C100: Canon C100 Mark II Announced 60P, New VF, & New OLED Panel Texas Media Systems

If face detection does not work with L glass...that would definitely impact my decision to make a move. the C100 I is a completely capable camera. The benefits of the Mark II are nice...but not mandatory. Something like face detection would be interesting enough to make the switch.

If I did decide to make the switch it would be for the purpose of using it in combination with a Letus Helix...so for me...face detection on L glass is important as most of my lenses are L...with the exception of the Sigma ART series and some Rokinon stuff.
 
Interesting that the C100 was upgraded before the C300, considering how much earlier the 300 was released.
Does this mean the 100 needed fresh life breathed into sooner, that the 300 continues to do good sales-wise without an update?
Or that there's bigger, deeper plans for the 300?
 
IndyFilmPhreak2013 said:
I'm willing to bet that both are true.
Click to expand...

+1

I wonder if we'll see a C300 updated before NAB. Before this MkII was announced, I'd have said no. Now I'm thinking an announcement will come soon. Still, it's interesting how out of the blue this felt. Was there a camera or tech show this was announced at?
 
Andrius Simutis said:
That's very possible, but do you think they'd really disable the function entirely?
Click to expand...
I have no idea but if the feature didn't work as designed with older or other 3rd party lenses AF systems. I can see Canon not wanting to enable it. People would complain how bad it is because it doesn't work right when it was designed to only work with the STM AF system.
 
well. after owning C100 for 2 years and i have to say I didn't make my investment back yet.

with or without it my rate is the same. and people wouldn't expect me to show up with a great camera like that. they expect me with a 5d mark iii. bigger budget expecting me with a c300

you have to say that people aren't paying this thing, no producer is asking you to specifically bring c100, they only say they want 5d, or c300, red, alexa.

and you can't charge a c300 rate just say that your image quality is the same.


Im tired of staying at this level, I spent 7500 + tax on C100, including AF upgrade. and now it only worth 3000 or less.

time to move up.
 
Ah. I hear you Shawnfx, but this shouldn't come as a surprise. I to payed top dollar to for my C100 and I'm still paying it off but this is the way it has been for oh ever! Accept it because if you dont then it's gut wrenching. Now I did make money with my C100 but I choose to pocket it instead of paying it off. Ah greed is good :-D
I do think it's funny because people complain how slow Canon is in updating and then they update and people complain that Canon destroyed their investment. If you really like to be hurt buy a Sony camera. They bring the hurt to loyal customers the best. F3 payed log upgrade then give it for free. That was classic. The list goes on.....
 
Erik Naso said:
Ah. I hear you Shawnfx, but this shouldn't come as a surprise. I to payed top dollar to for my C100 and I'm still paying it off but this is the way it has been for oh ever! Accept it because if you dont then it's gut wrenching. Now I did make money with my C100 but I choose to pocket it instead of paying it off. Ah greed is good :-D
I do think it's funny because people complain how slow Canon is in updating and then they update and people complain that Canon destroyed their investment. If you really like to be hurt buy a Sony camera. They bring the hurt to loyal customers the best. F3 payed log upgrade then give it for free. That was classic. The list goes on.....
Click to expand...

yeah I moved on to steadicam operator. so C100 would be my last professional camera I believe.

and this event/wedding low-no budget commercials has always been bullying the operators like me.

rate is insanly low and I feel I am always replacable cuz tons of rich students with 5d mark iii and bunch of L glasses willing to work for free.

its true that you do a lot better than those guys, but your rate can hire 3 - 5 of them. so producer believe 5 guys should always be better than yourself.

also, if you bring a A7S or GH4 client will look down to you. they think you aren't prepared.

I feel more like a labour than an artist.

don't ever think I fit in this market.
 
Last edited:
Guys, some of your statements make me curious...

If you're not making your money back on a C100 in two years it's a business problem, not a camera problem. And I say this as a "concerned friend", not as a shorty remark.

With a C100 you should target businesses as your customers. Shooting anything for a business that involves identity material that needs an edit should cost them at least, what... $3000?

If you're not seeing the jobs, or if you are working for less, you need to think about your positioning. But trust me, the original C100 is good enough for anything out there apart from special frame rate commercial content. That tends to go to RED I guess.

Don't let yourself get dragged down to the DSLR hobbyist level—unless that is what you are and want to be (because that's fine too).
 
Shawnvfx said:
…and this event/wedding low-no budget commercials has always been bullying the operators like me.

rate is insanly low and I feel I am always replacable cuz tons of rich students with 5d mark iii and bunch of L glasses willing to work for free.
Click to expand...

Hi Shawnvfx,

this is what I'm talking about. You can't thrive there.

But you setting yourself apart form the work-for-free crowd is your job. Everybody wants everything for free. If you give it they are, despite what Twisted Sister said, going to take it.
 
LeoGrey said:
Someone needs a hug?


Don't know what is more frightening, the possibility of you believing you know what an entire industry wants/needs or how personally offended you seem to be that a world leader technology isn't bending to your will. Lets assume for a second there is a flip side to the coin with even a glimmer of logic, it reads:


- The camera is a workhorse in the right hands
- It has a great price tag that allows both amateurs & professionals access to a professional tool
- The quality in which it captures those moving images is stunning(in the right hands)
- The ergonomics and usability have been praised by most of its owners
- The build quality, battery life, ND's, Preamps, AF, weight, external recording are tough to beat
- It can match the quality(in some cases outshine) cameras that cost 3-4 times as much
- It is one of the few large sensor cameras on the market that can perform in broad day light or no light


Now IF all of the above were NOT true, I doubt Canon would waste the r&d budget on a revision and we would be seeing a c200 or some other variant. Assuming it is true and unit sales are not dropping off, it makes a lot of sense as to why we are seeing the mk II with its features.

One thing I would love to know is how many c100 / fs700's have been sold to date. I'm guessing the C100 has a much bigger foot print in that pie chart and is in fact the reason Sony answered with the fs7. I'm sure Sony didn't foresee the O7Q breathing new life into the fs700, but fs7 was already in the pipeline.

ps: all this is speculation and opinion of course :)
Click to expand...

Not that it's ever going to happen, but I'd like to see those numbers as well. Unlike you,
however, I'm guessing there were more fs700s selling than C100s.....but as you say it's all
just guesses anyways
:)

As for Sony and the FS7, I think they brought that out....because Sony brings out a new,
better camera roughly every 10 minutes. How many Super 35 cams do they have
anyways 7 or 8?? At least when you buy a Canon, you don't have to worry about it
being 'obsolete' 10 minutes later. Still unsure if that is a good or bad thing.

But as a general thing, Canon added 60p for slow motion, better screen (which was one of
my least favorite things about the C100) and autofocus. Seems like a typical 'solid but
unspectacular' Canon upgrade to me.....pretty much exactly what I'd expect. Only surprising
thing was how 'out of left field' the announcement was, with no big build up. No 4k or 10
bit codec? I know a lot of people upset about that, but honestly I'm not one of them. As long
as it has a nice looking HD picture I'm good. If they could figure out how to make the autofocus
work on existing Canon lenses, instead of just the new STM lenses, I think they'd pull in a few
new customers too (especially DSLR 'crossover' types who already have a healthy investment in Canon
L lenses.)
 
AndreeOnline said:
Guys, some of your statements make me curious...

If you're not making your money back on a C100 in two years it's a business problem, not a camera problem. And I say this as a "concerned friend", not as a shorty remark.

With a C100 you should target businesses as your customers. Shooting anything for a business that involves identity material that needs an edit should cost them at least, what... $3000?

If you're not seeing the jobs, or if you are working for less, you need to think about your positioning. But trust me, the original C100 is good enough for anything out there apart from special frame rate commercial content. That tends to go to RED I guess.

Don't let yourself get dragged down to the DSLR hobbyist level—unless that is what you are and want to be (because that's fine too).
Click to expand...

I'd say yeah 3K minimum for a typical 'shoot and edit' promo video. But there certainly are a lot
of businesses and organizations out there that won't pay it. And ironically, I've found that many
of those that balk at my rates....are the ones, who in the initial meeting talk over and over, about
how they want to remind people in this video, that their services or products may cost more than
the competitors......but it is because of the higher quality that they offer as compared to competitors.
After hearing my rates, they invariably go and hire the college kid with a 7D and a laptop, because he is
so much more inexpensive than me. I couldn't make this stuff up.

One last thing. Yeah the C100 is good enough for most everything out there. But that special
frame rate commercial stuff? Similar to how the C100 is good enough for most normal frame rate
stuff, the FS700 is good enough for most of the high frame rate stuff now. We just have to reeducate
people that they are not paying us because of 'all our expensive gear' but because of the institutional
knowledge of how to use gear to make a compelling story using 'motion pictures'.
I guess if they can't see the difference between an actual pro and somebody slapping
stuff together to make drinking money on the weekends, they are not someone I
want as a client anyways.....
 
The C100 is good enough for nearly everything. And so are the a7s, the GH4, and the pocket. Even the D5300 if your stuff will end up on youtube.
 
alaskacameradude said:
But that special frame rate commercial stuff? Similar to how the C100 is good enough for most normal frame rate stuff, the FS700 is good enough for most of the high frame rate stuff now.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course, the CAMERAS are good enough. I would charge the same if I shot with a 5Dmk3 or a C100. But I would choose the C100 because it's easier to deliver the quality I want with that camera. That is the reason I ultimately went with the 1Dc. It's easier for me to reach my vision with that camera fro both stills and video.

Anyway. Why would you mention your camera to the client? They are clueless (even if they don't think so). Market yourself and your abilities—not the gear. Drones and gimbals fall under the 'abilities' category.
 
I need to end this rate thing by a quote from Robert Starling, a great steadicam op/trainer in las vegas

" if someone steals your client or job based on a low rate alone, they probably were not your client or job to begin with "

the client wasn't looking for quality in the first place. thats why C100 owners are hard to find their market, its such a vague place where clients couldn't figure out the difference from 5d owners who uses their camera very well.

yes we are tech geeks and pixel peepers, but the clients arent. they pretty much watch your video 360p from youtube whats the difference?

unless you throw in other stuff, like lav mics, lights, another 1-2 assistants to assist you light n boom, pre production meetings, gear prep, location scout, royalty free music, etc as an added value. then your profit is like 300-500 from a 3000 video..

which in the end doesn't even make sense anymore. like an event highlight coverage, no one is gonna pay for anything higher than 500. yeah true you just show up 3 hours and edit a highlight out of it but aren't u a labour? this video gets you no where.

again, event stuff belongs to those 150/day guys from craiglist.

and wedding team usually looks like wedding company owner + 2 guys from craiglist (usually 250-350) , for a 4000-5000 budget weddings. (edit time per wedding : 2 weeks, one highlight, one 15 min film, one full version).

nobody here is making any money, if you make 1k per wedding profit, you do 40 weddings, 40k = a regular office clerk. why bother investing so much money?


talking about those 8k - 15k weddings? keep dreaming dude.






having said all those, all i want to say is that C100 priced wrong. it should be equivalent to 5D MARK III. 5d's photo ability is par with c100's video ability.

and potographers rates are the same as videographers in the same market, but look at how much they have to invest ? 1/5 compare to us ? even less?

--

ok for TV station seasonal ops, you guys better off stay with c300.. and thats your place.

for anyone who went through the whole post. you are my hero.
 
Shawnvfx said:
I need to end this rate thing by a quote from Robert Starling, a great steadicam op/trainer in las vegas

" if someone steals your client or job based on a low rate alone, they probably were not your client or job to begin with "

the client wasn't looking for quality in the first place. thats why C100 owners are hard to find their market, its such a vague place where clients couldn't figure out the difference from 5d owners who uses their camera very well.

yes we are tech geeks and pixel peepers, but the clients arent. they pretty much watch your video 360p from youtube whats the difference?

unless you throw in other stuff, like lav mics, lights, another 1-2 assistants to assist you light n boom, pre production meetings, gear prep, location scout, royalty free music, etc as an added value. then your profit is like 300-500 from a 3000 video..

which in the end doesn't even make sense anymore. like an event highlight coverage, no one is gonna pay for anything higher than 500. yeah true you just show up 3 hours and edit a highlight out of it but aren't u a labour? this video gets you no where.

again, event stuff belongs to those 150/day guys from craiglist.

and wedding team usually looks like wedding company owner + 2 guys from craiglist (usually 250-350) , for a 4000-5000 budget weddings. (edit time per wedding : 2 weeks, one highlight, one 15 min film, one full version).

nobody here is making any money, if you make 1k per wedding profit, you do 40 weddings, 40k = a regular office clerk. why bother investing so much money?


talking about those 8k - 15k weddings? keep dreaming dude.






having said all those, all i want to say is that C100 priced wrong. it should be equivalent to 5D MARK III. 5d's photo ability is par with c100's video ability.

and potographers rates are the same as videographers in the same market, but look at how much they have to invest ? 1/5 compare to us ? even less?

--

ok for TV station seasonal ops, you guys better off stay with c300.. and thats your place.

for anyone who went through the whole post. you are my hero.
Click to expand...

So, I'm not anything great. I'd rate myself as 'decent' as a camera op,
lighting, sound and editor. I have not added up my total receipts for the
year, and the year isn't over yet either.....but I'm going to make more than
you claimed in your post.....and I'm in a tiny town in the middle of freaking nowhere.
You can't even drive here, you have to fly.

Of course I don't hire assistants and do all that other stuff either, it's just me.
Lucky for me, I guess, I used to do 'one man band' TV news where I had to light
interviews, set up sound and shoot them so I'm used to going it alone. So yeah in
the space of two months this summer, I shot and edited four 3-5K promo videos. They led
to me getting three more from the people involved. Now I'm not going to say they were 100%
profit, but it was certainly a heck of a lot more than $300-500 each. And if I'm doing weddings
that pay me 2-3K (I won't do them cheaper than that) I certainly don't spend one week editing them!
Yup, I lose plenty of jobs to the cheaper guys. Big loss. What it means is I work much less hard for
the same money. In your example, yeah I may only make 40 grand a year. Why not just
'a regular office clerk' then? Mainly because I made the 40 grand working 10 hours a week
and that office clerk was working 40 hours a week. The biggest and hardest lesson I have
ever learned is that turning down (cheap) work is not only OK, it is actually a good thing!
Yeah, there are times I wish I made more money (a first world problem to be sure). But
I've got enough for my family and I to eat, and we have a warm house to live in. If my
biggest problem is that I have a lot of free time to spend with my family because there
are not a lot of people that wish to pay my rates, I am one lucky guy indeed!

I guess what I'm saying, is I think there is a place for the 'mid priced' camera.
Things like the C100, FS700 and so on. Someone who knows a decent bit, can
go into business . Get some good glass, maybe a slider, a little light kit and a couple mics.
Make some good stuff. Maybe you can't get huge rates but you can get
more than the craigslist $100 per day guys. $800-$1000 a day is certainly
possible. We hear a lot about how the cheap gear and glut of young people
wanting to 'break in' will drive prices down and ruin the industry. And there is
a little truth in that. But as with most things, with change, comes opportunity.
And there is a big need for content right now. There are those out there who will
pay a decent rate...trick of course is finding them.
 
Last edited:
shawnvfx...

Sounds like you are, unwillingly, in the wrong market. The market you want to be in is out there....and doing very well...just sounds like your not placing yourself in it....though you have some nice gear.

Let the fellas that are willing to take the low budget stuff have it. If that's not where you want to be...let those opportunities go. I can tell you this....when I first started my business, I was willing to take on "whatever I could get" just cause I wanted to reinvest everything.

Now that that my rates are 10-20 fold what they were...there are waaaaay more opportunities out there. The truth is...there is a large, huge, market of professional clients that are desperately seeking professional media artists to deliver real projects.

Tap Into that. Don't settle for less. Stick to you guns. Make top shelf productions and don't settle for less. In the end you will be successful, your company will grow, and you will be sought after by the markets you desire to be in.

...and above all else...never....ever....be complacent with where your at. Always do your best to outdo what you though was possible the previous year.

Gear has nothing to do with it. Just tell them it's a cinema camera...and has shot many leading motion pictures. That's all they need to know.

Anyway...the camera itself is such a small part of what we do anyway these days.
 
Shawnvfx said:
I need to end this rate thing by a quote from Robert Starling, a great steadicam op/trainer in las vegas

.... if you make 1k per wedding profit, you do 40 weddings, 40k = a regular office clerk. why bother investing so much money?
Click to expand...

Because we are Tech guys who don't want to be Office Clerks......because we love what we do.......and because if we were Office Clerks...there are no forums I know of where we could go to and talk about the newest pencils or pens on the market :-D. I am gutted too that the C100 II has come out because I bought my C100 not too long ago after waiting a while to see.....biggest feature I wanted was 50p and that's now in.....I need someone to blame so I am going to pick Erik Naso with his bloody nice blog and ridiculously great catalogue of work and review of the C100. He forced me to buy it too soon.....all I can hope is he lays off reviews and a purchase of the C100 II for a while. Interesting to hear peoples take on pricing...and most of it makes great sense. You always have to walk a line between what you need to charge and what people are willing to pay. Not going to add to this post.....just ask....does anyone else have a problem with their postings and not being able to create new paragraphs??
 
On the bright side, we should be able to start picking up used C100s at a good price. If I can get a C100 body for thousands less than a new Mk II, that's a great deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top