Anyone defected to a C100 or C300?

B

bengiles

Well-known member
Incoming heresy...

I'm missing some of that Canon mojo - our clients keep picking the projects we've done on 5DIIs as examples of what they really like - purely on what they see, with no cues as to the technical differences between the films.

I know there are rumours of another EOS C model (200?) at NAB - so we're going to hold off until then.

But I'm wondering if anyone here has made the shift to a C100 or C300. If so, are you still using the AF100?

I'm torn, because I've invested so much time and energy in trying to coax nice results out of the AF100.

An MFT offering from Panasonic would be exciting too - but it's going to have to really wow us with the pics. It would certainly quieten the nagging commentary in my head, reminding me that we've just bought several thousand £ worth of native MFT lenses recently.

Ben.
 
I switched to the C100 in December and used it on numerous jobs. Sold the Af100 to fund it. Even if Canon released this so call C200 the price will be close to $10k or exceed it. If they did a C50 you will lose nd filters n xlrs and who knows what else. I like my camera overall but miss the screen on the side and miss slow-motion greatly. If Sony or Panasonic updates their cameras on the prosumer end which i highly doubt my c100 will be on sale.
 
Have been thinking of this for a while, but after shooting a broadcast spot on a C300 last week, I'm turning against the idea. The log footage is far less exciting than I expected, and grading it is much more of a pain than I thought it would be, footage is surprisingly grainy despite being shot at the native 850 ISO and correctly exposed for skin tones. I'm starting to think that that Af101 is good for another year or so. I know what you mean about clients asking for some 5D mojo but I've found the Nokton 25 provides a good deal of that, plus of course you could always get the Metabones Speedbooster and some decent Nikon manual lenses to give you that fuller frame look. I've mixed 5d and AF101 footage a lot in the past, using the 5d for key shots where I want to sell the mojo look to the client, and using the AF101 for everything else. Having said that, the C100 looks interesting with it's good price point and HDR colour setting...
 
I'm sticking with the AF100 for now. If I were to pick up anything it would be a used F3. I understand why you would want to please your clients but I have never gotten it with the "5D mojo." I think they look orangey and soft. I like what I've seen from the C300 but I think it's too expensive for what it is. Also, I have all Zeiss ZFs and m4/3 lenses so... it would be an expensive change to get into the canon lens ecosystem right now.
 
My station bought the C300 a few months ago. My primary camera was the AF-100 and I own an AF-100. I rented the C100 for several spots and enjoyed the sensitivity and image of the camera. Yes the C100 lacks features that you get with the AF and shares EVF issues as well. However the image in the EVF is much better.
I did a full review of shooting and editing with the C100 and Canon log. Link below

http://eriknaso.com/canon-c100-hands-on-review/

For me in a nut shell the C100 and C300 are very easy to shoot handheld without rigs. The image is very good and the noise is more organic and film like. I shot at very high ISO's that I wouldnt with the AF-100. I avoided 800 up with the AF-100, with the C300 3000 ISO is very usable. This opens up more otions in lighting and preserverving the backgrounds. The lack of full HD over cranking is strange at the pricepoint of the C300 and complete lack of any on the C100 is unaceptable. Audio inputs on the C300 is located on the LCD monitor base as well as the audio levels. I have to tilt the camera to see and adjust it. I guess I need to have more muscle memory but no yet.

I'm keeping my AF-100 for now since I have lenses that I also use with the GH3. I have my eye on an upgrade, and after NAB I can see what's coming from Panasonic and the others then plan for it. Hoping to see a new large sensor camera from Panasomic but who knows. I personally cant afford the C300 and that is the one I would like to own.
 
I've gone to the C100. I love it. The EVF doesn't bother me at all. I shoot mostly in Wide DR space and it's a joy. The image is clean and crisp, a good 1000 lines like the EX1. Ergonomics are the biggest plus of the C100. Low light is a no brainer on the C100 over the AF100. But the biggest reason I went C100 is that I own lot's of Eos glass and I'm now in a Canon ecosystem (c100, 5dmk2 and 3, and xf105). For slo-mo I can use my Mk3 or convert the 1080 60i out of the C100, but I don't really use slo-mo that much anyway. For ownership the c100 made sense as I can always rent a C300, BMC (which I had and dumped), Red.

But I still think the AF100 is a fantastic camera. It just has all the bells and whistles one could ask for. But man, running and gunning on the C100 is just awesome. Add the external recorder to it and you basically have the C300.
 
I just got the AF100, so I wouldn't be looking at a different camera now, any way. But I know that after working with this, I'm not going to anything that doesn't have built in ND. I know that one of Sony's cameras has ND. Do any of the Canon's?
 
BrandonT said:
I just got the AF100, so I wouldn't be looking at a different camera now, any way. But I know that after working with this, I'm not going to anything that doesn't have built in ND. I know that one of Sony's cameras has ND. Do any of the Canon's?
Click to expand...

Both the C100 and C300 have built in NDs.
 
Sony F3s are popping up used, here in the UK. That was my other consideration - our dealer is selling a K model with the 3 cine lenses for just under £9K.

But ergonomics are just as big a deal as the image. We were shooting another BBC Academy job yesterday - lots of running around inside their London W12 buildings. Within 20 mins, I just wasn't getting the steady results I wanted handheld with the AF, gave up and resorted to the sticks. We shot their 2 iPlayer films on the 5DII, almost completely handheld.

So that's ruling out the F3 as an option for us at the moment - we don't really need another unwieldy brick.

Interesting, Dustylense, that you're finding the EVF on the C100 OK - it seems to have caused a lot of noise amongst potential buyers. On paper, the C100 looks like very good value at the moment.

Also, what happened to the BMCC? Why did you abandon that?

Ben.
 
bengiles said:
Interesting, Dustylense, that you're finding the EVF on the C100 OK - it seems to have caused a lot of noise amongst potential buyers. On paper, the C100 looks like very good value at the moment.

Also, what happened to the BMCC? Why did you abandon that?

Ben.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am curious about the latter too. I seem to remember getting a lot of static from you when I mentioned the issues I found with the BMCC a while back....
 
Well, I have an xf105. It mimics the EVF in the C100. The XF300's evf mimics the C300. THe evf for me is just for framing. I don't rely on it for exposure. I see the peaking in the EVF so I'm having little issues focusing. Most times my shot is on sticks or slider and I set focus off the LCD. If I need an EVF and critical focus, I attach and external EVF, like I would on any camera such as a DSLR, AF100, F3, RED. So the EVF is functional as a framing device for me on the C100. Could it have been better. For sure! But it has not made me think twice of the C100's purchase. Again, if it's an issue I just attach the external EVF anyway and problem is solved.

Ahhhhh, the BMC. Where to start? First, the image is great. Or shall I say can be great. 8 out of 10 times it's great. For me (FOR ME), I have the need for wide shots and not just close ups of faces like you see in narrative work. I shot a couple projects with it and ran into many shots where the dreaded moire popped up. Just plain ruined the shots. And here I bought an AF100 2 years ago to overcome the 5dMk2's issue of moire. So with the BMC "I" felt even with it's beautiful color science, I took a step backwards with its issue with moire. I'd got use to not having to ask an interviewee if it were possible to change their shirt because my camera can't record it properly. I have point n shoots that handle moire. THe moire for the things I shoot on the BMC was just unacceptable for "ME".

Then it boiled down to workflow. If you have RAW, you're gonna want to shoot RAW. I mean why not? You don't buy a Corvette to drive 35 mph all the time right. "But there's Prores" scream the fanboys. Fine, there's Prores, that still moires. For "ME" and what I shoot, uncompressed RAW and its workflow didn't jive. Or let's say the trade off "if" the image hit wasn't worth it. People will say, "Have fun doing your VFX in Canon's 8 bit". I don't do VFX. The biggest VFX I need is green sceen and the C100 handles it just fine.

13 stops!!!!! OK. I come from slide film. Slide film had at best 8 stops. Usually 7 of useable detailed DR. 12 stops for 99% of what I shoot is a luxury, which I usually end up grading to a high contrast punchy color anyway. So it wasn't a real trade off letting go of the BMC on that end either. If I need 15 stops DR, I'll rent the camera that delivers it. It's just a new marketing ploy these days anyway. "THis camera has 12.4 stops DR and that one has 12.8". Come on....

Ergonomics! C100 wins there over the BMC and nearly every camera I've ever filmed with.

Just the continuing issues with the BMC. EF mount? Whoever was remotely involved in the development and conception of the EF mount on a M4/3 sized sensor is a complete and utter moron. Lots of users here have shot with the AF100 and GH2. Has there been a single lens that can cover the M/43 sensor that you have failed to mount? That is the brilliance of the M4/3. As long as the image circle is big enough you can shoot with it in the format. Then back that up that most EOS glass doesn't even talk to the BMC! Then back back that up with the fact that BMC made the darn flange wrong! "Well, I planned to mount my Zeiss with adapters and stuff". Great, mount that crap on the M4/3 mount! Finding a wide angle solution on the EF version of the BMC is just wayyyyyyy too limited. Total failure designing that camera in EF mount.

THe BMC is a version 1.0 camera. It's cheap. So if anything it WILL be improved upon either by BMD themselves or another company. If not, then make the M4/3 and make it available over the counter, slap a Mosaic Engineering VAF in it and maybe I'll buy it again. Or just wait for the improved product (by the time a M4/3 BMC is over the counter available, there might be that other solution?????).

So the camera in it's current state didn't fit "ME". Others will find total joy with it. It can and does produce great images. Just watch what your subject is wearing.

The C100 had what I needed. I shoot stills and video. For stills I have lots of EOS glass. My lenses go from my MK3 to my C100 and can pack in a single carry on. THe C100 has built in ND. ANy Af100 user understands the luxury of that. Waveform, peaking, microphone built in, XLR, headphone out, and connectivity to external recorder. All in check. It's super ergonomic. Does not moire (at least I haven't seen it). Produces a crisp sharp detailed image. It's S35. If I need Cine optics I have zero problems renting the Canon Cinema lenses. They're awesome. No slo mo but if I really really need it I can either convert the 1080/60i or use my MK3 (or rent a C300 or FS700 or EPIC or F5 or F3 or even the AF100). I'm getting tired of overcrank anyway. Two small batteries and a couple SD cards and I can shoot all day. Plus, I really like working in the Wide DR profile on the C100. Plus, I don't need to rig it beyond what it has. Maybe a external monitor here and there or recorder. No cages, no top handles, not even a shoulder mount. I've got a ton of 15mil rails I'm using to destroy dandelions out in my front yard. I just need two now if I need to mount a follow focus.

But thats just me. Apples and oranges and maybe a bit bananas. Pick the fruit that works for you. I don't nor plan to shoot the next Avengers. And if I do, I'll rent what I need because if you are shooting something like that you have the budget to do so. I worked for 2 years with the AF100 and loved it. Price per pound there might not be a better camera. I just wanted a single ecosystem and I picked with what my largest investment is in image wise and that is my EOS glass. And I'm super pleased with the C100 fitting that bill. I might be done chasing cameras for the next 2 years or more. Plus, both the BMC and the C100 paid themselves off so that is good. My Af100 paid itself off 40 times over. All on stupid little corporate jobs. It fits me.
 
dustylense said:
And I ran into them! LOL!
Click to expand...

I think you pretty much accurately described the issues in your previous post which made it a non-starter for me as well.
Sooooo close, yet not far enough. In their desire to draw the DSLR crowd over to the camera, they unfortunately recovered some of the problems as well.

Of course, Barry pegged the OLPF issue from the beginning. It is the greatest current issue with the camera.

For maneuverability I use a 5D Mark III with a small touch of sharpening in post. Actually it's softness is quite helpful with femaie talent sometimes in fact. For more filmic stuff I use an F3 - the best used deal going right now for people who want to move up from DSLR's for narrative purposes. Really tremendous and undervalued in my opinion.

When BMCC deals with their issues, they are going to knock one out of the park. For the moment, they are just a promising rookie.
 
dustylense said:
Well, I have an xf105. It mimics the EVF in the C100. The XF300's evf mimics the C300. THe evf for me is just for framing. I don't rely on it for exposure. I see the peaking in the EVF so I'm having little issues focusing. Most times my shot is on sticks or slider and I set focus off the LCD. If I need an EVF and critical focus, I attach and external EVF, like I would on any camera such as a DSLR, AF100, F3, RED. So the EVF is functional as a framing device for me on the C100. Could it have been better. For sure! But it has not made me think twice of the C100's purchase. Again, if it's an issue I just attach the external EVF anyway and problem is solved.
Click to expand...

The first time I used the EVF I thought it was utter crap. But I find myself using it more and more, and a hell of a lot while shooting with it during SXSW. Frankly, I'd rather have an off-camera articulating EVF, so I plan to go third-party for that, especially since I prefer to mount a camera with weight considerations on my shoulder rig rather than where it needs to be to use the EVF (have done that with the HPX170 and it makes the entire thing really heavy when you balance it out with the camera sitting fully up-front).
 
Yeah, that's really interesting hearing the issues that people are running into... I figured those would all be problems, and then everyone told me how crazy I was, and it got generally unpleasant enough over there I haven't even bothered to go back. I know that if I had stayed with the BMC, I would have ended up writing dustylense's post (well, minus the C100 stuff). There's so much obvious room for improvement (and simple, easy improvements!) with the BMC design, I can't imagine that we won't see a "fixed", "proper" BMC soon. Maybe even three weeks from now at NAB 2013. If not, well, I can wait. I would much rather buy something that works the way I want it to, and works right the first time, than go on the development-journey-through-hell...

Just -- please, for the love of all that is good and holy, fire whoever it was that came up with the idea to not put an OLPF in there! Do it right this time, please...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top