C100: C100 Mark II vs. Sony FS5 or Canon C200 or Panasonic AU-EVA1

G

guerriglia

Active member
Hi.
I am about to sell my old C100 Mark II. I would like to buy a new camera, but I found myself bogged down in a world of doubts.
What would you buy:
Sony FS5 with 4K free upgrade and Canon adapter for 4900 euros.
Canon C200 for 7100 euros.
Panasonic AU-EVA1 for 6800 euros.
(Prices are approximate and without VAT)
Consider that "spending other people's money is always fun" so please be considerate when you reply ;-)
Thanks!
 
Without knowing what you shoot, it would not be easy answering.

If your shooting will benefit from the awesome AF, then go for C200. Since you have the C100 Mark II, you would have some idea about the DPAF. So you will be able to decide whether that is important or not.

If you have time to grade your shots, want to pull out the maximum from each shot and ready to spend time then go for C200. There are some people who in the past have gone to great extents to get raw out of even 5DII/5DIII. If you are into independent films, commercials etc C200 raw lite can be of help. If you are happy with the MP4 of C200 then fine. If you definitely want a 10 bit codec which can edit easily, then go for EVA1. We have no idea when the 400Mbps codec will be available in EVA1 though. So there are variables you need to consider.

If you are shooting 5-6 hours of interviews every day, then raw may not be the most appealing idea unless mandated by the client. EVA-1 may be more appealing in that scenario.

The EVA-1 looks like a nice documentary camera and ticks most of the boxes except for people who need a viewfinder. It is said that many people from the DSLR generation don't care for viewfinders. So if you are one of them, then EVA 1 should be fine.

We don't know how good the high ISO of EVA-1 is since it has dual iso of 800-2500. I hope someone can compare once EVA1 is out in the market. May be Mr. Geoff Boyle will. So judge that yourself before buying, if high ISO is important to you.

I personally would place the Sony FS5 as the last choice due to colours and the FS5 files never appealed to me. So can't speak much about it.

No camera is perfect. You decide the criteria which are non-negotiable and then select the camera.
 
Yeah I'm with indiawilds. Need to know what your needs are. I'll say that you can make a good image out of all of them, but they each have strengths/weaknesses. For example I chose to buy a C200 because I'm primarily going to be shooting narrative in RAW. If I was going to be hired to shoot run and gun docs for a broadcast client that requires 10-bit, the C200 would have been a terrible choice and I might have gone FS5 or FS7 II for the electronic NDs. I don't know enough about EVA1 yet, but from what I can tell it'll be good too. It likely isn't as good a choice for me because I prefer RAW, will use the autofocus and LOVE the EVF; but none of those reasons may mean anything to you.


So what are your needs?
 
I shoot interviews and commercials in a controlled environment. When I am out in the field or need a quick camera for events, I switch to my Sony X70 4K. After reading that autofocus with my Canon lenses would be useless on the FS5, I tend to avoid the FS5. So EVA1 or C200?
 
I need a great autofocus (so I believe the C200 is better than the EVA1) and that's my priority, compared to colors. I really don't need to shoot raw at the moment, but could happen in the future if my clients ask for it. Then, a good 4K slow motion would be very helpful.
 
guerriglia said:
I need a great autofocus (so I believe the C200 is better than the EVA1) and that's my priority, compared to colors. I really don't need to shoot raw at the moment, but could happen in the future if my clients ask for it. Then, a good 4K slow motion would be very helpful.
Click to expand...

If you need great continuous autofocus and don't need a 10-bit codec you can record to cheap media, C200 would be the winner based on features alone IMO. The C200 also does 4k/60p with no hit to sharpness.
 
FS5 proven great looking images.
C200 few really good samples but when it looks good it looks really good.
EVA 1 hasn't really impressed yet.

FS5, light, small, versatile frame rates, 10-bit HD.
C200 bulky, heavy, configurable, internal raw.
EVA 1 light, small, yet to be handled by customers.
 
J.Brown said:
FS5 proven great looking images.
C200 few really good samples but when it looks good it looks really good.
EVA 1 hasn't really impressed yet.

FS5, light, small, versatile frame rates, 10-bit HD.
C200 bulky, heavy, configurable, internal raw.
EVA 1 light, small, yet to be handled by customers.
Click to expand...

Agree with everything except that the C200 is only bulky and heavy compared to DSLRs and the smallest of video cameras (which the FS5 and EVA are among). It's pretty small and light compared to most cinema and ENG cameras. When I take off the top handle and monitor, mine is barely larger than my 1DC.
 
I find C200 to be as bulky as my FS7 and about as heavy but with much more configurable buttons on the C200 and I really like the ND-filter buttons compared to the wheel on the FS7. A C100 or FS5 is much more enjoyable to work with hand held.
 
C200 - if u need just 1080p 10bit 4:2:2 for event for example , u can get a very cheap Atomos Ninja rocorder... its light and has hdmi.... BM monitor / recorder is also a very small solution , weights nothing really
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top