C100: C100 AVCHD, is it still a pain? And other questions from an FS100 user

Z

zwarte_kat

Active member
Hi there!
A short background:

I have been shooting with the FS100 the last few years. I actually come from being an editor and now I am more or less a guy who does small projects pretty much by myself (apart from assistants/talents etc.). The style videos that I make are short (low budget/start up) promos, events, education, and loads of various corporate work. I like doing doc stuff as well and would like to make more.

The FS100 has been good to me. Having already bought it second hand for a good price, it made it's money back many times. Again, I am mainly an editor, but shooting is my passion. Even if I don't make much money with the shooting I make it well back on finishing the rest of the video.

I already have everything I need for production: lenses, lights, tripod, monitor etc. Even a teleprompter.
I am actually selling a bunch of stuff because I have too much.

Having had a good year last year I have some money to spend, and I was thinking to switch to a C100, mainly to simply make the shooting and post production more comfortable, fast, and enjoyable, because:
  1. Build in ND filters, less hassle during the shoot
  2. Good colours out of the box. I always find myself retouching the FS100 image because it's a tad green and I don't like the skin tones. It looks like the C100 has good enough colours out of the cam for me, similar to their DSLRs (love these colours). I don't want to be messing with these FS100 picture profiles anymore.
  3. Build in waveform, even build in vector scope on the markII (surprised not many people are exited about this new addition)
  4. No more fiddling with the speed booster. I almost only use canon lenses so they go straight on the c100.
  5. I also shoot stills, and I assume the C100 image matches better when using canon stills in video as well.
  6. Less s*%tty grip than the FS100, with include expanded focus (use it a lot), less s*%tty top handle (fs100 one broke)
  7. Better integration with my ninja star, and dual recording on SD cards of which I have loads.
  8. Still a small data foot print: I shoot loads of stuff. Yes hard disks are cheap, but managing all these disks is a pain for me. Also I often send loads of data over google drive and dropbox to assistant editors, so I love the FS100s AVCHD.
So point 6 is kind of on my mind. I've read online that the C100's AVCHD files are kind of a pain to work with, more so then the FS100. Is this still the case? Does Premiere work slower with the C100 files? I am asking because my computer is not that fast, and I rather not upgrade yet. I have a Canon XA10 and the files from that cam are quite troublesome and render slow. Is the C100 the same? It could really be a deal breaker for me, since editing is like 80% of the process for me. Does the Mark 2 do it better with the MP4 files, or is it just the same drama in a different wrapper?

Further, any other thoughts from people who have used both of these cameras? Does the C100 give a noticeably better image? Is the audio better as I have heard? My other options are a used FS700, or even a GH4.

Many thanks for your thoughts!
 
Hello ZK

I loved using the original C100 and recorded one of my last jobs on the internal AVCHD and also out to a Nanoflash (XDCAM HD 422) I think editing you can transcode the AVCHD using Clipwrap or 5DtoRGB, both give excellent results should you want to do FX or CC on the footage. A++++++ on the shooting to post with C100, I can only imagine better quality from the Mark II.

Broatch Berry
Venice CA
 
Where did you read that the C100 files are harder to work with than the FS100? They are both AVCHD, so I don't know why it would matter. Even if it does matter, the clipwrap solution will fix it. The C100 files don't have the correct flag for 30P when shooting in PF30, so you have to go in and make sure your editor has set the footage for progressive or you might end up with interlaced. Otherwise, the C100 is fine.
 
Thanks for the replies, it seems to be a good upgrade and the AVCHD files not so much of a problem. I had read on some forums that those avchd files from Canon are more tricky then the ones from Sony, and had experienced the same thing from my XA10. I DO think the files are not exactly the same. Having said that, With the XA10 I recorded very long takes, which might have made it harder on the editing software. It might also have been an older implementation of AVCHD as the cam is a bit older. And I'll have to check if I didn't do the same interlacing interpretation with the XA10, which I haven't used for a while.
If anyone DID have issues with the C100's AVCHD, please let me know!

Now looking at a second hand C100. If I want slowmo I can always add an inexpensive 2nd hand GH4.
Thanks again!
 
The footage itself is decent, not too bad, but the PsF, for me, is killer. If I'm shooting stuff for web delivery that I am editing myself, AVCHD all the way, but I actually feel embarrassed handing it off to other editors and having to tell them how to interpret inside an NLE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top