C100: C100 or used F3?

LyleGorch

LyleGorch

Well-known member
I hate these "either-or" type threads, but this is a difficult one to unravel. Lots of F3s with slog on the market now at remarkably reasonable prices, by the time I outfit a C100 with a good external monitor and external recorder I'm pretty much in the same cost bracket. I currently have a lot of lenses but no Canon EF mount. About 90% of my work is documentary in weird locations. I'm not a huge fan of the Canon "look" but can accept that its become "currency" in the market and increasingly EP's are asking for Canon by name. Pros and cons?
 
If you think you need a good external monitor and external recorder for the c100, chances are you're going to want it on the F3 as well, which will bump your price up even more. We can try to justify buying more expensive camera's to ourselves by saying well, by the time I get accessories to allow me to get the most out of this camera, I could get this higher end one for the same amount. But wouldn't you want those things that allow you to get the most out of the higher end one too? There is a price difference in the base camera and that's all we should be comparing really in my book. (for this style camera that is)
 
Here's a mixture of F3, Red Epic, GH2, and C100 (roughly in that order) footage in real-world productions for you to gaze upon.


Frankly, I feel that my C100 outperforms the F3 footage, though I realize I'm entirely tooting my own horn.
 
imdjay said:
both are undoubtably amazing, but which form factor speaks to you?
Click to expand...

I don't like to run-n-gun, but when you do you do, the C100 is obviously a little better for handheld and the potential for IS lenses is a plus. My biggest hesitation is my hate for all things EF mount, that and I would like crunchable smpte TC on an A camera. Maybe its possible to jam a smart slate from the C100, I haven't read or heard anything about that.
 
I had the same question in October and finally went for a used F3 with s-log and a couple of SxS cards. At first I used it without s-log and it looked great but when I started to shoot with s-log this camera outshines most other cameras for the same price. You need a recorder like BMD Shuttle 2 to get the most out of it but I think it already beats something like the C100 with the internal SxS recording. Although I have both an Alphatron EVF and a great Marshall monitor I often shoot with just the LCD-screen as viewer.

If I had gone for the C100 or C300 which were among my choices I wouldn't get as great result. Really loving the image out of the F3.
 
Gary Huff said:
It's not. Closest you can get is to record out to a Pix240i with Genlock.
Click to expand...

So C100 and Pix240, and it would probably be logical to switch my B cam to Canon just to share a lens or two. Now we are getting into Scarlet territory. But Canon is cool, resistance is futile, maybe its time to be assimilated.
 
Gary Huff said:
Well, you're getting into Scarlet body ​territory. You're still about double that to actually shoot anything with it.
Click to expand...
That was my point above. It's easy to try and justify a higher purchase by combining the total amount spent against a camera body. With the F3 you have to purchase expensive media as well.
 
Yes these threads are the "worst" because usually advise is biased by the owner of the respected camera. :cool:

DISCLOSURE: For the record yes I do own the F3 and use it primarily for creating "cinematic" work. My primary job is DP not so much a "camera operator" although I do operate camera and direct depending on the project. I've also shot with the C100 but not for cinematic style productions, just some interviews & doc work, etc.. I also own the Canon 7D and mostly shoot stills with it. Incredible camera for photo or video.

Since you are looking at it from mostly a documentary work perspective, I honestly think either camera would work for you BUT the Canon will give you the benefit of using your existing lens collection. There is definitely some value there over getting into an F3 and having to look at expensive EF adapters that control the lens electronics, or possibly buying manual new glass.

The F3 is a heavy camera. 7 lbs without battery, and once you add glass, power, matte box, possibly ext. monitor, base plate, rails, etc.. you have to invest in a rig that will let you shoulder mount it. My F3 fully decked out weighs around 14 lbs last time I checked. I have a 22lbs steadicam for it just for that sake alone. The Canon is small and probably lighter overall if that makes any difference to you. WAY easier to brace in both arms against your chest and create some reasonable steady shots.

The advantage of the C100 over the F3 is the fact you can control the focus/iris of your EOS lenses and the One-shot AF is a nice feature too. Sadly from what I know there is no zoom control on any of the C100/300/500's. Sony on the other hand has released its 14x power zoom lens (see video) for only $9000 which works with the F3 and the zoom rocker switch located on the F3. Not bad. If you want to go on the cheap however you can get an old Nikon 24-80mm lens for $250 and the F3 has some built in exposure tools not many people know about which can actually adjust your exposure if you're using a zoom lens which does not have a constant aperture. ie. it ramps as you zoom.

Another "ENG" type lens option for the either camera is getting an old 2/3" B4 mount adapter and using it with a Canon J16 (or J17) fully powered zoom. Using an optical adapter such as the one by MTF priced at around $2000 you can actually cover the entire imaging sensor and have full 1080p without any windowing or cropping in post. A J16 lens might set you back $500-$1300.

The Fujion 19-90mm T2.9 is yet another option but it will set you back only $38,000.

Bit-depth, LOG,... and all that junk, I can't see wanting to excessively grade any footage for a doc but even if you wanted to the EXCAM HD codec built into the F3 can really be pushed around despite the fact its only 35mbps 8-bit 420. I've even shot SLOG to it despite "pros" advising against it, and i've had some exceptional results but have also seen great results with just using picture or image profiles. I've been pixel peeping on the C100 footage lately as well and again if you shoot with flatter profiles or LOG you will be able to squeeze out "higher perceptual quality" footage from it (or any cam for that matter).
 
Not to mention that AVCHD is a more robust codec than XDCam EX. I don't think the media difference is that pronounced, because if I was going to shoot internally to the F3, I'd just get a SxS to SD card adapter and call it a day.
 
I don't care much for the smearing appearing in the AVCHD implementation. Something that MPEG2 doesn't do. I also think there's a very distinct difference shooting to prores/dnxhd or to xdcam. With the F3 external recorders is something that makes a different. The thing with s-log is to know how to expose to gain the added benefit.
 
swanny said:
If you think you need a good external monitor and external recorder for the c100, chances are you're going to want it on the F3 as well, which will bump your price up even more. We can try to justify buying more expensive camera's to ourselves by saying well, by the time I get accessories to allow me to get the most out of this camera, I could get this higher end one for the same amount. But wouldn't you want those things that allow you to get the most out of the higher end one too? There is a price difference in the base camera and that's all we should be comparing really in my book. (for this style camera that is)
Click to expand...

There's still some difference, but I've seen used F3's go for under $7000. I was actually offered one for $6200 by a reputable ebay seller, which would make it officially cheaper than the C100 new. Granted most of these are former rental unit, and some people don't like that, but really the price difference is small and dwindling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top