C100: C100 Mk II or...

puredrifting said:
Definitely not hideous but those skin tones aren't exactly warm and friendly. I see that Sony cool blue/magenta tinge to the whole clip. Interesting that this clip and the Joe Simon clip are at least mostly shot with the FS7. A vast difference in look and skin tones there. This clip wouold discourage me from ever buying the FS7 but the Joe Simon clip would give me hope that the camera can achieve a tonality and look I can live with.
Click to expand...
I think the point Jeremey made a couple of posts above is reasonable in the sense that, if one tries a certain combination of LUT's, lenses, profiles, settings, white balance and filters, then he can get any look out of any camera, subject to their innate limitations in terms of the resolution or DR. And, for those shooting interiors, lighting plays a bigger role than all of the above combined.

PS. Most consumers of video -aka TV/YouTube viewers - won't notice a darn thing about the skin color anyway. As long as something is within normal parameters, it's no skin off their nose ... so to say.
 
IMHO. 4k is definitely not a hype for acquisition.
Acquire in 4K, post and deliver in 1080 is a pretty neat workflow.
 
puredrifting said:
Another question I have would be it must have been the C100 MKII because it looks as if almost every shot is 60 FPS or greater? It would be interesting to know which shots are which but agreed, the colors, latitude and feel of the images are quite nice. The post question would also be very interesting to hear about. Thanks for the link Jeremy.
Click to expand...


You're quite welcome (I've been researching this topic quite a bit lately if you can't tell) and yes I do believe it was the C100 Mk II.
 
puredrifting said:
... the Joe Simon clip are at least mostly shot with the FS7. A vast difference in look and skin tones there. This clip would discourage me from ever buying the FS7 but the Joe Simon clip would give me hope that the camera can achieve a tonality and look I can live with.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the debate I'm having where the difference between the various FS7 footage eaxmples are quite a bit. I would love to discover the "recipe" to setup these two cameras (FS7 and C100) to match as closely as possible in acquisition as to minimize the post process.
 
mcgeedigital said:
I hate hate hate the Sony menu structure and lag on the FS7. It is so convoluted and counterintuitive.

Canon has nailed down the skin tones mojo and intuitive menus, imo.
Click to expand...

Agreed!

While the FS7 can produce a lovely picture the camera itself feels beta, & I may upgrade to the C300 II.

There are numerous gotchas with the Sonys, especially the FS7. Some of these can be gotten around with a Gratical (or 7Q) & other add-ons, but not all. On the other hand the C300 II should be a no excuse workhorse, & only bested by the ARRIs.

If the C100 II didn't need a recorder to comply with broadcast specs I would have jumped on it.
 
The Sony FS7 doesn't have the dreaded colour science of the Sony company, the colours do match and are on par with Canon, on the FS7, F5, F55, F35 and F65 that is.

But, I would NOT want to shoot with an FS7 alongside a C100. Completely different menus and interface, completely different Gamma curves, paint menus, algorithms for colours, sharpening, DR. I would not want to shoot on an S-LOG camera and a C-Log B camera,

I'd get a C100 MKII and work with those two. They will complement each other beautifully and work in harmony. And the added C100/ MKII features over the MKI makes it a totally different level of shooting pleasure.

However if I was buying a stand alone camera, the FS7 would be choice, for future proofing against 4K delivery (C100 is 4K to HD, just not delivery)
 
Thanks everyone for adding to the conversation. I love being able to share thoughts with like-minded professionals.

There just doesn't seem to be a clear cut answer... Not that I thought there would be. The FS7 appears to be capable of creating some amazing footage that *can* intercut with the C-Line of cameras but it remains to be seen (hands-on at least) how much effort that will/would take. I hate to shelf the C100 as it is still wonderfully capable of creating stellar 1080 footage (even more so with an external recorder) but looking down the road in terms of longevity, DR and marketability the FS7 seems to be a great choice. The C300 MkII would fit both needs but it's not available for a while and about a 1/3 more investment.
 
digitalinnovations said:
... The C300 MkII would fit both needs but it's not available for a while and about a 1/3 more investment.
Click to expand...
C300 MKII is going to run double of FS7, body only ($16,000 vs. $8,000).

Of course, there are other options. I just saw a JVC LS-300 review (on the AF-100 thread) and the Aussie dude who reviewed it really, really liked it for what it was ($4,000 with the Metabones adapter or Rokinon cine prime included). Early LS-300 footage has been very iffy but the shooter in question made his look beautiful.
 
I agree with the choice of mkII to match, in use and in picture, the mkI

but I found that WB is quite different between the two, and grading is not transparent (with same setting, of course)

mkII is much colder.
Even before buying we could see it on the video tests.
 
coutard said:
...but I found that WB is quite different between the two, and grading is not transparent (with same setting, of course) mkII is much colder.
Click to expand...

Ugh...Well this is a bit disappointing. This almost makes me lean a bit towards the FS7 if you have to match up the footage anyway.
 
What you will need to do to get the FS-7 to match the c100i compared to the c100ii is in a totally different ballpark. Two completely different levels of headache.

For me, I personally would not entertain the idea of the FS-7 for one second. Have you read all the threads about what your getting into with the FS-7?

I've debated a lot as well, for me, the c300ii is worth every penny more than the FS-7. Just ask yourself where you ultimately want to end up....even if it's out of your budget. If you know you want to end up in the higher end....then it's just a question of economics. Figure it out and make it happen.

Not that a single opinion matters, but for me, I would take a 1080p c100 over a 4k FS-7 any day. Resolution is really not something to trade over the overall look and workflow. I personally think the c100 has a superior image.
 
the C100 mk1 and the C100 mk2 are definitely different, even when using the same settings/lenses. The mk2 is always colder.
Maybe another C100 mk1 is your answer if you want everything to match as closely as possible straight out of camera.
I chose an A7s as my b-cam. Great camera, has its quirks and annoyances, and definitely need to colour it to match it to a C100, but gets the job done. As long as you know how to shoot it, you can match both in a few minutes.
You'll have to do the same for the C100ii or the FS7 as well (although as mentioned, the FS7/A7s may take a touch more tweaking than the C100ii, but either way, you'll be tweaking).

I've shot 6 shoots the FS7 (and 2 years with the C100 mk1). I hated the FS7 the first two shoots, didn't mind it the next two, loved it the last two.
I prefer using the C100 (possibly because I'm still just more comfortable with it), but the added DR range from the FS7, the framerates, and 4k (if you need it) are fantastic, and leave the C100 way behind unfortunately.
 
ReelWorksMedia said:
I've debated a lot as well, for me, the c300ii is worth every penny more than the FS-7. Just ask yourself where you ultimately want to end up....even if it's out of your budget. If you know you want to end up in the higher end....then it's just a question of economics. Figure it out and make it happen.
Click to expand...

The C300II isn't in any 'higher end' production category then the FS7. They will be competing for the same jobs and the same business along with the F5.


The FS7 offers much more than resolution advantage over the C100II. For some it won't matter but for many the extra features are what is being demanded by clients and happy clients make happy bank accounts.

These days there are so many great camera options its just a matter of finding what makes the most business sense for your company and market niche. I recommend everyone rent the camera they are considering and see if its right for you. Most online 'tests' say more about the operators skill and eye than the camera most times. Going into the 14+ stop world with Log and all the colour gamuts is a steep learning curve for some. Compromises are needed to get that much into a reasonable file and I imagine the C300II will have a learning curve for those who are used to 8 bit, 12 stop Clog. Some users want to tackle a more advanced camera and some users don't which is why its good to rent and test for yourself.
 
Don't be too shy about having to match different cameras.
This is a very rough example, but completed in sub 5 mins.
Left is Sony A7s (PP6) -> Right is Canon C100 (C-Log)
raw1.jpg

Under 5 mins - not 100%, but not bad for now.
raw2.jpg

Matching isn't the end of the world! Part of the process
 
One thing the C100 Mark II will never do is shoot 4K. I shot with the C100 Mark I for a solid year across many different jobs of all sorts. This year, I purchased a FS7 and have loved the experience. I love how much you can do with the camera. For events, I can shoot a really nice 1080 50mbps XAVC-L codec which holds up really well. For more serious jobs, I can shoot in XAVC-I and really push it in post. And for the even more important jobs, I can shoot in 4K and deliver in 1080p. One of the best things about this camera and even the C300 Mark II is the ability to expand it into a true cinema making machine by using the Odyssey 7Q. The C100 Mark II can never do that.

I honestly think if you need a second camera, grab the C100 Mark I used for really cheap and hold tight until we see the C300 Mark II come out. If you are interested in the FS7, rent it for a long weekend and really put it through its paces. It took me a couple of days to really figure out the camera before I felt comfortable with it. I also watched all of Doug Jensen's FS7 course and that helped immensely.

Here are two different examples of recent videos I have finished shot with the FS7 + Leica R lenses. Oh yeah, should I mention the FS7 can take any lens combo? That is pretty cool.

Destination Tree - 4K XAVC-I SLOG3.CINE in CINE EL mode

Rangers United - 1080p XAVC-I (Interviews) XAVC-L 50 for B-ROLL - CUSTOM MODE USING JENSEN'S HG8 PROFILE FROM HIS TUTORIALS
 
I have the Canon C100 MK 1 and C100 MK II along with a Sony A7s. My advice is get a C100 Mk I. The Mk II is a little nicer but not worth the $$$. The C100 is a great camera at the current price point.
 
Firefox39 said:
I have the Canon C100 MK 1 and C100 MK II along with a Sony A7s. My advice is get a C100 Mk I. The Mk II is a little nicer but not worth the $$$. The C100 is a great camera at the current price point.
Click to expand...

Are there differences in Auto Focus between C100 MKI and MKII?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top