you can change it to gain.

Wow, downloading the 1080p version now. Even at 720p the C300 is much sharper... Once the iso starts getting cranked it still produced some pretty "grain"..

Thanks for the test!

The Canon can do 30 dB maximum. You put the Sony in its best and the canon half the way.

Mario, I compared 24 dB Sony F3 w/ 30 dB Canon C300, because the Sony can't shoot 30 dB firmware wise. Perhaps it can shoot 30 dB in the future!

I'm sorry, I did'n see the 24 dB shot with the C300 may be because it was not at the final comparison.

yes, don't get permission for that.

Hahah

super flat picture profiles always seem brighter but it would be great if it holds up low light performance when adding contrast. Anyway, I think both the F3 and C300 make beautiful pictures. I just didn't like the codec of the F3 on SxS cards. It has this ultra sharp Sony look like the EX1 had too. It's a matter of taste! I love it on some situations but it seemed the C300 looked more natural or if you want to say so... filmic. But like I said, beautiful cameras and exciting times ahead :)

c-log and technicolor is flat too. but of course not as flat as s-log. i noticed, that s-log doubles the sensitivity of the sensor, though it's harder to grade afterwards.

if I put Log-C (Alexa) side by side with any other codec it looks brighter because it shows more details but if I start grading, it always gets darker depending on how I will grade it of course. could you do a F3-SLog vs. C300 comparison (18dB) with a little contrast to match the shots? Just curious if it looks similar. I had a feeling that light sensitivity on both cameras are nearly equal but grain structure is different

Doesn't matter if you record externally or internally the brightness will be the same. Luminance is not affected by 8 or 10bit.

The S-Log is a lot flatter and therefore looks brighter than the equivalent on the C300...just depends on the grade.

Hey guys, your're all right - and not ;-)
You are mainly talking about taste of an image look, or how flat or flatter some cameras or Picture Profiles are (for that matter we need a gamma-test chart to find out out how "flat" they really are), I think we have to seperate the 8-bit cameras from the 10-bit cameras, because you have a lot more freedome of exposure with a 10-bit camera, you dont even need to exposure soo correctly, because of 10-bit you can correct it via post - you have 4-times more shades of RGB, so it's easier to correct in post if you know what to do.
On the other side are the 8-bit Cameras like DSLRs, AF-101, FS-100 and the C300 which are getting better and better BUT ... there is the limitation of the 8-bits.
Under "normal" circumstances you would not recognize much difference in image quality or any posterization or banding effects when you have lots of structures in the image, even noise helps reducing banding effects even when using black-level rising picture profiles and later adding LUT or contrast.
The only concern I have with this black-rising-logarithmic Gamma-Curves is mainly the black-rising, because if you lower the black level later in post to gain more contrast, you loose precious shades in RGB and in the worst case will get banding effects ... mainly on sky gradients, big objects with color gradients and so on.
I know it's all so technical and I dont want to take away the good wind in the sails of this great cameras, but I think it's not so unimportant to know when using cameras with 8-bit codec/outputs.

Patrick, the 2 extra bits of the Sony make its sampling more precise but don't change the sensor noise. So noise-wise extra bits don't give you more freedom of exposure.
And about the grading of flat imagery: To get more contrast you can curve the low end down without crushing the blacks level. The blacks usually have not risen but have been curved. One exception is the infamous technicolor style for the 5D/7D, which has a risen black level and therefore throws away precious bits in its already narrow 8-bit H264 codec.

Thats the question Floris, is the black level rised or not rised on the C300 with C-Log, a waveformmonitor check would clarify that. On the other hand I'm sure it can be compensated with the earlier mentioned black level parameter from the C300.

Patrick: Does the Sony F-3 w/ S-Log raise the black levels? Any update yet on whether this is the case with Canon's C-Log?

I suppose you can see what each is doing after they are all mega compressed equally.

not very well thus my comment :)

ja, aber darum geht es ja nicht. ;-)

That's true Mario. But I only compared C300 24 dB with 24 dB of the Sony F3. You can't compare 30 dB with 24 dB. 30 dB is of course better, but you wouldn't use it on a professional shoot!