5D Mk 3 vs C100 or C300
- Thread starter drdimento
- Start date
Many big differences between the 5D Mk3 and the Cx00 cameras. Off the top of my head, here are a few items where the Cx00 cameras out perform the 5D Mk3...
- Cx00 cameras have 12 stops of dynamic range over their entire ISO range ( 5D Mk3 can only approach this when shooting RAW via the Magic Lantern hack )
- Unlimited shooting time ( provided your memory cards and batteries hold out )
- Professional image controls
- Much higher image resolution than the 5D Mk3
- Much higher ISO range
- Much longer battery life
- Cx00 cameras have 12 stops of dynamic range over their entire ISO range ( 5D Mk3 can only approach this when shooting RAW via the Magic Lantern hack )
- Unlimited shooting time ( provided your memory cards and batteries hold out )
- Professional image controls
- Much higher image resolution than the 5D Mk3
- Much higher ISO range
- Much longer battery life
ReelWorksMedia
Well-known member
I own the C100, 300, and 5D. I have done lots of shoots with the 5D raw. I would hands down choose a Cxx over the 5D (raw or not) any day. The workflow is just so easy and the results are great. Get the C100.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
The C series is sharper, made for video, and has built-in audio.
ANY DSLR will have video as its secondary function, and it will be a compromise.
ANY DSLR will have video as its secondary function, and it will be a compromise.
Great All !! Thanks for the input. Being a videographer principally but having a steady photo business for commercials, I just never thought of using a photo camera for video for the reasons most have indicated.
BTW, the principal difference between the C100, C300 and C500 other than price is/are ?? I mean I look at the specs over at B&H and am challenged to see much difference since they all seem to have about the same imager (giving out the same image specs) ??
BTW, the principal difference between the C100, C300 and C500 other than price is/are ?? I mean I look at the specs over at B&H and am challenged to see much difference since they all seem to have about the same imager (giving out the same image specs) ??
Andrius Simutis
Veteran
XLR inputs, built in ND, and most importantly the footage just looks a lot better.
Most of the time specs mean nothing. When you look at the actual footage you will see big differences between the Canon 5D Mk3 and the Cx00 camera line.
Specs are even more meaningless when it comes to judging audio gear, like higher end microphones, mixers, or portable audio recorders. On paper they all look great, but very few will hold up on the job.
cpreston
Veteran
The built in ND makes a huge difference in the ability to shoot quickly at events. As everyone says, the C series cameras shoots at a much higher resolution and the footage is quite a bit more forgiving in color correction in post. Colors are close to being the same. One huge difference is that the 5d is full frame, which you probably already had thought about. Optimally, you just own both. They are very complimentary.
Bassman2003
Veteran
To use the 5DMKIII in the same sentence with the C series you need to be shooting with Magic Lantern RAW. If you have photo needs and not long recording times for video, the 5DMKIII with RAW video can be a great choice. The IQ is right up there with the best of them.
Amongst other things ...
C100 = 24mbps
C300 = 50mbps + SDI
C500 = 50mbps + SDI + 4K +120p
Mind you some of these extra capabilities are only available with the use of an external recorder ...
I think I see the difference and for what I want to do, it isn't there for me. I shoot both photo and video. Most of my video going forward (since selling off my broadcast business last year) will be short shots for cinema production, wherein I want to shoot scenes for a movie and have that nice DOF, rich depth in color, and scene image control, although I don't like the idea of using rips to accomplish the task and thus will just use the "in camera" sourcing which I believe is H.264, a codec that I have been quite pleased with since most all I shoot is 30p. I know I know a real cine guy should shoot 24p. Well, I don't follow the rules and win awards so I'm pleased with the result.
Secondly, for the few broadcast jobs I intend to do, or just commercial video, I've been using a pair of Canon XA20's and have to say that other than a few extra moments spent to set the cameras up (screen instead of buttons) I am quite pleased with the result and my clients absolutely love the resulting videos compared to my older XHA1s's that I sold two years ago.
So, if I'm going to go 24mbps, unless I want a bunch of buttons to push and/or "look" bigger and better, ima stick with my XA20's where I get two cameos and extras for the price of one C100. Then, yeah I would like the 50 mbps but I think if I recall the 5D Mk3 shoots something like 35 mbps or higher and it captures from the entire 35mm screen Canon technology told me and then internally compresses to 1920x1080. If that is not correct, I'd love to know.
But, from what I see, for my application, I think the 5D M3 (or is there a M4 coming?) will be the berries for me. Thanks for the help ALL and if anyone has any input on these latter points I offered, would love to hear more. Also, thanks for the Magic Lantern suggestions, although I'm not a fan of doing software overrides or rips to make things happen. I'm a fan of start up, run, finish without a lot of mechanical manipulations other than scene-image controls.
cpreston
Veteran
The 24mbps compression of the C100 is of much higher quality than any of the available h.264 compression on the 5D. The 1920x1080 on the 5D is just the file resolution and does not indicate the perceived resolution of the compressed video. The actual resolution is closer to 720p. The C series cameras are very close to full 1080p resolution.
I would say your best bet for comparisons is to either rent the cameras and shoot something and compare, or search online for comparison videos.
I would say your best bet for comparisons is to either rent the cameras and shoot something and compare, or search online for comparison videos.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Yes, do not get confused with codec number comparisons because there is a lot more to a good final image than just the codec specs. In the case of the 5D, Canon purposefully degrades the image before it hits the h.264 encoding. So the "strength" of the codec does not matter. On the other hand, the image coming from the C100 sensor is so strong that it does not matter that it only has 24mbps to deal with.
Only you can determine the budget, spending priority and final image quality needed for your work. But comparing and XA20 to a C100 or a 5DMKIII shooting RAW is way beyond the codec numbers... As stated, you can not go wrong with a C100.
Only you can determine the budget, spending priority and final image quality needed for your work. But comparing and XA20 to a C100 or a 5DMKIII shooting RAW is way beyond the codec numbers... As stated, you can not go wrong with a C100.
alaskacameradude
Veteran
So, if I'm going to go 24mbps, unless I want a bunch of buttons to push and/or "look" bigger and better, ima stick with my XA20's where I get two cameos and extras for the price of one C100. Then, yeah I would like the 50 mbps but I think if I recall the 5D Mk3 shoots something like 35 mbps or higher and it captures from the entire 35mm screen Canon technology told me and then internally compresses to 1920x1080. If that is not correct, I'd love to know.
But, from what I see, for my application, I think the 5D M3 (or is there a M4 coming?) will be the berries for me. Thanks for the help ALL and if anyone has any input on these latter points I offered, would love to hear more. Also, thanks for the Magic Lantern suggestions, although I'm not a fan of doing software overrides or rips to make things happen. I'm a fan of start up, run, finish without a lot of mechanical manipulations other than scene-image controls.
First, as others have said, you have to look at the whole picture. Canon's 'C' series is made
exclusively for motion pictures. No compromises are made for the needs of stills shooters,
as is done with the 5D M3. If you need to shoot stills, or just don't think the difference in
quality is worth it, just stay with the 5D. I personally make no money from stills, and so
attach no importance to a high megapixel stills modes. I'll stick with the cameras made
for shooting motion. But don't be fooled, the 5D is first and foremost made to capture stills.
The in camera video mode is inferior to the 'C' series.
I guess that is the question I have to answer. Do I want to consider being a photographer? Videographer? Cinematographer? Or both/all three? If I go with the 5D M3 I can of course take absolutely awesome stills (hopefully like the 5D M2 that I sold in the spring and better than 6D that I opted to move to unfortunately that just isn't getting me what I need) and do some pretty awesome looking videos. However, if I intend to move back away from the stills business and move more toward video/cine then sounds like I'd be better off moving in that direction and forget still work.
All this said, one thing I like much more favorably is SD Cards. I absolutely despise Compact Flash now that I have switched over to a video camera that shoots with SD Cards. Years ago SD Cards were very unreliable but today they are awesome. No read errors and virtually indestructible. Moreover, I have about 20 of them. Meanwhile, after switching to the 6D I sold off my entire CF inventory and the idea of having two card inventories doesn't turn me on at all. Enter the C100 that uses SD's. That I could go with AND another reason not to like the 5D M3. Perhaps, I'll hold off and see if Canon gets on board with a 5D M4 that is SD only and therein "make my day" or like the 5D M3 overprice the thing and I'll just stick with the 6D. Either way, looks like I'm not moving at all. :-(
So, ima cancel my ebay watches for 5D M3's and start saving up for me a C100 and/or sell my 6D if I could find a decent full frame Canon for stills. :dankk2:
alaskacameradude
Veteran
You hit the nail squarely on the head. Defining yourself is very important in almost any business.
Are you a Photographer? Cinematographer? Both? Those answers will lead you to what gear
you need. Obviously if you are a photographer a C100 or 300 doesn't do you much good.
Amen. It's a struggle I've suffered ever since making the decision to add photography back to my business in 2008. Having photographed for decades I added photos back just because the price I commanded as a photographer for the amount of work, equaled a more lucrative speculation than video ever rewarded. However, my work at the moment is about 50-50 to say 30 photo and 70 video. I have so much support gear for both and want to keep my assets to a minimum financially and thus I had moved away from the Canon 5D M2 because of its' older technology (hard to believe that any visuals gadget much over 3 years old is a dinosaur) and when considering the 5D M3 thought it was overpriced and not that much added over the 5D2. Even now, I don't favor the thing because of the memory card issue.
Then there's another thing. I like to hire newer talent help as assistants. Sure, I know guys who hire assistants better than themselves and charge buko thousands of dollars for their work, but I don't want that work. I want to put smiles on peoples faces and make them feel they received more than the best value from through the Doc instead of someone else. That said, I don't give my work away but I don't want to be paid "too much." Also, I pick my assignments. I have never advertised, get 100% repeat business, have only lost two customers (both over misunderstandings) and have produced over 1500 projects. Thus, I feel I'm doing a good job and were it not for my love of photography, I'd probably never own much more than a point and shoot. But the fact is, I love framing up a good image and working hard to get a masterpiece each time. At weddings, the customers hardly want that anymore. They want all the portraits out in less than an hour and that means working like a fool, rushing, and getting the shot as opposed to the creative image.
Video, we don't do portraits. I like that. Between ceremony and reception, it's establishing, interviews, and take a nice breath of fresh air. However, with photos instead of manning the camera the entire ceremony, after the chase down the aisle and a few departure shots, it's a couple dozen shots and that's it. Nice. But those portraits :-(
Maybe I'll just stick it out for a while where I'm at. I absolutely love the XA20's if I just could get used to the more complicated 6D. If only the 60D had a full frame. I like that price
Then I could have both economically. Bassman2003
Veteran
Dr., you have some decisions to make! I use the 5DMKII & III for stills work and the MKIII for video work. Imho, there is not that much difference stills-wise between the two from an image quality point of view. Shooting RAW will yield similar images using good glass. I prefer the MKIII because of the 100% viewfinder, better AF and quicker shutter.
The problem with the C-series is that they cost $5000 or $12,000. Other than that they are perfect I do not shoot a ton of SDOF video stuff, so can get away with just using the 5D MKIII for interviews and creative shots. If I shot more SDOF I would go with the C-series.
You can sharpen the 5DMKIII in post, and it can look fine, but the video image is soft using the h.264 encoding. A $300 CF card investment will get you 25 min. of RAW recording and worth the investment imho as you get footage that is up to the quality of the stills.
Coming from the XA20's, are you sure you want a SDOF camera for your main tool? They are different approaches to shooting video.
As far as CF vs SD, I have no real preference. CF is a little larger and easier to keep track of & handle. I do not see the reason to hate them.
The problem with the C-series is that they cost $5000 or $12,000. Other than that they are perfect
I do not shoot a ton of SDOF video stuff, so can get away with just using the 5D MKIII for interviews and creative shots. If I shot more SDOF I would go with the C-series.You can sharpen the 5DMKIII in post, and it can look fine, but the video image is soft using the h.264 encoding. A $300 CF card investment will get you 25 min. of RAW recording and worth the investment imho as you get footage that is up to the quality of the stills.
Coming from the XA20's, are you sure you want a SDOF camera for your main tool? They are different approaches to shooting video.
As far as CF vs SD, I have no real preference. CF is a little larger and easier to keep track of & handle. I do not see the reason to hate them.