C100: C100 II - Considering purchasing
- Thread starter Joshua_G
- Start date
Thanks. I'll wait for responses from people who are actually using the C100 MKII.
Yes, I read it before many times. In this case, for interviews, most of the times the 80D will be the A cam while the C100 will be the B cam …
Well, in my country, right now the C100 MKI is available only via Canon official representative (with 3 years warranty), while the C100 MKII is available also via parallel import (with 1 year warranty), which makes the C100 MKII cheaper to purchase, even after adding MAC 3 years warranty.
Kubicixfactor
Active member
Only the zoom STM lenses support face tracking on the C100 mkii.
I’ve had mine for a few years now, use it mainly with L primes. It ticks most of the boxes for the types of clients I have (and will need to keep doing that for a bit longer I reckon).
I’ve had mine for a few years now, use it mainly with L primes. It ticks most of the boxes for the types of clients I have (and will need to keep doing that for a bit longer I reckon).
NorBro
Major Contributor
lol. That's fair...but I'm not sure you're going to receive the responses you're hoping for.
Best to check YouTube if you have any particular lenses in mind and see what you can find.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
One thing I have found very frustrating about pondering the move to video autofocus is the lack of technical information available for different lenses and systems and specs on how they perform. (I don't have any cameras with good video AF yet so I haven't experimented for myself.)
Lens manufacturers don't tell you exactly what's happening inside the lens. They have different branding for different systems of focus control (which all claim to be fast and silent but obviously perform differently in those regards) but they don't tell you about generational upgrades within each focus control method.
I read a breakdown of lens focus motors from a repair shop who had to fix them. It was enlightening but mostly as to how the bits were secured, which constructions were more likely to break, and where generational changes in construction happened between lens releases. It didn't evaluate performance in use.
I really think the best thing to do is to watch YouTube videos where someone puts a specific lens on your specific camera and runs autofocus tests.
But definitely the effect of all this obscurity is to induce people to buy the latest and greatest lens releases in the hope that they will work best.
Lens manufacturers don't tell you exactly what's happening inside the lens. They have different branding for different systems of focus control (which all claim to be fast and silent but obviously perform differently in those regards) but they don't tell you about generational upgrades within each focus control method.
I read a breakdown of lens focus motors from a repair shop who had to fix them. It was enlightening but mostly as to how the bits were secured, which constructions were more likely to break, and where generational changes in construction happened between lens releases. It didn't evaluate performance in use.
I really think the best thing to do is to watch YouTube videos where someone puts a specific lens on your specific camera and runs autofocus tests.
But definitely the effect of all this obscurity is to induce people to buy the latest and greatest lens releases in the hope that they will work best.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Ironically, at least with Canon, generally the lenses that work the best with AF on these lower end cameras are the cheapest, the STM zooms. I have a couple and they are okay
but pale in comparison in quality with the L series EF lenses, that are built better, look better, but the AF is clunkier and slower. My C100 MKI came with the EF S 18-135 STM IS and
I still have it. It vignettes terribly with the C series cameras and isn't that great of a looking lens. The EF 24-105mm f/4.0 IS II is much sharper and better built but the AF isn't as
responsive as the cheap STM lens. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II seems to be the exception, it works pretty well even though it's not an STM lens.
Am assuming here that nobody (who is well informed, and is spending their own money) is buying a C100mk2/mk1 brand new in late 2020!! As that just strikes me as total mad craziness.
Thus of course I've always been referring to buying them secondhand, as only then do to they make sense as a bargain to buy.
Thanks.
Thanks.
I have the EF S 18-135 STM IS, however, when it vignettes badly on the C series, it's practically unusable for me in most cases, for my intended shoots. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II wouldn't be used much, if at all, for my intended shoots.
Bottom line, would I go for the C100 MKII, I'll use only one-time AF, not follow. For shooting lectures and sitting interviews, only one-time AF is good enough, though it's essential for me with my imperfect eyesight.
Well, there are no secondhand C100's in my country. Buying from abroad, with shipping costs and local taxes makes the deals less appealing. Moreover, should I need to return the camera to the seller, the local taxes I'd pay for import would be non-refundable. Also, the warranty does matter to me, and it's available only to new cameras.
Kubicixfactor
Active member
I’ve got an 18-135 and a 10-18. Not sure I’ve seen any real difference in the locking speed, only thing I’ve noticed is that that they’re quieter when focussing compared to USM.
As an unexpected bonus I did discover that the 18-135 flares quite easily
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I’ve got an 18-135 and a 10-18. Not sure I’ve seen any real difference in the locking speed, only thing I’ve noticed is that that they’re quieter when focussing compared to USM.
As an unexpected bonus I did discover that the 18-135 flares quite easily
I don't have any USM lenses so I don't know. But the EF S lenses look bad on the C series cameras in general because of the vignetting on the edges and corners. On my EF S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, I can actually see the
edge of the frame floating around because of the IS. To fix it, I have to crop in quite a bit to get rid of the black edge of frame. Useless.
Pascal Parvex
Well-known member
Strange. Is Super 35 larger than APS-C then?
Last edited:
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Yes. But also Canon has an unusually small APS-C sensor (1.6x crop instead of 1.5)
Super35 is 24.89mm wide
APS-C "Sensor sizes are typically about 22.5×15 mm for Canon and 24×16 mm for other manufacturers."
So, Canon has designed EF-S lenses for its stills cameras that have a smaller image circle than required by its cinema cameras
Super35 is 24.89mm wide
APS-C "Sensor sizes are typically about 22.5×15 mm for Canon and 24×16 mm for other manufacturers."
So, Canon has designed EF-S lenses for its stills cameras that have a smaller image circle than required by its cinema cameras
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I was praising Wide DR and knocking log.
Never have I ever heard a client say on set, "I'm glad we're shooting in black and white because I hate color," especially in these times when expressing hatred of color can get you fired. More often they say, "Why does log look like crap? Why did I hire you to shoot crap? You're fired!"
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Yes. EF S lenses on the C series cameras range from barely acceptable to useless. You really need FF L lenses to do it right. Of course, the amount of vignetting
and dark edges varies from lens to lens copy. I've borrowed a EF S 17-55 f/2.8 IS and compared to my own and my copy was worse, while the borrowed copy was usable.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I shot the "Ali & Cavett: The Tale of the Tapes" documentary that's on HBO using Wide DR, specifically because the client didn't want to shoot log or RAW. It looked great, director was very happy.
You just can't screw up your exposure very badly when shooting WDR, not a lot to push and pull there. I try to get it right so I don't need 15 stops and RAW/Log, but if you are running and gunning
or shooting event/documentary in challenging lighting conditions, that extra safety net of RAW/log are great.
Pascal Parvex
Well-known member
Thanks. I would give you and Eric below a thumbs up, but criticising Arri has gotten me a below zero score...
Okay, I read the C100 II user manual pdf, only EF-S STM lenses and the EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM support Face AF; though, according to the user manual, all EF lenses support Continuous AF … (that's Canon's joke on its' customers) … 
Also, the C100 II doesn't have 24p …
Also, as for the camera's manual, it cannot be jam-sync'd to another camera, nor to an external audio recorder …
Also, in order to record 1080p video with LPCM audio at 24 Mbps, one has to choose AVCHD, when the camera records PF29.97 or PF25.00; recording 29.97P or 25.00P is enabled only in MP4, where the audio can be only AAC …
The user manual doesn't mention the color space at all, I guess it's 4:2:0 8bit for both internal recording and HDMI out …
(that's Canon's joke on its' customers) … Also, the C100 II doesn't have 24p …
Also, as for the camera's manual, it cannot be jam-sync'd to another camera, nor to an external audio recorder …
Also, in order to record 1080p video with LPCM audio at 24 Mbps, one has to choose AVCHD, when the camera records PF29.97 or PF25.00; recording 29.97P or 25.00P is enabled only in MP4, where the audio can be only AAC …
The user manual doesn't mention the color space at all, I guess it's 4:2:0 8bit for both internal recording and HDMI out …
Does the Canon C-Log on the C100 II look not-so-good after applying a proper LUT?
(All are welcomed to comment on that).