The auto-focus in the C100 Mk II does seem a bit faster, but not to noticeably.
C100: C100 Mk II or...
- Thread starter digitalinnovations
- Start date
The auto-focus in the C100 Mk II does seem a bit faster, but not to noticeably.
Jeremy Krzmarzick
Member
I am feeling massive buyers regret after purchasing the C100 Mark II and Sony announcing the FS5. I feel in love with a lot of features that the C100 has, but now that the FS5 has slow motion and 4K.. The C100 Mark II has showed its far behind its time super fast.
Carcaridon
Well-known member
I feel a little the same. I love the image I get from the C100MII, but it's missing some features that are standard in a lot of 2015 cameras. I think not giving the C100 4K was a bad idea. Great camera to shoot with, easy to get a great image, but a little behind the times. I'll probably pickup an FS5 too.
chappelldigital
Well-known member
C100 Mk2 should have had 4K 8bit 420.
For the massive price jump over the mk1... it gives you almost nothing.
I'm on the fence between FS5 and FS7 now..... Was hoping for something from Canon... but come 2016, I'm sure I won't own a Canon camera any longer.
For the massive price jump over the mk1... it gives you almost nothing.
I'm on the fence between FS5 and FS7 now..... Was hoping for something from Canon... but come 2016, I'm sure I won't own a Canon camera any longer.
Maybe C200 will (if there is C200).
Carcaridon
Well-known member
Matt Turner
Well-known member
I think for most C100 owners the C100 MKII was what it should have been on release 3 years ago (except DPAF).
I don't see it competing with the FS5 on those grounds, considering it's the same price.
The release of the C100 MKII was an early surprise though so I'm sure a C100 MKIII is on it's way.
I'd upgrade if it had internal "broadcast" HD like the C300 (hopefully better than 60p) and 8bit 4:2:2 4K, at the C100 MKII price point. i dont think that's much to ask considering the FS5s specs.
I don't see it competing with the FS5 on those grounds, considering it's the same price.
The release of the C100 MKII was an early surprise though so I'm sure a C100 MKIII is on it's way.
I'd upgrade if it had internal "broadcast" HD like the C300 (hopefully better than 60p) and 8bit 4:2:2 4K, at the C100 MKII price point. i dont think that's much to ask considering the FS5s specs.
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Based upon past Canon response, everything all of you are saying is true but Canon will not respond until 2017. Canon has always been a follower and slow one at that when it comes to providing comparable features at the similar price point. I love my Canon cameras but Sony will always have more features for less money.
The way I see Canon's 4K lineup unfolding for 2015-16 is something like this --
5D MK IV - 4K center crop, slightly oversampled, MXF 305 Mbps, 8-bit 4:2:2 internal, 10-bit external, $3,500
1D XII - 4K center crop, oversampled, 305 Mbps, 10-bit 4:2:2 internal/external, $6,500
C200 - basically C100 MK II with 4K, 305 Mbps, 8-bit 4:2:2 internal, 10-bit 4:2:2 external --- $8,000
OK, the last one is a bit of a wild card but they can release it at any moment, subject to some sort of non-compete agreement with Sony in that market niche. The technology itself is there and has been for quite a while.
A lot depends on C300 MKII sales, which are very strong as of now. The industry seems to be able to absorb FS7 and C300 MKII just fine, as the low-medium budget productions follow the switch to 4K.
I bought the Sony FS7 with the kit lens, 28-135mm assuming the auto focus works well, not as good. Mainly purchase the camera as main for my wedding event and mix with 2 canon 5DM3. I also shoot with other team in the wedding industry. My editor complaints about FS7 coloring as well as the other team I shoot for. Purchase close to $12k, sold it for 9k, and ended up with Canon 100 Mark2 and I love it. The auto focus is fast, I mounted on my Ronin and steadicam pilot. Using the Ronin and Steadicam Pilot have been so much easier.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I think this is becoming a needs versus wants discussion. Do you need beautiful, accurate, flattering, warm skin tones in 1080 or do you want crazy, impressive specs in 4k but with crappy skin tones and color? Very few of us NEED 4k because a need would mean we have to deliver a 4k master, which very few of us do. The re-framing thing is for lazy shooters for the most part. Yes, you can do a pseudo two camera interview with 4k but how many people NEED to do that? Few. Unless you are delivering programming to a client who requires 4k, the C100 MKII is still more camera than most need to create compelling projects.
Doug_EX
Well-known member
But it only has 12 stops of dynamic range. How on earth am I supposed to make a great film with that?
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Ha, ha! Good one.
Spartacus
Veteran
Sorry, but this is just deliberate emphasizing of one C100 strength with downplaying of the real-world use of 4K.
I own the C100 and it's a great, great camera, but right now it's in its final year, before becoming old tech.
Resizing has nothing to do with laziness, but with creativity in post:
The director/preditor wants to get closer or to put the emphasis somewhere else in the picture. Thanks to the C100 excellent picture, we often scale to 120 in post, sometimes even 150 for web delivery.
Further with the absence of motorized zoom lenses (well, there are the 20K Canon cine zooms...) I rather do a slow zoom in post.
Doing this with 4K material for HD delivery makes a BIG difference - you may choose not to do it, but don't call others lazy, just because it isn't your thing.
BTW you been around long enough to know your points were exactly the same when HD came to kick SDs butt
What about true slomo, not some slowed down 60p? Just a gimmick I guess, yet clients want it and are happy if you can deliver. If we edit in-house, we can even get away with good old 60i deinterlacing (for web delivery). I would't mind sth like 90p at least in freaking HD, when others can do 120 in 4K.
About skin tones:
People always complain about Sony and early RED skin tones, I also prefer Canons rendering of correctly exposed and recorded skin tones out of the box.
But these days with some CC is easy enough to get sth pleasing out of most modern cameras.
Just a quick Vimeo search for FS7 and C100 gave me this:
https://vimeo.com/140083427 (don't care for that faded grade, but skin tones look good)
https://vimeo.com/140065705 (probably purposely graded that way, but skin tones look funky)
Matt Turner
Well-known member
Yes, this is precisely my angle @Spartacus:
who would give up 4K, HFR, internal broadcast quality HD, brand new camera, that has ~ok colour but can be easily CCd in post
vs
3 year old HD camera that has great autofocus and great colour out of the box.
...for the same price. <<< <<<
Remember these are low end cameras, so why not get the most bang for buck? (also applies to reliability - Canon is > Sony, but these are low end cameras for low end productions)