C100: c100 Mark II and possible successor

If the new firmware actually improves the sluggish aperture and menu response then I might become more interested in the FS7. The built in limitations of the FS5 in regards to output and evf viewing options has me on the sidelines as well. I will wait until these cameras have solid reputations (like the C300) until I spend money. I have learned over the years to never believe in anything but my actual experience with the camera and experiences of people hat I know and trust. Everything else could easily be forum or marketing hype.
 
Matt Turner said:
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.
Click to expand...

If Canon ends up offering a paid up grade 4K for the C100 mkII, is there anything holding them back from offering the up grade for C100 mkI owners too?
 
Dynamic range is a problem for me so a paid upgrade on the C100mk2 wouldn't be enough, probably.
 
Michael Thames said:
If Canon ends up offering a paid up grade 4K for the C100 mkII, is there anything holding them back from offering the up grade for C100 mkI owners too?
Click to expand...

I really doubt that this upgrade will happen. If Canon had this up their sleeve, wouldn't they have publicized it heavily when the C100ii was released, like Sony did with the FS700?
 
So, I've been tasked with getting 2 cameras for my department and our budget is limited.
And right now the thinking is that I'll get a C100mkii and a 5Diii which fits into the budget. The only other cameras I'm considering are the C100mki (same price as 5D basically).

Previously I had been thinking about an FS5/ A7s i combo, but we own a lot of Canon glass, I love Canon's internal look, I love its AF, and having to buy 2 Metabones adapters is probably going to pop the budget.

Maybe someone can poke holes in my C100mii/5diii choice

My reasons for the choice:
We shoot lots of journalism with short turnarounds. We don't have time for color correction besides general drag-and-drop corrections. We distribute on the web only. 4K would be nice for reframing/stabilization but we can survive without it .

I wanted the C100mii over the mki because of the better LCD ergonomics, the somewhat better ISO, but most importantly the 60p (I like having at least some kind of slow mo).

For the B cam, our second shooter wants a full frame camera. Hence the 5D iii. (Though personally, I have argued for a C100mi since then the cameras will be much easier to match).
But, here are the arguments for the 5D: We shoot a lot of stuff that requires a wide field of view and the full frame 5D provides that field of view without backing up the cam. Plus, the 5D makes it easier to get the background out of focus without backing up the cam and we have to shoot a lot of press junket interviews where we're forced to be quite close to the subject.

I think there's also some bias between us where I am biased in favor of video cams like the C100 (I'm an owner) and my second shooter is biased in favor of DSLRs/5Ds (he's an owner). But I want him to be comfortable with the cam he's using.

*But are those arguments enough to not buy the C100mki and have two C100s that match so easily?

At least there is a lot of advice out there for how to match the C100 and 5D.

Thanks for any thoughts!
 
Last edited:
A 5D3 may be fine for some shallow depth-of-field art film, but a poor choice for video journalism. Your production be better served by dedicated video cameras with matching looks.

Proper audio support alone should end any discussion, but also factor in dual record, better viewing options, better exposure tools, better ergonomics, reduced skew, & built-in NDs. Similar cameras may share lenses, media, microphones, batteries, battery chargers, etc, making them easier to support, especially when something breaks.

I typically like Canon's out-of-box colors more then the canned looks you'll get out of the FS5, or A7 series. To fully get around the "Sony Look" with either of those systems you'll need to shoot a flavor of S-Log, & apply a LUT (&/or skillfully grade) in post, whereas the F5/55 & FS7 can burn LUTs directly into the footage as needed (though you're then restricted to one of three preset white balances).
 
Last edited:
It seems that, for a run&gun solution, APS-C size 70D is a better fit - you get quick auto-focus but still get to use your Canon zoom glass. Full Frame for journalism is a poor fit.
 
JimmyMcV said:
Thanks for the advice folks. DLD - can you further explain why full frame is a bad fit for journalism?
Click to expand...
Well, larger sensors have a greater depth of field and are more used for the narrative productions. Even then, the traditional film based cameras have been of the s35/APS-C size anyway while the ENG products have relied on the much smaller (~ 1/2.3") sensors. It doesn't mean it can't be done but, for most, the trade-off isn't worth it.

As to 70D, it was the first Canon with the dual pixel auto focus, since then added to C100 and C300 series, and as of right now, the camera is (by far) the low price leader with that DPAF feature and can be had for around $900. The drawback is that you may have to tell your clients not to wear striped shirts for the interviews and that you'd would have to build an appropriate rig for it when operating handheld. But even there, there are many good deals to be had. And it's not a bad stills camera either.
 
C100 MKI or MKII don't intercut with the 5D MKIII very well. You can match the colors but the 5D MKIII is much softer and less detailed, makes it difficult to match. I would vote for a C100 MKI and a C100 MKII.
 
Ideally I would suggest getting two C100s so that things match seamlessly. If your clients also demand stills then better to go with the 5D III. The 5D has a brand pull. Many clients want 5D so that gets you covered. 70D takes you nowhere in terms of brand recognition.

When shooting with DSLR and C100, it is better to use DSLR for closeup of face and C100 for wider. You may need an additional round of sharpening with the 5D III when shooting wide scenes and cut with C100 footage.
 
Specs for 1D X MKII are leaking at usual places. Which leads me to believe - not the leaking, but the specs - that there will be no C 100 MK III/C200 in that $6,000-$8,000 price range in the near future. It makes no sense for Canon to compete with itself. 1D X MKII will basically be a slightly updated version of 1D C, with a new sensor and higher DR.
 
I dont need a c100 mark3, i need a c100 mark 2 with a new firmware...
1080p with 120fps, and 50mb codec.
A canon extension hand grip/sholder rig with "normal" price...
4k 30fps
I will pay 5000usd for this camera, not for the normal c100 mark2, i have the mark1
Canon still have the best color science to me, but sony...
 
A canon extension hand grip/sholder rig with "normal" price...


That would be a question to ask Z and RRM, wouldn't it? I agree with you but this shouldn't be a Canon request. I don't have confidence that Canon could ever make a robust handheld/shoulder rig with all the attributes professionals need for a particular domestic market.
 
PedroAquiles said:
I dont need a c100 mark3, i need a c100 mark 2 with a new firmware...
1080p with 120fps, and 50mb codec.
A canon extension hand grip/sholder rig with "normal" price...
4k 30fps
I will pay 5000usd for this camera, not for the normal c100 mark2, i have the mark1
Canon still have the best color science to me, but sony...
Click to expand...

I want it all too, but unfortunately that's not how the real world works. Canon is going to build cameras that are designed for a specific application and affordable to those customers. That's why the C100 exists and isn't the same as the C300 for 1/3 the price. The C100 is still a great camera for the event shooter. Event guys don't need 4k, some may want 4k, but they aren't losing jobs over not having it. TV guys now need 4k for some customers so Canon has made the C300 II to meet that need. In a few years when everyone has a 4k TV and everything is 4k, then Canon will surely have a 4k C100.
The Arri Alexa didn't have 4k and everyone was still choosing it over other 4k cameras. A lot of that was for the same reason that the C300 mopped the floor with the RED Scarlet...usability and color. They were both announced the same day and teh internets quickly and loudly proclaimed the Scarlet to be the vastly superior camera. Features and specs are nice, and yeah...I too wish the C100 was a little better in that regard, but at the end of the day I still get great footage from my C100 and it does most of what I need it to do without putting me completely in the poor house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top