C100: c100 Mark II and possible successor

E

EIREHotspur

Well-known member
Used the C100 Mark II that I hired for a shoot the other day.

Big difference from the C100 I sold a few months ago....dream to use really and also has 50P which I missed in the mark I.
Also the viewfinder is improved and LCD is much better.

Think I may get it in 2016....I may ever spring for 2.

Leads me to believing that if a mark II came out right now it would be perfect for me because surely the next version will either have to increase the FPS or include UHD at entry level to compete with the next Sony FS5 II or whatever.

I do see the trend though for people now switching to the FS7 and now the FS5 and I think that the dominence of Canon is over for the 5D3 and c100 price bracket.

They are going to have to make a move to stop the crossover.....
 
Yeah I've been ruminating on this since the C300 MKII launch... so this is a bit of a cathartic post... though I'm still super happy with my C100 MKI...

To my mind the C100 MKII is really what should have been released as the C100 MKI, but it's now a well rounded and very good Super 35 HD Camera, the only thing it really lacks is a decent codec.

But since everyone is jumping on 4K it's not going to be as competitive, even if it is a brilliant little HD camera. Also I want to buy a camera that will last till 2020+, I'm over the ultra-rapid body recycling, so my next camera must be 4K, which I can't currently get from the Cinema EOS line.

That's because Canon has a massive US$10,500 hole in their lineup between the C100 MKII and C300 MKII, whereas Sony now has a series of cameras at different price points that are all up to date on 4K tech (A7SII/RII, FS5, FS7, F5, F55). You could buy a FS7 + FS5 + A7S for ~ the same price as a C300 MKII. As reviewers have shown, there is not significant on screen difference between the FS7/C300MKII, even if the C300MKII is much better to operate.

So anyway I'm betting on a C100 MKIII that Canon positions as the most awesome Super 35 HD camera, with basic 4K. This must be well into development by now:

- Very good internal HD up to at least 60p (XFAVC, 2K maybe), possibly awesome (12bit 444 etc) as Canon seem to have put fantastic HD/2K capabilities into the C300 MKII
- 4K at least as good as the XC-10, I can probably live without 60p since there's no chance we'll get it
- A upgrade of the auto-focus, maybe not as good as the C300 MKII
- We'll probably get a DR boost or new sensor (+ C-Log2), though I'd be OK if they just unlocked the 4K capability of the existing sensor to save some $$
- Announced NAB 2016? I hope

Otherwise the rest of the feature set of the C100 MKII is already very good for a cheaper one man / event camera, I'd be happy with just the above upgrades.
And I'd love to retain my current C100 MKI as a B camera.

If they don't deliver on those features and with a non-video-competitive 5DIV, then I think Canon would be seen to have conceded the low end market to Sony and would be just concentrating on the C300 MKII in any serious way. They'll have no chance with a C500 MKII against RED, Arri and the high end Sonys.

BTW, rant: in my opinion the DSLR revolution is over, if you are doing video then BUY A VIDEO CAMERA! There are lot's of totally awesome ones out there at all price points. If the 5DIV doesn't deliver the video goods then I just don't see the point in complaining about it, it's a super awesome all rounder stills camera which Canon would prefer you bought a C100 instead if you are doing video. I'm sure there will be howls of agony and gnashing of teeth when the 5DIV is announced though, but that might push more people to Sony, thus blocking off a sales feeder from Canon DSLRs -> C100.

lol, anyway, bottom line is I'm waiting till NAB 2016.
 
Last edited:
I'll add that anecdotally, I used to see lots of C100s around town, now all the local video guys are instagramming their Sony lineup (FS7/A7S/FS700+7Q).

I can't even find a local C100 to hire/borrow as a 2nd cam on interview shoots, I have ended up finding a C300 lol.

I know they must be out there because they haven't shown up in significant numbers for sale online, I'd probably grab one next time I see one, but I'm guessing they are being used less and less as the new shiny Sonys take over. It's been a natural progression from Canon DSLRs -> C100 -> FS7 as people get better and can afford better.

I'm sure there will be not many sales of C300 MKIIs in my local area, as it's AU$22,500 here.

Sad :-P
 
Last edited:
XC10 - $2,500 (fixed lens)

5D MK IV - $3,500; cropped/binned 4K

1D X MK II - $6,500; s35 4K XFAVC @ 305K internal. HDMI 2.0a out.

C300 MK II - $16,000 (expect a slight price drop toward the NAB'16 to ~ $13,000-$14,000)

C500 MK II - $25,000; 444 4K internal to CFast 2.0 cards in compressed Raw.
 
I'm assuming you are countering my list of Sonys, there is a good price spread in your list, so yes that's fair enough.

But there's only 1 Cinema EOS camera in your list that actually exists, in fact three of the cameras you have listed have not been announced yet, and probably not even available till late next year.

BTW I'm not trying to s*** on Canon, I love my C100, I'm definitely a fanboy. I've just been seriously analysing this as I need a 2nd body. I think that Sony is really starting to dominate the low-mid end of the market. It won't stop Canon delivering great cameras though.

Can Canon can get their "mojo" back now? Because they won't deliver on the 5DIV vs A7S/R (for video), and the FS5 will be out for 6/9/12 months before the C100 MKIII will arrive. The 1DC wasn't a great seller so 1DXMKII sales for video will be very limited.

I'd also suggest that nobody would really seriously consider the XC-10, at least as an A camera. :-P
 
Last edited:
Matt Turner said:
Yeah I've been ruminating on this since the C300 MKII launch... so this is a bit of a cathartic post... though I'm still super happy with my C100 MKI...

To my mind the C100 MKII is really what should have been released as the C100 MKI, but it's now a well rounded and very good Super 35 HD Camera, the only thing it really lacks is a decent codec.

But since everyone is jumping on 4K it's not going to be as competitive, even if it is a brilliant little HD camera. Also I want to buy a camera that will last till 2020+, I'm over the ultra-rapid body recycling, so my next camera must be 4K, which I can't currently get from the Cinema EOS line.

That's because Canon has a massive US$10,500 hole in their lineup between the C100 MKII and C300 MKII, whereas Sony now has a series of cameras at different price points that are all up to date on 4K tech (A7SII/RII, FS5, FS7, F5, F55). You could buy a FS7 + FS5 + A7S for ~ the same price as a C300 MKII. As reviewers have shown, there is not significant on screen difference between the FS7/C300MKII, even if the C300MKII is much better to operate.

So anyway I'm betting on a C100 MKIII that Canon positions as the most awesome Super 35 HD camera, with basic 4K. This must be well into development by now:

- Very good internal HD up to at least 60p (XFAVC, 2K maybe), possibly awesome (12bit 444 etc) as Canon seem to have put fantastic HD/2K capabilities into the C300 MKII
- 4K at least as good as the XC-10, I can probably live without 60p since there's no chance we'll get it
- A upgrade of the auto-focus, maybe not as good as the C300 MKII
- We'll probably get a DR boost or new sensor (+ C-Log2), though I'd be OK if they just unlocked the 4K capability of the existing sensor to save some $$
- Announced NAB 2016? I hope

Otherwise the rest of the feature set of the C100 MKII is already very good for a cheaper one man / event camera, I'd be happy with just the above upgrades.
And I'd love to retain my current C100 MKI as a B camera.

If they don't deliver on those features and with a non-video-competitive 5DIV, then I think Canon would be seen to have conceded the low end market to Sony and would be just concentrating on the C300 MKII in any serious way. They'll have no chance with a C500 MKII against RED, Arri and the high end Sonys.

BTW, rant: in my opinion the DSLR revolution is over, if you are doing video then BUY A VIDEO CAMERA! There are lot's of totally awesome ones out there at all price points. If the 5DIV doesn't deliver the video goods then I just don't see the point in complaining about it, it's a super awesome all rounder stills camera which Canon would prefer you bought a C100 instead if you are doing video. I'm sure there will be howls of agony and gnashing of teeth when the 5DIV is announced though, but that might push more people to Sony, thus blocking off a sales feeder from Canon DSLRs -> C100.

lol, anyway, bottom line is I'm waiting till NAB 2016.
Click to expand...


I agree with everything because we all want all of those things...

Regardless of what they add on the next C100 III...I hope that they bring it out for Nab in April because that would be perfect for me.

Surely that would mean a price drop after christmas for the C100 II...

A lot of people post on how Canon do not release based on other makers like Sony....but they had it good for so long with the 5D revolution and then the C300 and C100 that I hope they are not that arrogant to see the FS5 and FS7 are going to wipe out sales of the C100 II and C300 II to the masses of the first versions.

Even the guy I brought the hired camera back to wasn't aware of the new differences in the C100 II.....he just raved about the FS7.....
 
I have seen different manufacturers over the years pull ahead in this horse race. I had a thought, I think the loyalty to Canon is generational, and now that these shooters have gotten older and more comfortable professionally, they are feeling confident to trust other brands?

What I mean is, there was an age group who cut their teeth on 5Ds and then other Canon DSLRs, they bought Canon lenses for the most part, felt comfortable in the menu structure, were loyal. Similar to when you first start buying cars you develop a brand loyalty. But I think it comes down to which manufacturer listens to the market and then creates a line up of different price points and fills holes. Sony seems to have done that while Canon dithered. That's my theory. They saw the looming 4K movement and have now positioned themselves properly. There is a maxim in marketing: "It is better to be first then to be better."

I remember the breakthrough little DV camera, the Panasonic DVX100. Wow, it flooded the film schools because it was so good and cheap. In fact, perhaps many of you don't know but that is how this website got its name. Panasonic would give them away to film schools as Apple did with the first FCP. To get the film school kids addicted and instill brand loyalty.

So that's my take. The Canon crowd who grew up on DSLR and then continued into the C100s & 300s are at a crossroads feeling pushed into 4K and Sony was preparing for this gap. Seen it many times before. I remember when the highest status symbol was an Ikegami or Hitachi on my shoulder!

Me, I'm not moving into 4K until I'm dragged and screaming. Thank God I didn't move into 3D! About 80% of my work now ends up on the web. For TV shows I have to rent anyway because the show usually dictates which model and codec I need to use. And remember this: The best camera to own is the one that's fully paid for. Same with cars.
 
Last edited:
Matt Turner said:
I'm assuming you are countering my list of Sonys, there is a good price spread in your list, so yes that's fair enough...
Click to expand...
It's a projected list based on widely/wildly circulating rumors.

On top of that, one may have to add about three dozen Sony cameras of various shapes and sizes (and, naturally, price points).

Canon is clearly separating their consumer and pro lines during the time when the competition is relatively sparse. Panasonic is targeting low end with their MFT's, Nikon is entirely absent and Leica, Samsung and JVC are only marginal players. The timing may be late for any major pre-Christmas announcements but then comes the CES in early January, then Photo Plus in February. A few more bits of information just might trickle out during those events.
 
I really like Canon and Panasonic cameras more than Sony. I have owned Sonys over the years (BVW70 Betacam, TRV-900 DV, VX-1000 DV, EX-1, EX-3), Panasonics (DVX100, HVX200, HPX170, HPX300 plus rented the heck out of the original Varicam and HDX900s) and Canons (T3i, 5D MKII, 5D MKIII, C100 MKI plus rent the C300 MKI on a regular basis) I could make a living with any of the three and they all have their idiosyncrasies, pluses and minuses. Canon has always been the worst marketer of the big three, they come to the table late, they are loath to change until dragged kicking and screaming into what people want.

Panasonic, for a while, was on the bleeding edge, the DVX100 was one of the best cameras I have ever owned, I bought mine for around $4,500.00 new and I tracked my rentals and costing it out over 5 years and it made me over $28k in rentals/line items to our clients. The HVX200 was a ground breaker too and it did well for me as did the HPX170. But once the DSLR thing went crazy, Panasonic basically was out of the running, they still made good cameras but everything affordable only had 1/3" imagers and the market wanted FF and S35.

Canon stumbled into the DSLR thing with the 5D MKII, gained momentum and has done very well with the EOS lineup as well. As much as I loathe Sony's look, color, motion signature and insane amount of models and stupid codecs with proprietary media, they are targeting what the market wants at the price points we are willing to pay. Sony menu structure is the worst and the way they engineer their cameras to make you buy expensive, outdated adapters to shoot desirable formats and codecs. I recently shot a project with a rental PMW-320 and I hated the colors, the menu structure but the client was happy with the images and operationally, the Sony was the right tool for the job (needed to have servo zoom for a live corporate conference type of shoot). So that started me thinking, should I own a camera that I love the look of, or should I own a camera that most clients are fine with the look of and the cost/value ratio is better? My problem is that like Ned, I freelance DP as well as produce so I do low end things where my C100 MKI is perfect and then I shoot on other people's projects where we rent REDs, Arris and other cameras I would never buy. If I were buying a new camera today that could handle most of my needs, as much as I dislike Sonys, it would be an FS5 or FS7. I don't like the images they make but clients seem to like them so as a business person, it would be stupid of me to go into debt to finance a C300 MKII when I could pay cash for an FS5 or FS7 package. At least in late 2015, I think Sony is playing the game smarter than Canon, even though I think the Canons are better to shoot with and make better images overall.
 
The difference in image between the FS7 and C300II is so narrow 99% of clients would never notice or care. In many threads showing C300II footage viewers are commenting that it looks very 'Sony'. Its all a silly rat race for most of the users on this board as their client base won't care and most importantly won't pay extra for something more expensive. The FS7 (Slog3/Sgamut.cine ) has improved a great deal on the old Sony broadcast colour.

I've owned my FS7 for a year now after having the debate and almost going C100/300 but felt they were too restricted. The camera has paid for itself in that year and still specs well enough to cover my companies needs for the next few years (especially having 4K60p internal which I do use a lot even though I didn't think I would) with all uses being money in the bank for me.

Canon can do great things with a C100III but as always have painted themselves in a corner by leaving much needed features off of higher models. The C300I not having 1080p60 was a joke and the C300II not having 4K60p is the same mistake repeated. It leaves little option to be generous with the lower models and build back brand loyalty.
 
puredrifting said:
I really like Canon and Panasonic cameras more than Sony.
Click to expand...

And see....your are a loyal customer and advocate for Canon and the typical customer that they have lost.

Cameras are bloody expensive....even for people who can make their money back fast on them.

As much as we love the Tech we do not change brands lightly because it means a whole set of new accessories, batteries, lenses etc

I just wish they would catch on and see that the clock is ticking....if Sony were groundbreaking with the FS7 & FS5...what do they have up their sleeve to keep their newly aquired C100/C300 user??
 
I like Canon cameras and don't care much for Sony cameras for all the reasons that puredrifting outlined earlier.

Let's look at a hypothetical timeline.

IF Canon addresses the gap in their line up with a C100iii or a C200, it'll probably be like a dumbed-down FS5 (at least that seems like what the intermediary between the C100ii and the C300ii would be). Let's be optimistic and say that they announce this at NAB 2016, and then they'll start hitting shelves in September 2016. Canon will probably want about $10K for it (again, halfway between the C100ii and C300ii) and if you're small-time corporate DP like me, you probably won't be able to afford one until they've been around for two or three years and you can pick one up secondhand for $5,000.

So with this reasoning, if you're sticking with Canon, you're probably not buying an S35 camera with 4K until late 2018 or 2019 (and that's IF Canon announces a C200 at NAB this coming year) -- by which time, Sony might be introducing their first 6K and 8K cameras. Will clients still settle for 1080P deliverables after they've been shooting 4K videos on their iPhones and watching them on 4K computer monitors for three or four years? I have a hard time believing that they will.

I don't like it at all, but it seems like Sony is getting so far ahead of Canon that it's the only way to go, at least as far as ownership is concerned.

That's just a highly speculative exercise in deductive reasoning that you should take with a mountain of salt.
 
Last edited:
I don't think your scenario is far off of the mark Quick. History shows that Canon has behaved pretty much the exact same way since they started making video cameras. Of course, they could totally change and defy expectations but I wouldn't count on it, old habits die hard. I personally don't think their plodding, slow to react to the market behavior is driven by Larry or Canon USA, I think their hands are tied by the marketing and strategy people in Japan. Canon seems to be VERY old school when it comes to business behavior and practices. As we always talk about too, pro sales are a minute part of their business worldwide. Canon sells a LOT more T5i, copiers and point and shoots than C300s and C100s so the pro video stuff will always take a back seat as far as innovation. I would love to see a breakdown of Canon's worldwide income streams and what part pro video plays in it, I bet it is infinitesimal.

Interesting that Sony, as a corporation, believe it or not, is on the ropes, struggling for their very survival. The /TV production business with Sony/TriStar, with the break in and web releases, has been a catastrophe, their consumer electronics business has been losing lots of money. Perhaps the fire that has been lit under Sony's butt to even survive is behind their aggressive and successful behavior in pro video. Sony, in pro video, was fat and happy for decades. Now that things have become lean and minimal, they seem to be reacting well to the market. The FS7 is a runaway hit and the FS5 seems that it will be as well.
 
Well I got to buy in and around April so NAB is a perfect time to find out what I will do.

Would have kept my C100 mark I and used it for a B camera and got the C100 mark II for my main camera had the mark I not had the issues with the viewfinder/lcd.

Now I would happily buy the mark II and use it as an A camera for now and buy the next version and keep it for the B camera down the line.

Most of what I need is HD and do not foresee needing UHD until the market catches on....UHD Tvs are coming down a lot in price...

The C100s are just solid dependable cameras....
 
nedcam said:
Me, I'm not moving into 4K until I'm dragged and screaming. Thank God I didn't move into 3D! About 80% of my work now ends up on the web. For TV shows I have to rent anyway because the show usually dictates which model and codec I need to use.
Click to expand...

Well put. I know very few people who use 4k, even when 4k is available to them on whatever rig they're using. The average bloke who logs onto youtube or vimeo to watch a vid is seeing the footage at 1080p tops. Most HD television content is streamed at 720p. Blu-Ray is 1080. Unless you have a 4K TV with a 4k disk player and you're planning on distributing your product on 4k (really -- what are the odds?), there doesn't seem to be a practical use for it, at least not now, and probably not for many years. I guess I just don't see the practicality of dumping an extra 5k into a camera for a feature that'll go largely unused, add money to your workflow, etc. If you really have the extra $$$ to burn, throw it into HW that you'll be able to keep using for many, many years. Get good glass, good sticks, etc. You can get a lighly used C100 Mk1 for a couple grand and add great glass onto it -- glass you can use on whatever next gen camera you get -- for the same price as a new FS7 without any glass at all. If you have the privilege of shooting on something that really demands 4k presentation, I can't imagine you'd be slumming it on cameras in the <20k price range anyway.
 
jthabel said:
Well put. I know very few people who use 4k, even when 4k is available to them on whatever rig they're using. The average bloke who logs onto youtube or vimeo to watch a vid is seeing the footage at 1080p tops. Most HD television content is streamed at 720p. Blu-Ray is 1080. Unless you have a 4K TV with a 4k disk player and you're planning on distributing your product on 4k (really -- what are the odds?), there doesn't seem to be a practical use for it, at least not now, and probably not for many years. I guess I just don't see the practicality of dumping an extra 5k into a camera for a feature that'll go largely unused, add money to your workflow, etc. If you really have the extra $$$ to burn, throw it into HW that you'll be able to keep using for many, many years. Get good glass, good sticks, etc. You can get a lighly used C100 Mk1 for a couple grand and add great glass onto it -- glass you can use on whatever next gen camera you get -- for the same price as a new FS7 without any glass at all. If you have the privilege of shooting on something that really demands 4k presentation, I can't imagine you'd be slumming it on cameras in the <20k price range anyway.
Click to expand...

This. One of the reasons I don't shoot much 4K except on the little cameras (GoPro, Inspire/P3, Osmo) where shooting their 4K means much better looking 1080P.

The C100 Mark II (and Mark I) makes VERY good 1080P and that's good for me.
 
puredrifting said:
I don't think your scenario is far off of the mark Quick. History shows that Canon has behaved pretty much the exact same way since they started making video cameras...
Click to expand...

I've probably mentioned this before, but from my experience it seems like Canon makes a camera to fit a specific user while Sony makes a camera because they can. It's why Sony drops a new camera with new specs every other month and Canon incrementally improves their same cameras. Canon thinks that event shooters don't need 4k so they don't put 4k in the C100. NHK TV in Japan starts asking for 4k, so Canon makes sure that the new C300 will meet that 4k demand. Meanwhile over at Sony they'll cram 4k into anything that will take it even if you'll never have a real need for it.
That's not saying one approach is better than the other, especially if you like to think people are more creative and will find new uses that the inventors hadn't thought of. If you look at it this way, you'll stop accusing Canon of "crippling" their releases and instead accuse them of just underestimating their user's needs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top