C100: C100 II buyer's remorse!?

J

JasonMillard81

Active member
Hi all!

So I am sort of having strong feelings of buyer's remorse with the c100 II and 24-105. *I am an amateur hobbyist who was thinking of using video to get "stunning" images for mini-documentaries for sports, education, and other non-narrative work.

Now that I have the X-T2 and feel the SOOC is probably better than what I could get out of my skills on the C100II I have to decide whether the $4500 investment in the camera was worth it or if I am better off selling it and saving some of it and investing the rest in Fuji x-t2.

It seems like the biggest benefits of the c100II (iso, built-in ND, and pre-amps) are not as critical considering there are probably decent work-arounds on my x-t2.

Heck I could probably buy a Sony 6500, used 6300, or a7sII for ISO performance if that was a concern.

As you can tell I am bit lost and looking for guidance.

Does it sound like selling the c100II and 24-105 would be a good move considering my needs:



1. Video + audio for mini-docs and non-narrative work?
 
I've been using Cinema EOS cameras for about 4 years. Before that I was mainly Canon DSLRs, and lately I've been dabbling in Sony mirrorless because that's what the cool kids are doing. Compared to the Sony mirrorless, the C100 MKII has equal or greater image quality (though no 4K), the best 8-bit 1080p super35 camera ever, best in class 60p for slowmo, very usable continuous autofocus, is rock solidly reliable, easy as hell to operate, and can run all day on cheap media and batteries.

The 24-105mm on the other hand, and in only my opinion, is a wholly drab, utilitarian, unremarkable lens. Try these three in your kit: tokina 11-16mm, Canon 17-55mm IS, Canon 70-200mm 2.8 II. I know it's a pain to switch between the 3 lenses while shooting, but you'll be rewarded with lovely, cinematic imagery you can capture all day long.

I can't speak to the Fuji, but if it's like the Sony's at all, the benefits don't outweigh the cons. Too small, too fiddly, small batteries, no ND's, etc.
 
JasonMillard81 said:
So I am sort of having strong feelings of buyer's remorse with the c100 II and 24-105. *I am an amateur hobbyist who was thinking of using video to get "stunning" images for mini-documentaries for sports, education, and other non-narrative work.
Click to expand...

Jason: As a beginner you won't understand the difference right away which is the speed of working with a more functional camera. After 100 times missing the shot because you have to add an ND, having problems monitoring audio or having a 3.5mm mini plug slip out you'll realize there are important reasons for the features in the C100. These features are most obvious on professional work for hire jobs where missing the shot usually leads to loosing the client. This is not as much of a problem with self produced projects where missing the shot might mean chilling out for lunch and coming back tomorrow. Try pulling a paid job 10 hours a day for 5 days on a paid gig with each camera. You'll discover the difference.

One metric for the ease of use is the number of minutes and number of set ups you come away with after a 50 hour shoot.

Hope this helps.
 
drummondb said:
Try these three in your kit: tokina 11-16mm, Canon 17-55mm IS, Canon 70-200mm 2.8 II. I know it's a pain to switch between the 3 lenses while shooting, but you'll be rewarded with lovely, cinematic imagery you can capture all day long.
Click to expand...

Interestingly this was what I used with my C300. Plus the 24-105 which took a lot longer to appreciate.
 
Thanks. I may wait and think on it. That being said I am an amateur and don't get paid. Ever. I'll shoot with both cameras and see if I can get a feel on which I feel more comfortable using considering what I do (shooting sports as a coach, mini interviews/docs for and with my students).

I won't be selling the x-t2 anytime soon as I need a photography camera and so far like it. So its either keep both or sell c100 and invest more into x-t2 (nd filters/mic) since I don't do paid gigs this could work?
 
The Fuji is a cool camera that can make beautiful images. The film emulation modes are excellent if you don't know how to grade images. But the internal audio sucks. External NDs suck. Not having real timecode sucks. Not having XLRs sucks. The amount of jello the XT-2 exhibits when handheld or doing fast pans sucks. The Fuji lenses are great, but expensive for the good ones. Since you are a noob, trust us when we say that trying to shoot doc on a DSLR/mirrorless can be a frustrating experience. Can it be done? Without a doubt. Will you miss shots, miss focus (the XT-2 video autofocus hunts more than DPAF on the C100 MKII), curse the audio workarounds in shooting dual system audio? Yes, you will. The only thing the XT-2 has over the C100 MKII, IMHO, having shot with both, is 4K. If you need to shoot 4K, the XT-2 is a good cheap way to do it.

24-105 is not a great lens, it's a mediocre lens, not wide enough for handheld documentary IMHO. DrummonDB nails, I shoot with the 17-55 2.8 IS and the 70-200 2.8 IS II, the combo is unbeatable for most video work. You won't find similar speed, size, weight and cost lenses for the Fuji.
 
Most of it was said, yet.

Like you, I'm a hobbyist, shot stills for many years and recently started to make some mini-documentaries.

'Great images' or 'stunning images' are 'user defined'. In video, other than the colors, or color science, of the camera - the lighting and operator skills are the major determining factors of the video image quality. Both Canon and Fuji have excellent color science, other makes fall short in this. It takes a lot of learning and much more experience to start to get the needed skills for both lighting and operating the camera for video.

Operating a camera for shooting stills and for shooting video are two totally different matters (other than correct exposure and composing). This is more pronounced in non-staged movies, like documentaries, where the cinematographer has to follow the scene as it happens and capture the right 'gist' of the event, at the right time, from the most appropriate position in relation to the scene. It is much more pronounced in a 'one-man-band' situation. One can 'get' it only by experience.

Other than the constant f/4 max aperture, the Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM is a much better choice than the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS (I have both, along other lenses). It has wider focal length range, it's sharper, focuses quicker and silently. If you'll need a wider angle than 18mm (28.8mm FF equivalent), you'll need to add the Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM. Another option, instead of both the 18-135 and the 10-18 is the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. For sports, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM is the king. However, it may be better not to make any new purchase yet, before learning from experience what you need and what you are missing.

It looks to me that the best you can do right now is to start actually making some mini-documentaries. Don't sell anything yet and don't buy anything yet. Shoot, edit and show the results to others who can give you unbiased opinion. Shoot some mini-documentaries with the Fuji and some others with Canon. Only then you'll be in a position to evaluate your actual needs.

Enjoy your shootings and movie making.
 
I shoot a lot with the C100 and for pro work it is easy to work. It's also limited in what one can do but what's there works fine. But if I didn't shoot for a living and just wanted to make pretty looking videos all by myself I'd go for one of the mirrorless cameras like the A7R/S.
 
If you really like the images out of the XT-2 better and are not working professionally, follow your heart. This is especially true if you're doing narrative rather than doc, where your shots are all planned and you can do double-system sound. Buying the recommended kit of lenses for the C100 MK II and getting its operation down cold is a lot time and expense, especially time. The working professionals need to bring home the bacon, so they need a professional camera. You only need to bring home pictures that please you.
 
The C100 Mk1 is still a great camera, IMO, and I'm not convinced yet that the Mk2 is worth the upgrade or price hike. I recently started using my Mk1 for limited slo-mo, and I'm able to drop my 60i vids into my 24p timeline, adjust the clip speed in Premiere to compensate, and I'm really not disappointed with the outcome versus what I've seen from the slo-mo from 60p in the Mk2. I also rely on my Ninja Blade to focus, so the weak eyepiece on the Mk1 also isn't a concern for me. As for the 24-105, I've never understood what the hate is, but I think it comes down to your copy. My 24-105 is great, and it's what I use almost exclusively for outdoor daytime work. Mine's perfectly sharp.

As for your other lenses -- the whole point of having a C100 for me is the ability to swap lenses. I used a pair of XH-A1s for almost five years for industrial/corp work, and the big reason I finally switched to the C100 was for the ability to switch and choose my lens type, and I've never looked back. As far as lenses go, I'd say stick with Canon glass whenever possible. I own the 24-105 for general outdoor work, the Canon 70-200 2.8 (non-IS) for my occasional tighter shots or interviews, a Tokina 11-16 2.8 for my occasional shots in tight spaces, a Canon 50mm 1.8 for my extreme low light shots, and a Tamron 24-70 2.8 for general purpose indoor work. The latter is the lens that stays on my cam 85% of the time. I love it, but I'm about to trade it out for the new(ish) Canon 24-70 2.8. Having done some recent comparisons, the Canon 24-70 sharpness and colors are simply the best, and I want the best for the lens I use 85% of the time.

The C100 is just about the best run-n-gun camera out there, whether you're doing doc work, short films, music vids, whatever. The ability it gives me to move quickly, the reliability, and the Canon color science are the selling factors for me. I have no need for 4k video. Most of my work is viewed online or on TVs, and 1080p will continue to be just fine for that for years to come.
 
If this isn't your source of income, don't get caught up in the new gear roll outs every month. You've already got two cameras that are completely capable of achieving great imagery.

I have the C300, C300mkii and the Fuji XT2. I love them all and have used them all in professional capacities. The fuji is a struggle for video work, none of their lenses are easily focusable. Lack of internal LOG is a bit of a bummer, but the internal 4k does look great if you're not doing anything in post. The various work arounds to get the DSLR's to function like a proper video camera have been well documented since the 5Dmk2. External recorders/audio recorders etc. I can't imagine going back to that way of shooting after using the Cxxx cameras.

All that being said, you're only beholden to yourself and if it makes more sense to invest fully in the Fuji system go for it. You can pickup some adaptors to mount EF lenses.
 
jm.gardiner said:
If this isn't your source of income, don't get caught up in the new gear roll outs every month. You've already got two cameras that are completely capable of achieving great imagery.

I have the C300, C300mkii and the Fuji XT2. I love them all and have used them all in professional capacities. The fuji is a struggle for video work, none of their lenses are easily focusable. Lack of internal LOG is a bit of a bummer, but the internal 4k does look great if you're not doing anything in post. The various work arounds to get the DSLR's to function like a proper video camera have been well documented since the 5Dmk2. External recorders/audio recorders etc. I can't imagine going back to that way of shooting after using the Cxxx cameras.

All that being said, you're only beholden to yourself and if it makes more sense to invest fully in the Fuji system go for it. You can pickup some adaptors to mount EF lenses.
Click to expand...

Hey John

I'm picking up my C300 MKII this week, just curious what you've used successfully as B-Cam to the MKII?
 
A C100 MKI or II set to WideDR seems to match very well to a C300 MKII set to the BT.709 preset, which is based on WideDR.


I did a shoot recently where I tested this out, and I was very happy with how well they inter-cut. This is quite a boring video but you'll at least get to see the two cameras together. You'll see the first cut about 8 seconds in: https://vimeo.com/pureromance/review/193593509/6e50e10db1
 
I've matched it to my C300mk1 pretty well. The mk2 has a touch more red in it and I find that I'm sometime setting the mk2 down to ISO 400 to the mk1's 850, just to get the tonal range more accurate between the two cameras. Looking forward to whatever the C100mk3 looks like.
 
jthabel said:
The C100 Mk1 is still a great camera, IMO, and I'm not convinced yet that the Mk2 is worth the upgrade or price hike.
Click to expand...

I used to think that too until last week when I got a C100 mkII. I never ever looked through the viewfinder once on the old mkI, thought I never would need it, but now I have it on the mkII I'm using it all the time, and love it. I thought the LCD was fine on the mkI cause I always used a Blade. Now with the mkII i can turn the LCD around so I can see it while recording, so I don't need to always use the Blade, or external monitor. I can strip down the mkII and use the scratch mic, walking around, or on the Helix...... absolutely liberating. I never shot slow motion before, never thought about it, and now find myself using SM. Not to mention, I honestly do like the image coming out of the mkII more than the mkI, not that it is an issue, cause I love the image of the mkI anyways. After the versatility i found in the mkII, it's hard to pick up the mkI for anything other than using it with a tripod or on a slider as a B camera to the mkII. I take the mkII with me everywhere now. Just yesterday I bought her lunch, and a margarita.... I'm in love all over again. Probably will sell the mkI this next year and get a C300 mkII. Or if anyone would consider trading a C300 mkII for a C100 i'd seriously consider it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top