C100: c100 Mark II and possible successor

[coutard]

Seems way too soon for a successor, but firmware to allow the C100 mkii to output 4K would get a lot more people on board. Everything about the camera is nice - colours, cadence, usability - but people want some degree of future proofing.

Speaking of that :
I was just at a broadcast exhibition here in Paris, because I wanted to look at the FS5 : I have a C100 MKII and when I'm shooting doc with the ninja, it's kind of heavy setup and 4K+422HD+slowmotion+SDI RAW made me think of FS5.

BUT

a Canon REP kind of told me that a paid 4K update COULD be available for C100 MKII in the next months....

 

[chappelldigital]

a Canon REP kind of told me that a paid 4K update COULD be available for C100 MKII in the next months....

That would make it more expensive than the brand new FS5 though.... Hopefully a paid upgrade would give you a lot more than just 4K to keep up with the FPS/Bit depth/colour space of the FS5?

 

[Erik Naso]

a Canon REP kind of told me that a paid 4K update COULD be available for C100 MKII in the next months....

That would be a first! But.........

To stop me from pulling the trigger on the FS5 I would need some HFR action too and not in 720p. I hate to say it but Canon is so stingy and I just dont see them bending. I feel they think the Dual Pixel AF is what sells the camera to a lot of people but I personally dont put auto focus on the top of the list for camera features.

So whats it worth? $500? $900. I'm not sure. Wait is this the Panasonic forum? Are we talking about V LOG L paid update? :lipsrseal

 

[Andrius Simutis]

a Canon REP kind of told me that a paid 4K update COULD be available for C100 MKII in the next months....

Never believe a "Canon Rep" about what's coming in the future. They really don't know what they're talking about. Not that they intentionally lie, but just that I've seen way too many instances of an engineer thinking out loud that "in theory it would be possible to read out the sensor as 4k, but..." and that turns into "Canon is totally going to make this camera record 4k raw!!!! OMG!!!"
I have never once had anything a rep has said about future products bear out. They've been wrong 100% of the time.

 

[coutard]

That would make it more expensive than the brand new FS5 though.... Hopefully a paid upgrade would give you a lot more than just 4K to keep up with the FPS/Bit depth/colour space of the FS5?

well....it may be true but I'm thinking on my own position : if I want to switch to FS5 I have to sell my C100 II for maybe 3500€ (bought it 5100€) and add another 3000€ to get the FS5 (and still need to buy E-mount to EF adapter). That's a lot. To me, at least.

That's why if I can get a 1000€/1500€ upgrade to get 420 4K / AND 422 HD ! with maybe a little slow-motion in HD ...I'd go for it.

 

[Matt Turner]

a Canon REP kind of told me that a paid 4K update COULD be available for C100 MKII in the next months....

Really? The processor was upgraded from the MKI, but are the HDMI output and SD Cards up to the job? Otherwise it sounds like a gutting of the camera to upgrade, which is unlikely to happen. Even the DPAF update didn't replace the sensor or any components (AFAIK). I believe it was just a calibration and firmware update.

 

[DLD]

Seems way too soon for a successor...

1D X MKII with 4K has been at the top of the Canon rumor mill for several months now. Once out, it'll fill that $7,000-$8,000 gap in Canon's lineup. Of course, there's been no official announcements but the NAB'16 (April) seems like a good time, unless they want to make the C500 MKII the centerpiece of their NAB activities.

Regardless, IMO, C200/C 100 MKIII would be a tad too similar to C300 MKII. 1D X MKII would be sort of like 1D C with the internal 4K in XAFC and other goodies, less of a run&gun model and less of a competitor to both C100 MKII and C300 MKII.

By NAB'17, however, I expect solid pro quality cameras to be hitting a $5,000 mark but it's still a year and a half away.

 

[Matt Turner]

1D X MKII with 4K ... it'll fill that $7,000-$8,000 gap in Canon's lineup.

It will be a spectacular camera I'm sure, but it's not a Cinema EOS video camera, so not filling the gap in that product line.
Most people will perceive it as a pro stills camera with 4K video, it won't compete with the FS5.
For primarily video users it will probably sell as well as the 1D-C, it's not like there's going to be a massive 5DII type surge of sales to video users.

 

[DLD]

It will be a spectacular camera I'm sure, but it's not a Cinema EOS video camera, so not filling the gap in that product line.

Most people will perceive it as a pro stills camera with 4K video, it won't compete with the FS5.
For primarily video users it will probably sell as well as the 1D-C, it's not like there's going to be a massive 5DII type surge of sales to video users.

That's correct. It'll be something riggable but not a direct competition (unless it vows with its IQ, which is not outside of realm of possibilities).

As aside note, Nikon announced - and I am using the word generously - D5. Except, what it said is that it is "developing it". No price, no specs, no release date given. The previous rumors had that and 1D X MKII with roughly similar specs, except for the codec and the recording bit rate, which are unknown.

 

[EIREHotspur]

To stop me from pulling the trigger on the FS5 I would need some HFR action too and not in 720p.

I would prefer a HFR to a 4K update....and this is even less likely to happen...

I would not be interested in the FS5 because the HFR is only burst and not continuous...

This thing of reading great rumours only to be crushed by good common sense.....

 

[Michael Thames]

Many people buy 5D3 over D810 because of their piles of L glass. Also Canon does do a great job of marketing much like Apple they have captured a lot of mindshare.

Canon would love you to believe that the C300II has the sex appeal that the Amira or Alexa mini or Red weapon. I'm not finding in my market the C300II has any sort of cache or sex appeal over the FS7. Most production companies will take either or and not pay a cent more for C300II. In fact there are many series that started production before the C300II was available and went all FS7 or F5 and are requesting those specific cameras for episode continuity. Only on these forums do I ever hear about the image minutia and 'Sony Look'. The new colour science is an improvement over past Sgamut stuff and in most reviews the previous CanonC300I users like the C300II image slightly more. One user commented that the MK2 looked very 'Sony' compared to MKI footage. These forums are a bubble that doesn't represent what most Producers and Creative directors are talking about. With Log high DR codecs and 10bit colour the footage gives users enough to take the look in many directions. Producers and Brand managers never cared when I went from C300 to FS7 footage. No one noticed as the images looked great in their eyes. The ones that care and obsess about image and there is lots of them but they are renting ARRI and RED stuff for their high end projects.

I guess if I were forced to move up from a C100 the only logical choice would be an FS7 as well. I would sell all my Canon glass and then after I did that Canon would come out with another camera or paid updates to their existing ones and I would end up regretting it....... or within 2 or 3 more years cameras we never thought of would be offered.........don't know how many of us are in the same boat having started off with the 5DIII and needing it for a photography camera. So the idea of jumping ship for HFR and 4K at this point in time doesn't appeal to me. I still need my 5D3 and I'm not going sell my lenses.

I hear ear people talk of future proofing...... In this world what does that really mean....... 2or 3 years? I buy a new computer and you might as well throw it away after 3 years.

There are two types of people, professionals and semi-professionals I fall into the later. So for me the C100 is plenty good, I have no clients asking for 4K, except for my own interest. I don't know but I can imagine there are many semi-professionals as well as some professionals who are quite satisfied with the C100.

 

[puredrifting]

I guess if I were forced to move up from a C100 the only logical choice would be an FS7 as well. I would sell all my Canon glass and then after I did that Canon would come out with another camera or paid updates to their existing ones and I would end up regretting it....... or within 2 or 3 more years cameras we never thought of would be offered.........don't know how many of us are in the same boat having started off with the 5DIII and needing it for a photography camera. So the idea of jumping ship for HFR and 4K at this point in time doesn't appeal to me. I still need my 5D3 and I'm not going sell my lenses.

I hear ear people talk of future proofing...... In this world what does that really mean....... 2or 3 years? I buy a new computer and you might as well throw it away after 3 years.

There are two types of people, professionals and semi-professionals I fall into the later. So for me the C100 is plenty good, I have no clients asking for 4K, except for my own interest. I don't know but I can imagine there are many semi-professionals as well as some professionals who are quite satisfied with the C100.

At first, I was going to ask why you wouldn't just use your EOS lenses on the FS-7 with the Metabones adapter but then I researched a bit and read this. http://www.newsshooter.com/2014/11/...abones-ef-adapter-problem-and-best-solutions/ What a PITA. I hate that every still lens and now some video lens manufacturers have to make their mounts, control protocols and iris control different? I have played around with the stock Sony lens and while it is usable, it is far from a premium lens like the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II. It's slow, kind of clunky and not that sharp or 3D looking. So I agree, if you are going to jump ship, you have to be wealthy enough to keep your EOS lenses for the future (they seem to work pretty well on every other video camera that is popular) or you have to dump them to be able to afford new lenses that will work consistenly with the FS-7.

Oh, and I am very satisfied with my C100 MKI. It has it's limitations but I have used it for a ton of broadcast, web viral videos, stuff for Fortune 200s, etc. It is a GREAT camera for very little money. Of course, it has its limitations but for the bucks, it's a great value, especially when paired with the Ninja Blade.

 

[DLD]

... I have played around with the stock Sony lens and while it is usable, it is far from a premium lens like the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II...

Sony's most recent forays have been into the Zeiss branded primes, which are pretty decent.

As to the various mounts and electronics, this is, obviously, intentional since it helps Canon sell more lenses and more bodies. Had Canon not had a head start, people might stop buying its (consumer) gear altogether.

PS. These days, there are some "reverse engineered" products that help the third party bodies work with the EF lenses. Kipon is one. I am pretty sure there are others.

 

[puredrifting]

Sony's most recent forays have been into the Zeiss branded primes, which are pretty decent.

Yes, I just played with the stock Sony zoom lens. Was not very impressed. It's a servo nicer version of my 18-135 STM IS. Not a bad lens, but not a great one either.

As to the various mounts and electronics, this is, obviously, intentional since it helps Canon sell more lenses and more bodies. Had Canon not had a head start, people might stop buying its (consumer) gear altogether.

I prefer standard mounts like B4 and PL that just let you mix and match any lens with any camera. But there is no chance that would ever happen with consumer lenses, other than M43 stuff. That was the one thing I dug about my GH4 before I sold it, it was nice to be able to just buy any M43 lens out there, that I wasn't shackled to just Panasonic for lenses.

PS. These days, there are some "reverse engineered" products that help the third party bodies work with the EF lenses. Kipon is one. I am pretty sure there are others.

Yes, but according to Dan Chung, none of them seem to work with the FS-7 without glitches, weird iris behavior and other stuff that people who shoot for a living just don't have timne to deal with. Disappointing mount and behavior with adapters from Sony. That's one more thing that kind of holds me back from the FS7, I wouldn't be able to reliably use my EOS lenses. Although I shoot mostly with manual Nikons and they would work fine on the FS7, they work on everything out there pretty much, I've used them on REDs too.

 

[Giriki]

Bumping this.

 

[Matt Turner]

Looking at the specs on the FS5 it's not so compelling to someone already used to a C100. I don't see the point of jumping to Sony just for the FS5.

As part of a FS5/FS7 combo, I think it would make sense, but by itself it doesn't seem so exciting if you are already a C100 shooter.

If you are in the market right this second, then yes it's better than a C100 MKII, but I think the C100 MKIII would have the edge (except for slo-mo) assuming they improve the HD recording and include the XC-10s 4K capabilities, both of which should be a no brainer for Canon (even with the same sensor + Moore's law, etc).

So I'm still holding out to see what the C100 MKIII brings. :happy:

 

[scaus]

Speaking of that :
I was just at a broadcast exhibition here in Paris, because I wanted to look at the FS5 : I have a C100 MKII and when I'm shooting doc with the ninja, it's kind of heavy setup and 4K+422HD+slowmotion+SDI RAW made me think of FS5.

BUT

a Canon REP kind of told me that a paid 4K update COULD be available for C100 MKII in the next months....

I've shot twice with the C100 mkii and loved it. It's as sharp as my GH4 downscaled and colours I find as pleasing as my Blackmagic footage (not quite as nice motion cadence though). So purchasing a couple would be a no brainer, besides my fear that clients may start asking for 4k deliverables in 2016. My business needs to upgrade cameras by the end of the month and I have a bad case of analysis paralysis.

I wish I liked the FS7/FS5 more as they are amazing value spec-wise. Just not sure that the time it takes to get a nice image is viable for our workflow.

 

[coutard]

Looking at the specs on the FS5 it's not so compelling to someone already used to a C100. I don't see the point of jumping to Sony just for the FS5.

As part of a FS5/FS7 combo, I think it would make sense, but by itself it doesn't seem so exciting if you are already a C100 shooter.

If you are in the market right this second, then yes it's better than a C100 MKII, but I think the C100 MKIII would have the edge (except for slo-mo) assuming they improve the HD recording and include the XC-10s 4K capabilities, both of which should be a no brainer for Canon (even with the same sensor + Moore's law, etc).

So I'm still holding out to see what the C100 MKIII brings. :happy:

420 HD 8bits at 50fps VS 422 HD 10bits at 240fps ?

that makes me think.

Plus, I don't think we'll see a C100 MKII this soon. I pray for a paid upgrade.

 

[Matt Turner]

420 HD 8bits at 50fps VS 422 HD 10bits at 240fps ?

that makes me think.

Plus, I don't think we'll see a C100 MKII this soon. I pray for a paid upgrade.

I meant that yes, the FS5 is definitely better right now (and is a good camera) but as a current C100 user it doesn't make me want to dump everything and go Sony.

Canon can easily implement equivalent HD and better 4K in the C100 MKIII (except for > 1080p60 which we know they wont do, but we do get DPAF instead).

I'm still betting on a NAB '16 or earlier announcement.

 

[Bern Caughey]

At first, I was going to ask why you wouldn't just use your EOS lenses on the FS-7 with the Metabones adapter but then I researched a bit and read this. http://www.newsshooter.com/2014/11/...abones-ef-adapter-problem-and-best-solutions/ What a PITA.

Dan's article is a year old & the situation has changed drastically.

I have the latest Metabone's Smart Adapter, & Speedbooster, & besides sluggish aperture response, they work fine. No weird workarounds, & I'd wager most FS7 owners use EF glass. Sony's about to release new firmware that appears to speed up the menus so there's a glimmer of hope the aperture response may improve too.

As a Canon stills shooter this compatibility is important to me, especially as the majority of my gigs involve air travel. I have a dozen "L" lenses, but no long zooms as it's not my style. But I'm a hybrid DP/Photographer & my film work requires longer focal lengths so picked up Sony's cine-esque 28-135mm f/4 instead of a EF 70-200mm. Not the sexiest optic, but it's a parfocal, stabilized, 5:1 servo zoom, with a dedicated step-less aperture ring, & long-throw focus ring, with hard stops. In summary...a workhorse. If Sony releases a shorter companion I'll likely pick that up too.

But the FS cameras' ability to switch between SpeedBoosters, & Smart Adapters, is a great feature that facilitates traveling with fewer lenses, as three primes become six focal lengths. And if needed there's PL adapters too.

When filming documentary, or simply documentary style, & require a minimal footprint, I typically carry the EF 24-105mm f/4 mounted via Speedbooster (focal reduced 17-75mm f/2.8), Sony's 28-135mm f/4, & sometimes the EF 16-35mm f/2.8 (focal reduced 11-25mm f/2). 11-135mm is an incredible range, & if I need to go even lighter, resort to just the 24-105mm with a SpeedBooster, & Smart Adapter, which covers 17-105mm, a 6:1 range.

I'm a fan of the original C300 & picked up an FS7 while waiting for the C300 mkII. Haven't tested the new version yet, but now doubt I'll buy in. Imagine I'll love it, but it's twice the price of the FS7, & nowhere near twice the camera.