C100: C100mII VF for critical focus

W

Walter Hergt

Active member
Greetings. Well, with the latest price drop, and since I have been planning to immanently purchase a SmallHD 501 to go along with my C100, I'm thinking of forgoing that purchase, selling the C100 and upgrading to the MarkII. A bit more $$ our of pocket but not much for a bunch of nice additions - 60p and face tracking (for events that I shoot) particularly for me.

How good is the MarkII viewfinder for focus work?

I've been using a Zacuto VF on the C100 LCD which has been quite good with the internal peaking. But only quite good. The C100 LCD plus ZFinder gets a little vague in CLog. I'm starting to shoot for a mini-doc in about six weeks, primarily with primes such as the Sigma 18-35 and my FD 50 1.4. Hence, my interest in the 501 - more accurate screen, vectorscope and other help, better focus assist... But the MarkII ticks those boxes and I wouldn't need to pack, cable, mount, charge, schlepp another piece of gear if...

So, how about that viewfinder for focus?

ah, and, how much quieter are the body buttons on the MarkII? I'm especially thinking about the #7 on the grip. The very audible click of the MarkI makes it that I don't use it.
 
Last edited:
I own the C100 Mk1 but I've rented and used the Mk2. The viewfinder is a huge improvement. I'd personally still use a field monitor for focus assist though, even with the Mk2. I've screwed up focus just using the viewfinder and LCD on both the Mk1s and Mk2s.

If you're running and gunning in a documentary style type setting and field monitor isn't an option, you can maybe get away with just using the viewfinder on the Mk2.

I can't remember a difference in button noise between the two models. My inclination is to say there isn't any.
 
I have both the C100 Mark II and C100 Mark I. I find the viewfinder is good enough for focus. It's not amazing, but it's good, and is generally good enough.

The body buttons on the C100 Mark II are much quieter than the Mark I, with the exception of the handgrip button #7, which makes the same level of noise. The handgrip button on the C300 Mark II is quiet, so I suppose if that button being quiet is important enough to you, for a few hundred bucks or so you could probably buy the C300 Mark II handgrip part from Canon and use it on the C100.
 
Interesting. Thanks.

I do try to be as minimal kit as possible but I'm at the point where I actually need an external monitor/viewfinder for the next things I want to do if I'm going to continue with the C100. I've found the DP4 with its evf awkward in size and, frankly, not such a great monitor. I'm concerned about switching out awkwardness with a 501 and a Sidefinder. I don't shoulder rig but use a chest pad and VF for handheld work. Lighter and tighter to my face/chest would me much better ergonomically.
 
Walter Hergt said:
Interesting. Thanks.

I do try to be as minimal kit as possible...
Click to expand...

Then the C100 Mark II will shine. Having a proper VF build in, as well as waveforms etc. is why people like me bought it. To stop messing around with externals.
A few notes from my experience that I rarely hear mentioned:

-When you use waveforms or vector scopes, you cannot also watch your audio meters.
-You can only use these scopes on the LCD, not the build in VF
-I didn't find face tracking or even autofocus that impressive. It works well with push autofocus to save you a few sec to manually focus before recording, but it can be pretty flawed when trying to use it when recording. But sometimes it's still better then any alternative. For example when something slowly moves in your direction (fashion show etc).
-Also volume levels are a pain to adjust on the go since they are on top of the handle, but you have the C100 so I guess you know.
-C100 Mark II has an even weirder form than the I, with it's protruding VF, it's a HUGE pain to pack.

Honestly I wouldn't make the upgrade just for a mini doc though, try to make it work with you C100, and spend the money on something nice. :)
I didn't mind my C100II not having 4K when I bought it, but not sure if I would still buy it today. 4K requests are finally starting to appear here...
 
zwarte_kat said:
-C100 Mark II has an even weirder form than the I, with it's protruding VF, it's a HUGE pain to pack.

Honestly I wouldn't make the upgrade just for a mini doc though, try to make it work with you C100, and spend the money on something nice. :)
I didn't mind my C100II not having 4K when I bought it, but not sure if I would still buy it today. 4K requests are finally starting to appear here...
Click to expand...

Ha! True enough - the only time I curse my C100 is when packing it. Mostly it's about the handle but I don't need the body to be an issue too!

Your points reinforce my intentions of a week ago: get a good monitor/evf for the shortcomings of the C100 - a thing I would also need for a desired BMMCC that could compliment the C100 in lots of situations, be my A-cam for my mini-doc, get me inexpensively into working with RAW for short narrative and more artistic pieces, provide the 60p, etc.

I've been planning to wring the C100 for all that it's worth for as long as possible. Dumping it for a MarkII for short-term "efficiency" distracts from that, I think, esp when the MarkII isn't a panacea ala your other points above.
 
-When you use waveforms or vector scopes, you cannot also watch your audio meters.
-You can only use these scopes on the LCD, not the build in VF

Yes , I do not understand why canon did not fix it this bug .
 
Probably a usability decision rather than a bug.
If the waveform and audio meters were on at the same time half of the LCD would be obscured.
If it's on the VF it would be tiny.
It would be nice to have the option though if you want to do it.
 
Yeah, ideally I'd see the audio meters in the VF and the waveforms on the LCD.
Would be nice to check audio and exposure at the same time on a camera I paid $5500 for...
 
zwarte_kat said:
Yeah, ideally I'd see the audio meters in the VF and the waveforms on the LCD.
Would be nice to check audio and exposure at the same time on a camera I paid $5500 for...
Click to expand...

Well this price drop is telling that Canon is feeling pressure to be more responsive to the market and (hopefully) what people need. Perhaps we can get some firmware improvements for functionality too. I'd be pleased to have the tracking from the C300mii available in the C100mii. There is enough difference between those cameras now (4K...) that I don't think improvements to the 100-series would cannibalize as much.

Ug. Back and forth.
 
There is 0% chance of significant firmware feature updates for the current C100s.
The momentum has slowed considerably. We'll only get updates for lens compatibility.
Any new features will appear on a MKIII.
 
puredrifting said:
C100 MKIII with 1080 120P full res and 4K, even if it was only UHD, would be a great seller at $6k.
Click to expand...

Yeah, would be swell. I'm also in the now. ;-)

It's tough figuring out the medium term having shifted in the past 14 months to making the majority of my income from photography and video. Photography being my passion but video I'm becoming more excited about, particularly as it's where I'm making most of my $$, such as it is.

Work in the past three months has revealed how much a monitor would help for focus and color particularly. I'm quite comfortable with good exposure and the C100's onboard tools. Hence, thinking of the SmallHD 501 for everything and then with a Sidewinder for handheld and the doc work I am starting to do. When the price dropped on the MarkII, it opened up the original question for the thread.

And I need to upgrade my stills camera late summer/fall. My Fuji XT-1 is getting long in the tooth and now that it's an income generator, I need to ramp up what I can deliver there too. New Fuji XT-2? D750? 5DmarkIV if they improve DR, which I assume they will? It's all really tight for budgeting as I'm in this transitional/developmental time.

I think I'm back to getting the SmallHD to add to my C100 and getting as much out of that camera as possible and skip a generation of Cxxx. (Wonder what a used C300mkii will run in 18 months?)
The monitor will be useful for any-/many things. Whatever I get for stills will have decent 1080/60p for those creative shots as they are needed. Placing the yearning for a BMMCC as a creative doc tool on the back burner...
 
Last edited:
puredrifting said:
C100 MKIII with 1080 120P full res and 4K, even if it was only UHD, would be a great seller at $6k.
Click to expand...

Just read your posts in the neighboring C100mkII thread... Very helpful.

What I am getting paid for is a lot of indoor/outdoor event coverage and now more in combination with sit-down interviews/profiles/etc. I picked up a Ninja Star when everyone one said it made a big difference but have not used it much as it's now accepted that it does not make a big difference. I don't green screen but I will use it in this upcoming doc work as there are numerous low-light and high-contrast settings (lots of barns) and I think the HQ can help hold detail and alleviate noise/macro blocking when pushing shadows.

So monitor, yes, and I've thought of selling the Ninja Star and picking up even a Ninja Flame to also have an external recorder to grow into the future with. (What if I pick up an A7rII in the fall, etc.? (Actually really don't expect that particular camera...))

BUT for how I want to shoot this doc, I need an EVF. Hence, back to the 501/Sidefinder notion to enhance what I already have.
 
I think we are at the point where if you are making a living with video, your next move needs to have 4K. I just read some tests and looked at the YouTube reviews on the X-T2, pretty damn impressive for the money. If you are happy with the X-T1 as far as lenses and general look, seems like an X-T2 would be a shoe-in for you? Could use it for stills and the video looks pretty good, at least from what I am seeing so far, not sure about jello and moire' though? For me, it would be hard to go back to the DSLR/Mirrorless form factor, having given up the 5D MKIII for the C100, I would miss the DPAF, XLRs, TC, built in NDs etc. too much to ever go back as my primary. I did a shoot for Netflix a few weeks ago though, a promo with Lauren Graham, shot it with a 1080 camera, the C300 MKI and it appears that in editing, they used the 1080p footage and punched in on it pretty hard to make a single camera look like two. It would have been very nice in that situation to have handed my client a 4K master instead of 1080 master.

My problem is that I am boxed in, I cannot stomach the Sony color science or motion signature on the FS5 and FS7. The only Panasonics I even kind of like are the Varicam and Varicam LT, both are too big and too expensive for my work, I love the Amira but can't afford to own one and I hate operating with REDs, I really hate everything about RED cameras, the name, the cosmetics, the workflow, the look. So that pretty much leads me back to Canon. The C300 MKII is the logical camera for me, it's probably what I will buy once the next price reduction happens, even $12k is a lot of the feature set or I may buy a used one in six months. As far as your choice, lots of good ones out there for you, just depends on what you value most and can afford.
 
Are you guys seriously impressed with the X-T2? Those test videos are far out into the realm of over-sharpened, clipped highlights video-ness.
 
Hearnia said:
Are you guys seriously impressed with the X-T2? Those test videos are far out into the realm of over-sharpened, clipped highlights video-ness.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I think it is well too early to be definitive about what the XT-2 will and won't able to do, particularly for cinematic work. No one has seen anything from F-Log footage - flat or worked up. Promo material is typically overly punchy and contrasty.

Dan Chung @ Newsshooter spoke with Emmanuel Pampuri who was very positive about it. We'll see how it all bears out.

I mention the XT-2 since I shoot Fuji for my photographic work. If the F-Log is good and I could match it to the C100 well, then it could be a great b-cam and what it offers for 60p, etc. lessens my interest in switching out the C100. Just trying to figure out what will compliment. To date with Fuji, it's never been a consideration. The XT-2 might be.
 
Hearnia said:
Are you guys seriously impressed with the X-T2? Those test videos are far out into the realm of over-sharpened, clipped highlights video-ness.
Click to expand...

Without geting some camera masters to examine on a good monitor that have had anything in post done to them, it's hard to say what the image REALLY looks like. But to me, for the money, I thought the images looked nice. Sure not as organic, smooth and filmic as those produced by a higher end video camera. But compared to the A7 XX or the GH4, the Fuji X-T2 images look leagues better to my eye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top