C100: C100 overpriced?

I have the C100 and I think a good and fair price would be $4999. I paid $5499. At $4000 it would be a bargain in my eyes.
 
yeah, for me C100 should be little bit more expensive than 5D3

I paid 6.5k for this camera. thinking 2k of my payment is floating in water.


But consider C300, I dont feel that bad anymore.


Once again, C100 isnt a Prosumer camera, its a semi-pro camcorder.
thats why we pay extra to cover the cost of Canon, Since it doesnt sell as many as cheap DSLRs.
 
It would be a reasonable price for a lot of us if it weren't so limited by the single AVCHD codec.

I say this because despite adding new cameras to our kit other than Canon for the first time in years, I still really like the image from the sensor and overall ergonomics.
I'm sure there are a lot of us who are hoping Canon will boost it's potential with an upgrade.
A modern, 50mbs codec for broadcast would have a lot more of us buying them.
 
jimagine said:
It would be a reasonable price for a lot of us if it weren't so limited by the single AVCHD codec.

I say this because despite adding new cameras to our kit other than Canon for the first time in years, I still really like the image from the sensor and overall ergonomics.
I'm sure there are a lot of us who are hoping Canon will boost it's potential with an upgrade.
A modern, 50mbs codec for broadcast would have a lot more of us buying them.
Click to expand...
Honestly that wont happen. I would like a better codec but the HDMI out gives you uncompressed option. I would like more frame rates more than anything. I think that was a miss.
 
alex1 said:
I would say somewhere around $4000 sounds about right for this camera.
Click to expand...

Compared to what?

Is there another $4,000 camera that does everything that the C100 does?

i.e. 12 stops of dynamic range right up to 20,000 ISO

...Right now I don't see any other lower cost camera that has the same feature set as the C100. So how is it over-priced?
 
I purchased it at $6,500 in December and to be honest it was a big investment but it didn't feel over-priced to me. As Erik said missing 60P wasn't a smart move, it felt like a slap in the face to me but I used the cam made money back and sold it to get the current cam I have as it does all I'm needing it to do. The closest cam to the C100 is the FS700 and that's $2k more at the current prices with rebates.
 
mhood said:
This. I'm one very happy camper...and I bought before the rebate.
Click to expand...
As did I. I bought 3 weeks before the rebate. Was sad for a day but the image of the C100 pulled me out of that feeling. I still think Canon owes us 720/60p though. But I'm not overly concerned with it. Some cameras shoot 200fps sure. But I get bored of fast forwarding through videos shot at 200fps on vimeo.
 
I think I´ll wait about a year before answering this question;) I paid close to double the price of the C100 for my HVX and P2 cards back then and looking back, it was a very very good investment. But my gut tells me, I´ll say the same about the C100.
 
TheDingo said:
Compared to what?

Is there another $4,000 camera that does everything that the C100 does?

i.e. 12 stops of dynamic range right up to 20,000 ISO

...Right now I don't see any other lower cost camera that has the same feature set as the C100. So how is it over-priced?
Click to expand...

Not a $4000 one, but there is a $3000 one that shoots 14-bit RAW ;)

Like Ryan said, around $4500 is about the right price.
 
mhood said:
Yea...with the ergonomics of a haydite brick and as rare as hen's teeth. And the workflow for raw seems to be a study in pain.
Click to expand...

You should have seen the film days! I think we take the ease of digitally processing RAW negatives today for granted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top