C100 raw clip

Objectively: we are the pioneers of the digital age, not just camera users but the whole human race. Nothing will be "perfect" in this transition phase but things are getting better all the time. For me in 2013 the C100 will be the better (not perfect) choice. After that... who knows.
 
KINOKS said:
This artificial limiting the cameras to a lousy codec is getting on my nerves too
Click to expand...

AVCHD is not a lousy CODEC, but it's a limited CODEC. ( i.e. At 24 Mbits it can be overwhelmed when there are tons of fine details changing rapidly in the image, but for general shooting it's fine )

...I actually like the idea of using an external recorder, where I can record at 200 Mbits and be assured that everything is being captured properly with minimal compression. ( 50 Mbits MPEG-2 internal on the C300 still seems limited by comparison )

KINOKS said:
Is the C100 processing the same as C300? Or is it not so good?
Click to expand...

Canon has stated that both cameras use the same imager and the same image processing chip, so there is a good chance the C100 will produce the same image quality. ( unless the C100 is intentionally downgraded )
 
StMad said:
My C100 will arrive within the week...i should have plenty of footage to share for those that are curious. My main plan is to see whether i can live without an external recorder.
Click to expand...

If you can put up some nice .MTS files straight from the camera and shots of something other then cats I'll give you a dollar. :P Seriously, show me some skin tones in nice light please! :)
 
cowpunk52 said:
Agreed - watching at 100% with my fact 8 inches from the screen, it looks pretty damn good. I'm impressed.

Now to see some footage with a lot of motion...
Click to expand...
Just tossed it in FCPX and played around. Lots of information in this file. Stretches quite nice for onboard codec. Super detailed image. I'm impressed. WOuld love to see some more footage and would looooooove to see some external recording. Lots of chroma info in this file.
Cow, do you think the C100 is going to have the same menu control as the C300 and XF300? If so, this might be my next camera.
 
Thank you very very much for sharing these clips, I am finding it really useful.

My impressions so far are
1.) The image looks pretty good.
2.) Weird blocking in the individual channels.
3.) Doesn't seem to hold the highlight detail in the hair very well...
 
sebben said:
Thank you very very much for sharing these clips, I am finding it really useful.

My impressions so far are
1.) The image looks pretty good.
2.) Weird blocking in the individual channels.
3.) Doesn't seem to hold the highlight detail in the hair very well...
Click to expand...


I think this could possibly be one of the clips done at 320 ISO when there was still a bug that clipped highlights at 85 IRE. Should be corrected in shipping cameras.
 
Is it only me...? I am working these clips in Premiere CS6 and when displaying both fields
the footage looks good! Although when I pause the video it seems to get a tiiny bit sharper
than when playing (I'm looking at it fullscreen on our Thunderbolt Display). Maybe more a
CS6 issue then camera but still. Playback resolution and still resolution is of course both
set to "Full", not "1/2".

Interesting footage KINOKS keep it coming!
A tip for an interesting peace of footage where the codec should really show its ugly face:
Film water so that the whole frame is full of it, and sharp, step down the lens and get maximum DoP.
Maybe a sink filled with water and then put the tap on so it creates lots of small waves.

Make sure all the water in the frame is sharp so the codec gets to work the hardest. Or why not
film some leaves in the wind, stepped down. Could be interesting!

When filming water with our EX1, it can break down quite ugly, and its 35Mbit/s.
 
Unfortunately I don't have the camera any more. I only had it for a very short time.
I have no doubt that the codec would fell apart when shooting high detail scenes with lots of motion. I don't think that a test is really needed:) Do you?
Seriously, it's a 24Mbs codec!:)

Al the test that I did where done to see the highlight rollof and to see how much can the levels be pushed. And to get an overall sense of the picture offcourse.
 
Well that's probably right, but interesting still to see how bad it is, this "new" AVCHD-codec. =)
But I agree, it may well be a bit obvious how it will look.

Thank you Matt!
 
Matt Turner said:
I can probably try this tomorrow or the next day if noone else has a go.
Click to expand...

Currently, Matt and I are trying to get together in the next day or so to shoot some comparisons - C100 AVCHD, C100 to Ninja Prores HQ, C300 MXF(same shots).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top