C100: C100 MKII image better than the C100 MKI

Michael Thames

Michael Thames

Carbonite Member
Just got a C100 MKII for practical reasons for using on a Helix. Wasn't thinking about the image quality, just wanting to use it remotely and that it had a scratch mic for recording audio and matching it in post with an external recorder.

Am I hallucinating? The C100 MKII looks like a better image to me than the MKI. Thats my non scientific hit. In post it looks sharper and better contrast. I wasn't expecting that. Do others notice this as well, or are the differences not really noticeable to the naked eye. Dang, I might have to sell the MKI and get another MKII.
 
If you mean it is more blue and the colours are all off.. then yes... yes it is better....haha (my non-scientific assessment as well)
 
I have not found the C100 MKII to look better, I agree with chappell, it looks slightly worse than the MKI to my eye. Some people feel that Canon messed up the color science just a touch, it appears cooler and just slightly less "filmic" looking, which has been my observation when shooting with my MKI and renting a MKII as a second cam. Subtle though, not a huge difference. C100 MKII is a bit sharper and contrastier it seems also. If I had it to do over again, I would have rather bought the MKII for the eyepiece, 60p and better DPAF but timing was my issue, I bought right before the MKII came out. I knew it was coming but needed the camera for a big two week shoot in Africa. Renting would have killed any profit margin so I bought the MKI knowing it was obsolete the day I got it but that was okay. I wish I didn't need 4k soon, I would just buy another C100 MKI to have two of them, great little interview camera especially.
 
puredrifting said:
I have not found the C100 MKII to look better, I agree with chappell, it looks slightly worse than the MKI to my eye. Some people feel that Canon messed up the color science just a touch, it appears cooler and just slightly less "filmic" looking, which has been my observation when shooting with my MKI and renting a MKII as a second cam. Subtle though, not a huge difference. C100 MKII is a bit sharper and contrastier it seems also. If I had it to do over again, I would have rather bought the MKII for the eyepiece, 60p and better DPAF but timing was my issue, I bought right before the MKII came out. I knew it was coming but needed the camera for a big two week shoot in Africa. Renting would have killed any profit margin so I bought the MKI knowing it was obsolete the day I got it but that was okay. I wish I didn't need 4k soon, I would just buy another C100 MKI to have two of them, great little interview camera especially.
Click to expand...

It's probably too subtle to make any difference, but would you say the MKII comes closer at all to matching the colour coming out of the c300 MKII?
 
MK II colours are more natural/neutral. Less red bias than the MK I. Still looks very 'Canon' though. The image also has slightly more detail. Whether or not these things make it better is a matter of taste. The differences are small.

The 50/60P is the reason to go for the MKII over the MKI if you need it. Despite the low bit rate, it somehow manages to look very, very nice slowed down.
 
seanarmada said:
It's probably too subtle to make any difference, but would you say the MKII comes closer at all to matching the colour coming out of the c300 MKII?
Click to expand...

i haven't used the C100mkII much but have used the C100mkI side by side with C300mkII quite a bit, and the C100mkI is much yellower indoors. The WB needs to be set about 300-400K less than what the C300II is set to. So I assume the C100mkII image, since it's bluer, would be closer to C300II.

But even with adjusting for WB, the C100mkI can still be quite yellow indoors. Here's a side by side of interviews - correctly white balanced - of the C100mkI and C300mkII. Both ungraded C-Log.

c100c300ii.jpg


Outdoor in sunny weather, all the Canon Cinema cameras sing. :-)
 
slavikb said:
i haven't used the C100mkII much but have used the C100mkI side by side with C300mkII quite a bit, and the C100mkI is much yellower indoors. The WB needs to be set about 300-400K less than what the C300II is set to. So I assume the C100mkII image, since it's bluer, would be closer to C300II.

But even with adjusting for WB, the C100mkI can still be quite yellow indoors. Here's a side by side of interviews - correctly white balanced - of the C100mkI and C300mkII. Both ungraded C-Log.

View attachment 119338


Outdoor in sunny weather, all the Canon Cinema cameras sing. :-)
Click to expand...

Thanks for showing that Slavik! Definitely a difference. Is it tough to match with a bit of post work?
 
Slavik, yea, that yellow color cast is what I'm talking about. Mix that with less sharpness and that's what my uneducated eye is seeing. The yellow color cast, and the 5D3 green color cast is not a good combination for my skill level trying to match up the two cameras, thus the reason I got another C100.

Yes, I should learn not to make broad sweeping statements like one C100 is better than another. I think the higher resolution LCD screen was also contributing to my pycho visual un realities.

Puredrifting....... thanks you made me feel good about the C100 mkI........ the best of both worlds!
 
C300 Mark II and C100 Mark II match up well color-wise. C100 Mark I has different colors, but it takes me just a minute or two to color match in post. I prefer the Mark II image because it's a bit sharper and with minor post correction I can make it match the C100 Mark I color. I'm not saying the Mark II color is worse.

With the C100 Mark I it tended towards green, so I always keep the White Balance shift two away from green (more so if I have green fluorescent lighting). With the C100 Mark II, I feel I haven't found the sweet spot for the white balance shift. The C300 Mark II doesn't have white balance shift, but often manages to look just right without it, so I don't know if some auto white balance shift is going on or what.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
... With the C100 Mark II, I feel I haven't found the sweet spot for the white balance shift...
Click to expand...

That's understatement. I have never had the base (let alone dialed-in offset) WB right under metal halide, FL or combinations of those with daylight. Taking it further, I've not hit on what does work consistently- Auto works sometimes well and other times the canned indoor/outdoor settings work well. Tried Expo cap in some situations and it worked well, others not even close. I hate post corrections but end-up correcting for WB the most. Must be me.
 
puredrifting said:
I would just buy another C100 MKI to have two of them, great little interview camera especially.
Click to expand...

Do you use an outboard monitor? We have both a C300 and a C100 MKI and I just cannot bear to film with the MKI because I find it impossible to monitor for focus (we don't have DPAF on that one). It really drives me bananas.
 
Since I'm a Canon shooter, would anyone like to weigh in on the GH5? I'd love for Canon to release a C100 with 4K capabilities, or even an update. Happily pay. Quite happy with my MKII and MKI for weddings but I'd love the extra resolution to deliver higher quality in the future. 1080p stretched on a 4K monitor makes judging sharpness more difficult than I'd like to admit as well.

In regards to the MKII and MKI, I much prefer the color out of the MKII. I always was a bit annoyed with the yellow shift on the MKI but I realize this is all preference. DPAF is sometimes useful but I mainly use it for glidecam shots and that is about it. The viewfinder, better screen for many situations like outdoors and slow motion made the MKII an A-cam for my operation. Still, this GH5 is tempting but going back to no ND filters or punch in for focus while recording...seems hard to go back now but you can't deny the skin tones from the GH series or the features.
 
ParagonFilmworks said:
Since I'm a Canon shooter, would anyone like to weigh in on the GH5? I'd love for Canon to release a C100 with 4K capabilities, or even an update. Happily pay. Quite happy with my MKII and MKI for weddings but I'd love the extra resolution to deliver higher quality in the future. 1080p stretched on a 4K monitor makes judging sharpness more difficult than I'd like to admit as well.

In regards to the MKII and MKI, I much prefer the color out of the MKII. I always was a bit annoyed with the yellow shift on the MKI but I realize this is all preference. DPAF is sometimes useful but I mainly use it for glidecam shots and that is about it. The viewfinder, better screen for many situations like outdoors and slow motion made the MKII an A-cam for my operation. Still, this GH5 is tempting but going back to no ND filters or punch in for focus while recording...seems hard to go back now but you can't deny the skin tones from the GH series or the features.
Click to expand...

I shoot with both a C100 MkI and a GH4 - the GH4 is for gimbal/steadicam work and high frame rate stuff...in my experience the skin tones on the C100 are far better than the GH4. I don't really need 4K, so the only thing it has going for it is the higher frame rates. No ND, no XLR inputs. Those 2 are killer for me. At the time of purchase, it was great to fill in the gaps of the C100 MkI, but today the C100 MkII would take care of that for me.
 
Rain Man said:
No ND, no XLR inputs. Those 2 are killer for me.
Click to expand...

I think this is a killer for me also. XLR inputs will be easily available for the GH5 but no ND and no punch in while record are large turnoffs. I started on the DSLR path many years ago like the majority, it's tough to go back. Cutting in the GH5 with the C100s would be nice but really make me see the lack of resolution when editing, clients won't care I'm sure but it would be a nagging inconsistency for me personally. Could also use the MKII for myself, MKI for my second and have a GH5 for the wide at the ceremony and special shots and broll for stabilization and slow motion though. It's rather tempting...perhaps it's just the new toy in the ring but the footage out coming from it is spectacular...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top