Canon C100 is Announced
- Thread starter cowpunk52
- Start date
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
Well, here's to hoping Canon gives those interested uncompressed 8-bit 4:2:2 out.
From the Canon white paper....
"When shooting with an ISO of 850 (2.5db gain) or above, users can capture image with 12 stops of latitude (6.7 stops below middle gray and 5.3 stops above)"
This is the reason I will be interested (if true). 12 stops DR, s35, amazing low light, nice handling, NDs, XLRs, dual SDs.... Other than the over crank and codec, what's not to like?
"When shooting with an ISO of 850 (2.5db gain) or above, users can capture image with 12 stops of latitude (6.7 stops below middle gray and 5.3 stops above)"
This is the reason I will be interested (if true). 12 stops DR, s35, amazing low light, nice handling, NDs, XLRs, dual SDs.... Other than the over crank and codec, what's not to like?
philiplipetz
Veteran
even with a 4:2:0 output on the HDMI?
Barry_Green
Moderator
It seems very unlikely that the HDMI output is truly 4:2:0. Possible, I guess, and I know you've been told that by Canon themselves, but still, it seems quite unlikely. Even little cameras like the HMC40 output true 4:2:2 on their HDMI outputs.
The only restricted HDMI output camera I've run into recently is the GH2, it has a weird hobbled 4:2:0 output, but -- it's a stills camera. I can't imagine the C100 will actually have a restricted 4:2:0 output, that just seems illogical.
tazza
Well-known member
I think the AVCHD codec is a hearty bugger. Most of my shoots do not require heavy grading other than some light CC.
I think canon made a good choice in codec but not price point. Maybe it will force shooters to be more adept at lighting and not so dependent on dynamic range or codec.
I think canon made a good choice in codec but not price point. Maybe it will force shooters to be more adept at lighting and not so dependent on dynamic range or codec.
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
For the "dedicated video camera" crowd (doc and reality shooters), this seems like a great camera from what we know so far.
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
Agreed. I just hope its closer to the rumoured $5-$6K instead.
roxics
Veteran
I really don't get it. Nor do I get the broadcast/ENG excuse. If you want to do run and gun broadcast/ENG work than get a camera with a smaller sensor and a lens with more range. I don't see how a large sensor camera is good for this type of work.
If you're going to start slapping external recorders on this thing than why not just save a few grand and buy a BMC to shoot RAW or ProRes/DNxHD?
Really this camera makes no sense. I'm sorry but it doesn't. Not at the price they want in light of recent announcements.
If you're going to start slapping external recorders on this thing than why not just save a few grand and buy a BMC to shoot RAW or ProRes/DNxHD?
Really this camera makes no sense. I'm sorry but it doesn't. Not at the price they want in light of recent announcements.
I couldn't agree more, and I'm getting a little frustrated waiting to invest in our new Canon cameras going forward when they keep missing the obvious mark.
They have to stop worrying about competing with their own cameras and realize that their competition have been offering cameras with similar and better specs AND multiple frame rates for less money - for a while.
They make it very hard to stay brand loyal for people who've invested years into their glass and technology.
If/when Black Magic releases a next gen refined BMC with 60p, I can't imagine what Canon could do to keep countless previous advocates from leaving and never looking back.
I'd be willing to bet that BM will offer a camera in a year or so that will sit between the C300 and the C500 in specs for around $5k.
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
Because the BMC would be a TERRIBLE run and gun doc camera. It's a pretty good cinema camera (for the price point), but you really want to grade RAW and deal with S16 sensor size when shooting a reality show or doing weddings?
It shoots ProRes with a REC709 look, pretty close to WYSIWYG. No transcoding if your NLE can cut ProRes.
13 stops, great highlight retention, so on and so forth. How is this a bad thing for documentary, reality, and ESPECIALLY weddings?
And why wouldn't you want to deal with a smaller sensor (read: hitting focus) on shoots like these???
I think people are just so narrow-minded, short-sighted that they feel like they have to pigeon hole these devices into a category yet have zero experience with them. ZERO. Yeah, it's specified as a Cinema Camera, that's where it will be strongest...
DSLRs are specified as STILLS cameras, that's what they are strongest at... doesn't matter one wet dollar to most of the people on this forum, does it?
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
Because doc and reality shooters (as noted in other posts) want auto focus, buttons not menus, a lot of DR (shooting in available light) and a very fast and easy workflow. Everything I have read about the BMC indicates the workflow is anything but "fast and easy". Maybe I have been misinformed. The issue with the S16 sensor (just like the GH2) is the difficulty in finding a wide lens and the limitations a small sensor causes in low light.
If you aren't gonna shoot RAW on the BMC, why the hell would you even buy it. That's 99% of it's selling point.
If you aren't gonna shoot RAW on the BMC, why the hell would you even buy it. That's 99% of it's selling point.
One of the vendors on this site spoke to Canon reps and they confirmed it has 8-bit, 4:2:2 HDMI output.
ETA - actually, it might have been a vendor from another site, but the info is still out there.
ETA 2 - No, it was from this site. Sheesh...
Last edited:
Let me know what James Cameron shoots his huge docs on.
I also am not sure why you're listing DR as if the Magic Cam isn't destroying anything else in its price bracket here, along with a number of cameras above it.
You haven't been misinformed, the information is there for anyone to go and look at if they have an interest. If they don't, that's fine. If you consider a ProRes "Video" LUT style workflow anything but "fast and easy" I don't know what to tell you. How much faster can you get than plugging in an SSD and cutting right from the drive???
Compared to what? Full Frame? And it's not an S16 sensor. Like I said, the information is out there, it's not that hard to find it.
It pains me that so few people actually understand the value of color, clarity, detail, and most importantly dynamic range.
Like, it pains me (my brain, mostly) to no end that there isn't a very fast way to show you why you would still shoot out a ProRes HQ LOG workflow with a camera like such when you don't need the extra bit that RAW provides. It's like someone's asking me why the hell you'd shoot Alexa over Epic, only you wouldn't ask that because you've been told that Alexa is better than Epic, but why and HOW if Epic is closer to a RAW workflow out of the box.
FFFFFFFFF
HeadStAtE!
Member
I think you make fair points, at least with the GH2 you have Micro 4/3 lenses designed for wide angle use, the 12mm Olympus as well as some wider lenses from cheaper brands. Also I noted on the workflow, Philip Bloom is beta testing the BMC and Tweeted today:
If I was shooting a documentary I'd used an XF300 over the BMC or C100 for that matter.
Yeah, I want the nose to come off of the Magic Cam in exchange for an M4/3 mount so that I can PL mount it. But if it couldn't happen it really wouldn't be an issue, there are plenty of fast-enough wide angles.
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
Couldn't have said it better!
I've covered concerts for some of the biggest artists on this planet (https://vimeo.com/38762100), and I did it all with a 60D. Shooting concerts and music-festivals is virtually documentary work. I ordered a BMC right after it's announcement, not only because of the 13-stops of DR, not only because of the 220Mbit ProRes/DNxHD (FILM and REC709 modes), not only because of the RAW, not only because of the EF mount, but also, believe it or not, because of the small sensor! Smaller sensor = easier focusing - and believe me, when you've got Snoop Dogg bouncing around on a stage high as a kite, you'll be screaming for a smaller sensor!
But before live-event cinematography, I'm an independent filmmaker - and the Blackmagic shines there as well - very brightly - and not only aesthetically, but financially. I mean, who wouldn't want this quality for $3000 (this is ProRes 220Mbit in "Film Mode"): http://www.nickbedford.com/uploads/casey_graded.jpg
(Ungraded version here: http://www.nickbedford.com/uploads/casey_ungraded.jpg)
My favourite film ever is "La Haine" - and that was shot on 16mm - sensor size isn't everything when it comes to cinematography, just watch "La Haine" and you'll see.
Canon could have had it all. They missed the mark with the C300 (beautifully sharp, but rather over-priced for 8-bit), the 5DMK3 (nowhere near 1080P, virtually no difference between 5DMK2 except for cleaner ISO), and now the C100. Thank God for Blackmagic Design - a company not obsessed with massive profit-margins, and hell-bent of revolutionising the industry - Canon could learn quite a bit from them.
Last edited:
Simon, so buy the BMC. You don't like the C100, a camera you've never seen nor touched - we got that. Why are you even in this forum? If you don't like it, move on.
Seriously dude, it's just a camera.
For everyone else who doesn't like the specs, look, image, whatever, for the C100 - don't buy it. Simple solution.
Let the rest of us who are interested in this camera share what news and information we can find.
Seriously dude, it's just a camera.
For everyone else who doesn't like the specs, look, image, whatever, for the C100 - don't buy it. Simple solution.
Let the rest of us who are interested in this camera share what news and information we can find.
And I'd take a AG-AC160A over the XF300 for its even smaller file sizes in AVCHD. Let's be honest, color correction in most documentaries is usually pretty light, if done at all.
However, a documentary shot on the BMC Jesus-cam would look hella impressive, you have to admit.