it will be worthless more or less. No one wants to buy my FX9 now because of the FX6.
I agree with you. The C400 most likely will cannibalize everything else in that range for them. Personally I'll continue to shoot with my C500 II until it dies though. I'm not concerned with it from a resale perspective, it's been a depreciating asset from the moment it was purchased. It's just a light proof box that captures the images that make me money.
@@dustinschmidtphoto True, good perspective there. Here´s my situation: I got an FX9 brand new last year with two Sigma lenses, also new. With time I realised how much I hated its weight, power consumtion, size, and the fact that you must crop in on the sensor to get any form of slow motion. FF is only up to 30p. Also, in slow mo you get no AF.
So in 1 year I´ve lost about 4000 dollars. It has an amazing image but that dosen´t do it.
If it's not suiting your business needs then it's definitely not a camera to keep around. At that point, yeah, definitely cut your losses and move on.
@@dustinschmidtphoto thanks man!
I agree. At $11k launch price, FX9 is the worst value camera body that carries the IMX410 sensor. I'm surprised FX9II is still not out yet, which should carry the a9iii GS sensor.
arri raw ???
I could be wrong but I don’t think Arri raw is all that compressed? That’s where I think RED raw excels. Compressed to useable file sizes on media that you can actually afford. (Doesn’t arri raw require codex drives?)
@@dustinschmidtphoto yes arri do,. but it's the best, but you are right red is maybe best & affordable raw, canon is too heavy on machine, even though it's just 12bit compare to 16bit redraw.
I think they put next to no R&D into this camera, especially given the time to release.
I have the R3, C70 and C500 II and it seems they basically just took the C500II body, the motors/ND from the C70 and the sensor from the R3 and slammed it all together.
I dont know which camera this is meant to be replacing? C70 or C500? or is it a new addition? Would love to see some comparison footage of C400 to C500, because if it's the R3 sensor the image out of that is nothing even close to the C500.
image quality looks sharper than the C70 and on par with the C500 and C300...I think the difference between that and the C500 is a few functions. I also think if they went 8k RAW it would have been a C500 Mk III and would have been competing with RED
It's interesting because Canon said that the C400 technically slots in between the C300 III and C500 II. But it has features that beat both, and then some things where it isn't as adaptable. All things considered, I'd go for a C400 at the moment if I was starting from scratch.
A truly great 8K raw from Canon would be a big leap. The 8K out of the R5C is pretty good, but not on par with the C500 II's raw image. 8K is definitely coming though, no doubt.
I posed this same comment already. Canon is just too late. Canon as company just baffles me, just screw your customers for no reason. Never give your customers the much need things. while we waited for them to catch up. It started with no 10 bit for the C200 so people moved onto the Sony, black magic, red, ZCAM and Kinefinity. They have lost the cinema race. Move over to the new RF mount for mirrorless, lockdown out the mount. Then didn’t provide lens or cameras with good dynamic range. Holding back a good log curve. So they lost lens mount race and mirrorless camera race. People have invested into other systems. Very few people will move back to canon. New system is too expensive and they era a generation behind. Their RF glass is more noisy than the third party lens and finally a full size HDMI. They have destroyed the Canon name. They’re more known as “canon cripple hamer”. They chose to wear that badge for a decade and proudly. Segmented their cameras to useless models. They are so out of touch with their customers base, to the point of going out of business. Wow!! How only 3 worthy cameras can’t keep them a float. Sad just sad.
I'm not sure if this is public knowledge but the C400 is the current Canon Flashship, because Canon is allowing people who purchase multiples of the C400 to also get a FREE C500 MK2 or C300 MK3 with their purchase, buyer's choice.
so the C500 MK2 is no longer their flagship if they are giving it away...under the right purchasing circumstances.
That’s certainly interesting, I hadn’t heard about that promo. I primarily put the C500 II at the top purely based on pricing, but there’s no doubt the C400 packs more into a smaller and cheaper package. Aside from a couple of niche features that the C500 II has, the C400 is an arguably better camera for most things. I’m sure Canon is chomping at the bit to move fully over to RF but they probably need to unload their EF inventory first.
Nice camera the C400 but, unexpectedly, the C70 looks better in your comparison
At this point you can get a C70 for so cheap, it's an amazing buy. If you don't need certain features...it may be the smarter business decision.
Where is this footage?
Yeah what comparison @@PeacefulMoments1844
DR is not high end like C500II or even C70. Why is everybody telling this wrong?
Supposedly the word from Canon is that the C400 has similar dynamic range to the C500 II and just a touch less than the C70 and the C300 III since those have dual gain output sensors and perform better in the shadows. Personally having shot with both the C500 II and the C300 III, I prefer the C500 II image. We will have to wait and see how the C400 performs.
@@dustinschmidtphoto Canon also tells the story of 15 or 16 stops DR even if every test shows an absolute maximum of 13. Its just marketing. And I bet the c400 is going to flood the used market even faster then the c200 did.
@@740intercoolerevery camera company aside from Arri inflates their DR numbers. The C400 will be on par with the best that Canon can offer. Plenty of usable range for the type of work most of us do, but yes, not a true 15-16 stops most likely. I hope they do go on the used market soon! If they do I’d probably pick one up!