C100: Canon c100 m2 vs FS5 picture quality difference?

M

maciek8791

New member
Hello, I am considering to buy a c100 m2.

Did any of You guys had a chance to compare the picture quality in 1080p between Fs5 and c100?
I was going for c100 m2, because my target is FHD, not 4K. But some people told me that also the FHD quality of FS5 beats c100.
What do You think about this?
I am interested in both 4K from FS5 scaled down to FHD, or FS5 working in FHD mode. Anyone got experience with that?
 
On the FS section I have noticed lots of comments about the better color of the Canon. Pretty much all of the FS7 guys are really happy though.
 
In that comparison video, the FS5 seemed to have more DR, but rather dull colors. That seems like a tough decision to be in. I am sure fs5 has different color profiles available. Maybe look into a video that compares fs5 scene modes.

Canon C series got skin tone out of camera down good. Probably its most redeeming quality in the price bracket.
 
The Sony its a camera with great specs, but i think in the end, its all about the quality/color of the image.
Color science of the canon, its just amazing. The CP8 Wide Profile have one of the best looks strait of the camera with good DR for some room in the post, and don´t forget...its done with a AVCHD 28mbs CODEC! with 20$ 32GB Normal SD CARDS !!!
The S-Logs of the SONYs with the madness about the DINAMIC RANGE 13/\14 stops ? that need a sharp exposure, and even with that the skin tones sucks, i see some color of the lips in some footage that look like dead people.

The market its starting to speak about this.

" I think Sony are starting to see the consequences of S-LOG out there in the open… Fact is it looks terrible straight off the card and is an absolute pain to get right in post. The result is that in the vast majority of cases, even the final look of the footage feels ‘off’. Sony are beginning to risk getting a reputation for weird looking images, even though the cameras are capable of superb performance in the right hands."

"Try this for an experiment… Pick an actor of an older age, do a few tests with 4K S-LOG on the FS7 and Magic Lantern 2K raw on the 5D Mark III. The difference is quite remarkable in the softer rendering of the 5D and the way colour comes out BANG ON straight away, perfect skin tones, flattering rendering, far less clinically revealing of every wrinkle or imperfection. 14bit raw is so kind to old folk!! To get the FS5 or FS7 this way in post requires considerable time, effort and expertise – is it worth it?"

http://www.eoshd.com/2016/01/rodney...ic-and-my-thoughts-on-the-new-ursa-mini-4-6k/

I was tempted with the specs of the FS5, but now i will push my lovely C100m1 to limit and wait for the next C100K3
 
I was considering both. The C100 mkii image looked significantly better to my eyes so I went with that. A conservative, boring choice...but one I don't regret.
 
While I do prefer the "Canon look" out of camera I have to say this whole argument only has merit if you're not playing with color correction in post. I always shoot in c-log and alter my image at least somewhat in post. I'm no expert, but I doubt it'd be hard to make the final product on either one of these cams match pretty closely to one another with not a lot of post work.

If you're really just interested in HD and not 4K, the C100 Mk1 is an incredible value. I had a chance to compare footage from a Mk1 and a Mk2 on a shoot not too long back (with the Mk1 as a B-cam), and I honestly couldn't tell a difference. The viewfinder on the Mk2 is certainly nicer, but I use a Blade anyway.
 
PedroAquiles said:
The Sony its a camera with great specs, but i think in the end, its all about the quality/color of the image.
Color science of the canon, its just amazing. The CP8 Wide Profile have one of the best looks strait of the camera with good DR for some room in the post, and don´t forget...its done with a AVCHD 28mbs CODEC! with 20$ 32GB Normal SD CARDS !!!
The S-Logs of the SONYs with the madness about the DINAMIC RANGE 13/\14 stops ? that need a sharp exposure, and even with that the skin tones sucks, i see some color of the lips in some footage that look like dead people.

The market its starting to speak about this.

" I think Sony are starting to see the consequences of S-LOG out there in the open… Fact is it looks terrible straight off the card and is an absolute pain to get right in post. The result is that in the vast majority of cases, even the final look of the footage feels ‘off’. Sony are beginning to risk getting a reputation for weird looking images, even though the cameras are capable of superb performance in the right hands."

"Try this for an experiment… Pick an actor of an older age, do a few tests with 4K S-LOG on the FS7 and Magic Lantern 2K raw on the 5D Mark III. The difference is quite remarkable in the softer rendering of the 5D and the way colour comes out BANG ON straight away, perfect skin tones, flattering rendering, far less clinically revealing of every wrinkle or imperfection. 14bit raw is so kind to old folk!! To get the FS5 or FS7 this way in post requires considerable time, effort and expertise – is it worth it?"

http://www.eoshd.com/2016/01/rodney...ic-and-my-thoughts-on-the-new-ursa-mini-4-6k/

I was tempted with the specs of the FS5, but now i will push my lovely C100m1 to limit and wait for the next C100K3
Click to expand...

I appreciate this is a Canon forum and there's going to be a bit of bias towards Canon but it's been a while since I've read such an ill-informed post.

Slog2/3 are incredibly easy to expose and extremely forgiving of over exposure because of the equal distribution of bits across the curve so you don't bake in an odd look. How exactly do the skin tones suck in Slog? The rendering of SLog is entirely down to the choice of LUT used to transform it into the delivery colorspace so if you've got poor skin tone blame yourself so either you shot it wrong or the LUT you used was crap, so I must ask, do you have an appreciation of LUTs beyond using those ugly "film look" LUTs? Have you every built your own LUT?

Newsflash: SLog3 is not supposed to be used straight of the card because it needs de-logging through a LUT and if it's a pain to do in post, frankly, you're doing it wrong. Whoever wrote that quote is an ignoramus of the highest order.

The sentient beings who use FS5s, FS7s, F5s, F55s, F35s and F65s on a regular basis really have no issue working with SLog footage, it couldn't be more straight forward and flexible. When SLog3 is used with Sony's latest colour science SGamut3.cine gamut the results are stunning and extremely easy to grade and there's not a hint of the Sony Broadcast look. YMMV.
 
When I bought my first DSLR 12 years ago, I was a noob for cameras, colors, or anything else, but I chose Canon only because of the colors, and larger body because of the ergonomics. Fast forward today, I still use Canon but I didn't stop checking Nikon and Sony offerings. Last summer, I waited anxiously for A7s II, saw the dead colors, the green cast and everything in the samples, but I though maybe it isn't so bad, and I get great options, 4k, 120p, IBIS, peaking, everything. I preordered A7s II and waited for a month, and when I finally got it, within 15 minutes I saw that I made a big mistake. Everything looks really good on paper, and you don't think about the execution, but, there is really no ergonomics, it's in a class of some small point and shoot, the colors are really bad and very unpredictable. In one instance you get descent colors, and the next shot is really terrible with brown and dead people, zombies are really the most accurate description. IBIS is working, but it's automatic only with bad and overpriced small number of Sony lenses. Viewfinder is ok, but it is very hard to see critical focus, you get one picture in the viewfinder, one in LCD and the final image is different, so you fight all the time to make some descent colors, have a good focus and be still for handheld operation, because the ergonomics are very bad. You should be comfortable shooting, be positive about your focus and see the colors right in the viewfinder, and Sony doesn't allow you any of this, and for some reason they managed to do the same thing with much larger cameras, FS5 and FS7, I don't want to talk about FS700 which has the worst ergonomics in history, I have lost critical shots only because of it. And, when you read or hear the comments on the internet, you always hear "Canon has the best colors" and "That is the thing of preference", you naver hear "Sony has the best colors" so I think every Sony user sees the bad colors but they don't want to admit it and then they are lying to themselves.

Finally, I exchanged my A7s II for C100 mark II and now I can see again. I don't have 4k or 120p, but the things I have are the best in industry, and the picture I get is really the next best thing to the Alexa, the most used camera in Hollywood, only because of the color rendering...

And btw, yesterday Sony announced A6300 for $1000, which is almost identical to A7s II if you use Speedbooster, and just 4 months after A7s II launch. It's really a big blow to any A7s II owner and Sony's big disrispect of it's users and customers...

Sorry for the English, not my native language...
 
Last edited:
Sony is spraying and praying that one of the cameras becomes a hit. In marketing theories it is called "Shot gun approach" where you fire pellets and hope one or more hit the target. Sony is ready to cannibalise their own cameras by their new launches. Their philosophy is better to take away market share from its own products by a new launch than risk a competitor taking away market share. As a customer I would be very irritated. Thankfully Canon launches cameras at decent intervals so that you have easily made your money out of the product.

Also it gives Canon to launch more stable products. All these electronic products needs time to do testing to fine tune the hardware and software. Rapid fire launches places a huge strain on the employees to get the product right. So you find more reports of bugs with Sony products. There are so many options/configurations to use a product. It becomes virtually impossible to test it and make it bullet proof if you don't give the employees time to test.
 
You may have to work harder or have more expertise to get it there, but you really can shoot amazing stuff on Sony. Check out the Netflix show Marco Polo shot on F55. Awesome.
 
Fahnon said:
You may have to work harder or have more expertise to get it there, but you really can shoot amazing stuff on Sony. Check out the Netflix show Marco Polo shot on F55. Awesome.
Click to expand...

depends on which sony's product. It supposed to be the same sensor, same slog, same "philosophy", but I find very different quality among sony's cameras.

for exemple I shot a documentary on F5 and it was amazing. but all I see coming from FS7 and moreover FS5 doesn't please me at all. It supposed to be the same slog3...but when you watch comparisons video the SLOG3 is not the same at all between F5, FS5, and A7S II
 
Fahnon said:
You may have to work harder or have more expertise to get it there, but you really can shoot amazing stuff on Sony. Check out the Netflix show Marco Polo shot on F55. Awesome.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything new, the same dull colors, very narrow palette of colors like every sony on the planet. Looks like some colors and tones are missing alltogether, I cannot explain that, but it's like it has only two out of three primary colors, so in every shot one color is missing. When it is flat, it looks much better, but when you add contrast and saturation, everything falls aparat very quickly, it is impossible to have pleasing high contrast and/or saturated image out of Sony, and anyway Wide DR off C100 looks way better than any Sony flat look, no matter who graded it. No serious movie is shot on Sony F anyway, against a very large number of high budget movies shot with Canon Cinema cameras, and that means something. When we get 4k and higher DR on some new C100, Sony is out of business.
 
Last edited:
Maybe just some people do not understand that a7s is just 8bit . slog2,3 for such flat profile is useless . Try to use bake profile and you will see all palette of colour .
I preordered A7s II and waited for a month, and when I finally got it, within 15 minutes I saw that I made a big mistake
Click to expand...
How can you judge camera after 15 min of using , hmmm . Sony is not like canon when straight out form box you can run . Yes I like canon for that . They give use right balance tool , c-log , wdr for 8bit sensor manage well . Sony slog2,3 for 8bit is usless , pain in ass . Sony camera in right hands can give lovely results . Do not forget canon is so popular of wide range of lens , this is main reason why canon still keep , photo , video business so well .
 
Pedro, you're absolutely right in my experience. You can make the FS5 skin color/tone look ok, but just ok, and that after tearing your hair out in post. The Canon--out of the camera the colors look super---much better than the Sony. Sony looks great on paper, but the Canon out performs in the real world---that's my experience.
 
Sorry, but some people in this thread are nuts. C100 colors are pretty pleasing for sure, but it's not hard to get great colors out of the FS5 or especially the FS7. Slog3 is pretty much plug and play with a LUT, and on the FS7 you can actually monitor or burn in the LUT while you're shooting.

Colors are every bit as good in this mode as the C100 or C300 - I've owned both. Canon has the upper hand on white balancing - but C100 file is paper thin. I've never had issues pushing the 10 bit codec on FS5, and with FS7 you can push whole stops while still keeping a fat clean image. C300 was better than the C100 and I'm sure C300mkii is fantastic (haven't used it.)

Also, EOSHD is not even a remotely reliable source. His posts are anecdotal and usually contradictory. He also only really shoots for fun, which is fine, but his opinion is not nearly as informed as other blogs out there.

Lastly, WRT the Alexa comparisons... c'mon. C100 to Alexa comparison is beyond ludicrous.
 
Sony's XAVC 4:2:2 HD codec is definitely superior, especially for post grading. Canon has more pleasing skin tone out of the box, but Sony's color matrix is more neutral and handles saturated reds better.
 
The C100 is 3 years old now, it won't be a fair comparison until the C100 MKIII specs are announced,
and even then not until we get them in hand as the Cinema EOS line usage always seem to outperform the on-paper specs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top