C100: c100 Mark II and possible successor

EIREHotspur said:
We'll, that may be among posters here but we've delivered a lot of MK IIs....and we have another "name" show that is using 4 MK II PLs starting in 10 days.....so I think claiming the Mk II is not doing well is inaccurate....

Jim Martin
Click to expand...

Jim....maybe you use the cameras you sell....but I would class you more as a seller than a user.....and like someone else pointed out....look outside of your business and see that the Canons are not within a country mile of sales compared to The Sony's.

Also you are but one Business vs More than one persons experience dealing with their own locality....majority rules and all that.

When I brought back my rental C100 II to the top Camera Rental store in Ireland and asked him how many they had to rent out....he pointed at it and said...."thats it...everyone wants the FS7 ..we have tons of those"..

I loved the C100 II compared to the Mark ... I must say...but if It came to a choice right now then it is a no brainer...

They are overpriced....they should be half the price they are...
 
EIREHotspur said:
Jim....maybe you use the cameras you sell....but I would class you more as a seller than a user.....and like someone else pointed out....look outside of your business and see that the Canons are not within a country mile of sales compared to The Sony's.

Also you are but one Business vs More than one persons experience dealing with their own locality....majority rules and all that.

When I brought back my rental C100 II to the top Camera Rental store in Ireland and asked him how many they had to rent out....he pointed at it and said...."thats it...everyone wants the FS7 ..we have tons of those"..

In our rental dept. we have both and the FS7 is doing well although they seem to be a little fragile when compared to the original C300. Particularly, the control handle is not that robust (we've had to fix/replace a few). The 16 C300s are still going out the most...still at their price quoted 4 years ago (other than Arri, unprecedented). The new camera is starting to take hold and will continue to build over the next few months.
Many posters keep coming back to price like it is the only thing.....it's not. As has been pointed out by others here on this site, the FS7 is not half the price once you add the back, a recorder, and the proprietary cards....and the extra time and money in post working on the color (compared to the Canon look). Look, both are good cameras but I don't like when people post in absolutes...."this camera is great and xxx cameras sucks".......or when people use multiple posts to say they think a certain camera sucks. We all can enjoy and relish in the fact that the tools that are available now are ten fold better than what we had 10 years ago and at a much lower price.
As for myself, worked behind the camera, then in front, then back behind and for the last many years now, selling. I kinda do know which way is up in our business and what works best for our clients.....and I love new products as they come out.....but, I'm not shy in pointing out things they may or will 'bite you" in your production process....that is my job.

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

Happy New Year!

ps - I screwed up the quote part of this post so me bad
Click to expand...
 
Jim Martin said:
EIREHotspur said:
As has been pointed out by others here on this site, the FS7 is not half the price once you add the back, a recorder, and the proprietary cards....and the extra time and money in post working on the color (compared to the Canon look).
Click to expand...

Why do you need a recorder on FS7 to equal a C300II? If your going to insist on a recorder to even out the 444 HD spec then what do you add to the C300II to get 4K60p or internal prores HD? What about running 3 streams of video (VF, 2x SDI monitors)? Many users are reporting that the C300II is limited in its streams for directors monitors. Your posing this like the C300II doesn't require expensive media and need good post colouring for Clog2. Slog3/Slgamut3.cine and Clog2 are not that far off colouring and from samples and reviews many feel the Clog2 looks closer to Sony Slog3 than old Clog look. If the goal is handing over footage with a WYSIWYG look then yes Canon has an advantage.

I agree blanket statements that cameras suck are wrong because none of these cameras suck but lets be honest when comparing cameras.
Click to expand...
 
Jim Martin said:
EIREHotspur said:
Many posters keep coming back to price like it is the only thing.....it's not. As has been pointed out by others here on this site, the FS7 is not half the price once you add the back, a recorder, and the proprietary cards....and the extra time and money in post working on the color (compared to the Canon look). Look, both are good cameras but I don't like when people post in absolutes...."this camera is great and xxx cameras sucks".......or when people use multiple posts to say they think a certain camera sucks. We all can enjoy and relish in the fact that the tools that are available now are ten fold better than what we had 10 years ago and at a much lower price.
Click to expand...

Well, price certainly does matter, but I still agree with what you're saying. There are many things that make a camera great. All that aside, I just want to say that there seems to be a weird desire among many Ops to own the absolute best camera body they can, as if it's some kind of contest. Craft is gonna make up 90% of your success, IMO, not whether or not you have the latest and greatest HW. I've seen plenty of garbage shot on really expensive rigs and plenty of great films shot on rigs that are on the edge of obsolescence. Sure, some clients demand and expect you to bring a minimum to the table, but most (that I've encountered) don't. I'm of the opinion that you should make what you have last for as long as you can. The more you shoot with something, the more you'll get used to it. If there's a clear economic value in upgrading, do so. Don't get sucked into the hype.
Click to expand...
 
Jim Martin said:
EIREHotspur said:
Many posters keep coming back to price like it is the only thing.....it's not. As has been pointed out by others here on this site, the FS7 is not half the price once you add the back, a recorder, and the proprietary cards....and the extra time and money in post working on the color (compared to the Canon look).
Click to expand...

This is misleading. On the FS7, very, very few people use the back extension as it's not needed, you don't need a recorder at all and yes the cards are proprietary, but have greatly dropped in price and for a 64 gig card it's $220 vs $265, a difference yes, but not huge. As for colors, clients seem to be very happy with LC709a (aka new color science) straight out of the camera with no grading.

Not saying at all that the FS7 is better than the C300, but you should put out truthful facts and specs, especially as a dealer. I personally shop at EVS all the time as I live in LA, and I would certainly hope to hear honest specs from your sales people.

Edit: I'm not pro-Sony at all. I actually want to see Canon rise up and kick A$$ again, but right now they are being cheap / slow and getting their A$$ kicked. I've owned several Canons, several Sonys and soon will own a Red. For me, it's just about getting the best camera for the right price and Sony / Red are doing that right now. I hope Canon will catch up and be competitive again because competition is best for everyone.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I thought this was a fairly decent forum but this thread has turned me off completely. I belong to number of special interest forums so I know people are the same anywhere you go- fanboys for this or that. The thing I don't get is how certain people actually HAVE the time to bash Canon and do it in, of all places, a Canon section of the forum!

Best camera for the right price?? What does this mean? Think about it and in the meantime read these words from cowpunk-

"There's no reason to be angry about cameras. You're wasting your time and energy. Shoot with what works - if something better comes along at your budget level, shoot with that."
 
Maybe I'm wrong... but I'm fairly sure XQD cards the FS7 uses aren't proprietary. There are Nikon cameras that use the same cards, and both Sony and Lexar make them.

Price isn't everything I suppose.. but it is a huge deal. I would have loved to buy a C300ii... I used my C100 for over 2 years and loved it... so would have loved to stick to Canon .... but for half the price, I switched to Sony and got the FS7.
 
Jim....I certainly do not say the C100 sucks....never have. Just compared to the Sony's it is now over priced.

I agree with you that it doesn't matter what price the C300 II is as the Big Guys go for those and have the big budgets.

The C100 II and FS5/FS7 is aimed more at the Wedding shooter bracket.
When I say Wedding Shooter they do Corporates, Sports etc.

With due respect Jim....you run a great Business...and obviously you give great advice because I read your posts and people leave great feedback having in dealt with you.

So I respect your opinion and advice.

However as you sell cameras...you are hardly likely to come on here and say The Canon C100 Mark I is a load of junk compared to the Mark II.
 
All I would say is that at some point Canon should care about retaining their customers. As I've said, it is likely they will lose me. Not just because of price, but ergonomics and features also. Now it's fine to say "so and so top notch TV production" is using Canon's. Great! Quite frankly, their concerns are radically different than mine, so I don't really care. But if Canon's strategy is to give up on existing C100/C300 Mk I users and only go after high-end productions, I'm not sure that is a profitable strategy.
 
EIREHotspur said:
Jim....I certainly do not say the C100 sucks....never have. Just compared to the Sony's it is now over priced.

I agree with you that it doesn't matter what price the C300 II is as the Big Guys go for those and have the big budgets.

The C100 II and FS5/FS7 is aimed more at the Wedding shooter bracket.
When I say Wedding Shooter they do Corporates, Sports etc.

With due respect Jim....you run a great Business...and obviously you give great advice because I read your posts and people leave great feedback having in dealt with you.

So I respect your opinion and advice.

However as you sell cameras...you are hardly likely to come on here and say The Canon C100 Mark I is a load of junk compared to the Mark II.
Click to expand...
No. I didn't say you said that...I was talking in general about this site, especially over the last year or so...camera bashing, "mine is better than yours", pixel counting, spec sheet declarations, etc. There are a lot of really smart people that don't post here anymore because of it. Even Barry Green was getting questioned here...absolutely ridiculous. I, and EVS want the best for everyone so, when asked, will give you our opinion...that is based on working experience (Many of us here are active shooters on a regular basis), professional opinions from working pros (up to The ASC level) that let us know about the good, the bad, and the ugly, and any reliability issues that have surfaced as newer models arrive. I can't tell you how many times we've been told by a client that 'I'm getting X camera for X dollars....it's less than the established cameras"....and we try to point out that X camera is really 2-3 times the price once you get all the items to make it function properly......again, looking out for everyone's best interest here.

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

ps - C100 good, C100 MK II better.....FS700 good, FS7 better, FS5 better for less money, etc....I could go on but I think I'm done for the year!
 
"Not saying at all that the FS7 is better than the C300, but you should put out truthful facts and specs, especially as a dealer. I personally shop at EVS all the time as I live in LA, and I would certainly hope to hear honest specs from your sales people."

Gene-
You will never find anyone here fudging facts/specs/etc...we pride ourselves in getting the straight story out there....and are complimented often for doing just that. Now I am available for flogging so the next time you are in, let me know!

...Jim
 
control4userguy said:
I thought this was a fairly decent forum but this thread has turned me off completely. I belong to number of special interest forums so I know people are the same anywhere you go- fanboys for this or that. The thing I don't get is how certain people actually HAVE the time to bash Canon and do it in, of all places, a Canon section of the forum!

Best camera for the right price?? What does this mean? Think about it and in the meantime read these words from cowpunk-

"There's no reason to be angry about cameras. You're wasting your time and energy. Shoot with what works - if something better comes along at your budget level, shoot with that."
Click to expand...

HUH??? You're disappointed that people are discussing Canon in a Canon thread, on a filmmakers web forum. From here on out, just so we don't disappoint you, we'll make sure to talk about Maple syrup while on DVX USER, and if by chance you land in a Canon thread, do yourself a favor and make sure to talk about RED Cams. I wouldn't want to hurt controlforuserguy's feelings and all. Of course this is only if you feel like wasting your time posting to the site!

Being that your turned off for god knows what reason, I'm willing to go out on a limb and assume the site will go on without you should you decide not to return. Just saying!
 
gene_can_sing said:
... Not saying at all that the FS7 is better than the C300, but you should put out truthful facts and specs, especially as a dealer. I personally shop at EVS all the time as I live in LA, and I would certainly hope to hear honest specs from your sales people...
Click to expand...
Gene, if you had a problem with a sales presentation at EVS - or any other retailer - you should bring it up with the management. There are obviously a less trustworthy types but, with the internet era, any type of dishonesty is counterproductive to business.

chappelldigital said:
Maybe I'm wrong... but I'm fairly sure XQD cards the FS7 uses aren't proprietary. There are Nikon cameras that use the same cards, and both Sony and Lexar make them...
Click to expand...
QXD cards are an open source, with the standards controlled by a coalition. Anyone, theoretically, can make it but, primarily due to low volume of sales, Sandisk, Kingston, Transcend, Samsung, et al. choose not to engage in this sector.
 
LDBecker said:
Well... As I said, I have another main gig, but I HAVE used video to promote two fund appeals that brought in over a quarter million dollars... And I'm involved in planning a large venue meeting next June that will highlight refugee resettlement in the LA area... AND I'm putting together a project highlighting three small foodbanks in the Los Angeles area... And did some videos highlighting school administrator training... And a video highlighting Native American school on a reservation... And a series of interviews... And I do regular videos for my own church (I'm the Sr. Pastor), and for my bishop's office... I guess I am coming at this from another angle, but I think it's a valid one. I'm having fun, developing skills, meeting a lot of interesting people, extending what I think is important for people to be a part of and support, and I am finding some success. As to the question of Sony vs. Canon, I've been a Canon SLR/DSLR shooter for decades and have a nice selection of canon primes that I am anxious to see how they work with video on the C100 mk II -anyone use an 85 1.2LII or 50 1.2 on one? I also like Canon color better, and I often need better low-light performance in churches than my XF300 can give. Make sense?
Click to expand...

Fair enough, you can make the argument for C series camera because you've got a heap of Canon lenses.

But you could still easily use them with a Sony PMW-F3 together with an adapter (but that adapter costs US$1k! However even then, it still works out to great value vs a C100 mk1).
http://www.metabones.com/article/of/Metabones_launches_EF-FZ_Mount
http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/10/...t-adapter-reviewed-by-paul-ream-of-extrashot/
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1190615-REG/metabones_mb_ef_fz_bt1_canon_ef_to_sony.html

However, even if skipping an F3 and settling for less, a C100 mk1 secondhand makes a lot more sense than a C100 mk2 as it is a lot cheaper and you'll be using it in an area where you'll not be making any profit of the purchase. So makes a lot of sense to save a heap of money, when the improvements from a C100 mk1 to a C100 mk2 is only rather very small.
 
Last edited:
IronFilm said:
a C100 mk1 secondhand makes a lot more sense than a C100 mk2 as it is a lot cheaper and you'll be using it in an area where you'll not be making any profit of the purchase. So makes a lot of sense to save a heap of money, when the improvements from a C100 mk1 to a C100 mk2 is only rather very small.
Click to expand...
The differences can seem small, but if a good viewfinder and OLED screen make the difference between you getting a shot in focus, properly exposed, etc., or not, which can make the difference between a client hiring you again, which can mean thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, then the difference is large. In the case where you're doing unpaid videos for yourself, having in-focus and properly exposed shots that you yourself are editing can be the difference between being bald and having hair (if you were to pull out your hair in frustration, that is).

I've always liked the images I saw from the Sony F3 more than what I've seen from the FS7, F5, and F55. The F3 has 3.4-3.6 megapixel sensor, while the FS7, F5, and F55 have 8.9MP, so the pixel size of the F3 is larger than the other Sony professional cameras. The F35 also looks better than the FS7, F5, and F55 in terms of image quality. That said, the newer lineup has a lot of newer features (such as 4K) which to a large degree makes the older cameras obsolete, even though the older cameras oddly still have better image quality. In the corporate and doc world, ease of use typically trumps outright image quality. So I'd really only recommend an F3 to maybe low budget narrative films who can work around its shortcomings in name of great image quality at a low price point.
 
I kind of agree with Eric....but I also think there is one other element to consider. People "know" their cameras. So the larger gap you are referring too is actually not as large as you are suggesting. A great DP that knows the C100I like the back of his hand is not going to gain a crazy amout of money (equal in time) by making the switch to the MarkII. The profit gain in time due to the upgrade will be minimal if not none...and the footage enhancement will be noticeable mostly to the shooter. Not a bad thing....but also not a sound business investment. It's more of a creative comfort if you will.
 
Last edited:
ReelWorksMedia, summed it up well part of what I'm trying to get across: there are real difference, but they'll mostly only be noticed by you rather than anybody else! So can still be a good thing, but I'll be highly skeptical as to if a C100 mk2 is a wise business investment
 
Going to make me sound like a great diplomat but I think theres truth in most of the comments made here.

On paper...yes the upgrades on the C100 Mark 2 are small compared to the Mark 1.
However the difference in the LCD is huge...and after all if you are not happy with what your seeing and the ability to get focus is diminished then it is like walking around with bad eyesight for years.

Like IronFilm says the Mark 2 does not seem to be a good investment as everyone now will want the FS5/FS7 for 4k even if they are not using it yet.
Also Canon could bring out a Mark 3 within a year with 4k and the second hand market would have the MArk 2 at the price it should be from new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top