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

Yes I guess some people want internal recording. But keep in mind the hdmi implementation in the C100 is very sleek. You can attach a ninja star (tiny gadget) attach a small hdmi (lockable on the mk ii) and forget about it. When you press record on the camera the footage gets recorded on the ninja to the CFast cards. You can almost consider it an internal part of the camera. You can glue it and consider the camera to have Cfast slot :D this small inconvenience will get you 7$K off, plus a smaller\lighter camera, with extra 60p 1080p, internal wifi, and the lovely autofocus system. Plus they do claim a sharper image with less aliasing and better low light performance for the digic 4 processor. But we'll have to wait and see.
 
Spoke with my dealer today. He's picking up hints from Canon that they're going to be announcing a C200 in December.

That's all I know.

Ben.
 
i dont know why there would be a c200.. what specs would the c200 that c100 and c300 woulnt have? it seems like too much of an in between camera. Plus why would they announce it in december? seem that it would steal attention from the c100 mk2 that will go on sale then? dont make sense. I personally think that they are going to to stick with their same lines and just upgrade them. like the c300 will shot 4k internally somehow and the c500 will have maybe higher than 4k and a better frame rates.
 
Edry said:
i dont know why there would be a c200.. what specs would the c200 that c100 and c300 woulnt have? it seems like too much of an in between camera. Plus why would they announce it in december? seem that it would steal attention from the c100 mk2 that will go on sale then? dont make sense. I personally think that they are going to to stick with their same lines and just upgrade them. like the c300 will shot 4k internally somehow and the c500 will have maybe higher than 4k and a better frame rates.
Click to expand...

Agreed and probably come in around the price of the Original C300. $14-16K. Nothing to make the FS7 @ $8K or C100II @$5.5K look like a bad buy especially if released 8-10months from now which is likely.
 
Please, anyone that is from broadcast or working with people from it tune in. Let's speculate a little bit which camera can be the next "industry standard" in that segment.
Let's say Canon will update C300 (mark II, C400?) with the following:
- 10bit internal
- more output connections
- higher frame rates (let's say 120fps)
- higher resolution evf and screen
- better sensor, color reproduction etc.
- maybe some other tweeks
BUT
- no 4K (either internal or external)

While this hold people to Canon or they're going to chose FS7?
Let's assume for FS7 that it will be as good as we hope it to be.
- image will hold up to be identical to that from F5
- workflow using Catalyst Browse will be extremely straightforward, deloging will be executed with a single click. It will be working seamlessly to match it to Canon, Alexa etc.

Will this make broadcast people switch to Sony and that becoming sort of a standard for the next year or two?

Of course all that is speculation but I'm sure you already know a feeling of people attitude toward next steps.

The answer may help us to determine what to buy next. Either wait for Canon or just jump on FS7 as it will be the next hot camera.
 
I personally think the likelihood of Canon having a 4k solution in the $12-$15k range in 2015 is very high. They obviously have the ability to do this....from a marketing standpoint it makes sense just to answer the competition. Of course, I predict that they will give us a lot of features we want...but still leave some in demand ....such as no overcrank in 4k...but I think they will at least have a solution.

Its time...and I'm sure they are aware of that. I also think the current lines will have a necessary price adjustment to fit everything in. Makes sense.

For me... I think I might skip the FS7 (Metabones...ect)....and skip the C100 mark II. Hope they release solid camera in the $12-15k range in the next 6 months...and trade up to that. For me...it's all about color science and dynamic range. I think Canon is heading in a good direction on those fronts.
 
alohype said:
Will this make broadcast people switch to Sony and that becoming sort of a standard for the next year or two?
Click to expand...

Broadcast used to be all Sony but the C300 took some of that and most could go back easily but it all comes down to post workflows. That is what made the C300 a hit was that it gave a great image in a 50mb 8bit mxf codec that worked well with all existing post and media infrastructures. I was part of a meeting 2 years ago (when c100 was announced) and they bought 4 C300's instead of 8 C100s plus recorders. The prores or DNX was too large a file they just wanted the 50 and they didn't want to deal with any external systems. The money wasn't as important as fitting perfectly into the current broadcast structure (avid ISIS then) and not take up more space than absolutely necessary. The camera was pennies compared to the massive shared storage networks in house for post. 20 TV channels ran out of the one building.

Where I see 4K being important is with smaller production companies outside the broadcast companies themselves who create content and are more updated on equipment and workflow. Being small it is cheaper to adapt and reap the benefits of new technology. Broadcast won't be 4K for a while so 1080 delivery will still be the finishing form. 10bit is more important to many content creators.

In my mind the biggest sell of 4K is someone like myself who does small commerical and branded content. Sub $40K campaigns/commercials. Being limited on resources having 4K is a bonus because sometimes I am limited for angles or cameras/Ops so being able to pull another crop out of the frame is valuable. Also when I have gotten caught short on lenses I know I can punch in an get a longer shot then my lens could in HD. Its just something that is helpful at not a bad data penalty for compressed 4K. To me other factors being similar I am planning on a 4K system for my next camera investment.
 
RatLabProductions said:
Broadcast used to be all Sony but the C300 took some of that and most could go back easily but it all comes down to post workflows. That is what made the C300 a hit was that it gave a great image in a 50mb 8bit mxf codec that worked well with all existing post and media infrastructures. I was part of a meeting 2 years ago (when c100 was announced) and they bought 4 C300's instead of 8 C100s plus recorders. The prores or DNX was too large a file they just wanted the 50 and they didn't want to deal with any external systems. The money wasn't as important as fitting perfectly into the current broadcast structure (avid ISIS then) and not take up more space than absolutely necessary. The camera was pennies compared to the massive shared storage networks in house for post. 20 TV channels ran out of the one building.

Where I see 4K being important is with smaller production companies outside the broadcast companies themselves who create content and are more updated on equipment and workflow. Being small it is cheaper to adapt and reap the benefits of new technology. Broadcast won't be 4K for a while so 1080 delivery will still be the finishing form. 10bit is more important to many content creators.

In my mind the biggest sell of 4K is someone like myself who does small commerical and branded content. Sub $40K campaigns/commercials. Being limited on resources having 4K is a bonus because sometimes I am limited for angles or cameras/Ops so being able to pull another crop out of the frame is valuable. Also when I have gotten caught short on lenses I know I can punch in an get a longer shot then my lens could in HD. Its just something that is helpful at not a bad data penalty for compressed 4K. To me other factors being similar I am planning on a 4K system for my next camera investment.
Click to expand...

Yep...on point.
 
mcgeedigital said:
It would bury sales alright.

Of the C300 and the C500.

Why would they undercut their higher end products?

That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Because although the margin on their higher end products is huge, the market for mid-range products is ginormous (is that really a word?). And, the market for lenses is even bigger. I own 2 C100s and I bought an A7s, I love it - althought it's not "better" than the C100-II or 1 even, but it does some things better (4K, and a far better 2K codec) - and I'm now buying Sony lenses to take advantage of the fast AF and compact size. Make a camera that dominates the lower-level professional or whatever you want to call it, squash the competition, and profits will soar. The weird thing is that they could have seen this when the 5DII came out and took off, but somehow they're stuck on the old model.

BTW, I'm not Canon hating. I just think their business model is way too conservative. But of course this opens the door for companies like Blackmagic & Sony to make interesting products that challenge them.
 
Last edited:
I always liked the C100 the best among all the "C" line. Because it was truly hand-holdable, inscospiciuos, rugged all-in-one and due to its lovely colours.

But it came with a joke of an EVF, a consumer codec and no 60p. I thought, when the next C100 comes out, fixing those issues, it's going to be a killer machine. A truly all terrain, Broadcast camera for under €6k. It will sell like hotcakes, and pros will buy them in pairs, just to have A+B and as backup.

It would have cost Canon nothing to put in a 50Mbps codec on the C100mk2, …just like on cams costing half that much btw! But the brilliant marketing minds had to strap the DIGIC DV4 instead, an old chip that comes on $300 consumer cameras.


What a missed opportunity, to kill the FS7 and everything else, and set a new industry standard, which is what Canon used to do in several market segments. But Canon still wanted a 6 month window to clear its C300 stock, so it releases in 2015 (!) a "CINEMA SERIES" with a terrible consumer codec for €6K.
Cannibalizing? Sony didn't have a problem Cannibalizing the F5 with the FS7. As Apple/Jobs said: if you don't do it yourself, somebody else will.


BTW, this is what I've heard from C100 owners. They're either:

-very much Pissed, as they just paid €500 for the AF upgrade a month ago

-Already served with a C100+Ninja, and NOT spending almost €6k again to have almost the same camera. They're getting an A7s to cover other bases, or are rather considering selling the pack to jump into the FS7.


So, what is this C100mk2 for? Wedding videographers that still are on 5Ds?
Oh, but they are about to jump into the A7S+GH4+accessories, for less money, to end up with: dual cameras, 4k, XLRs in, slow-mo, better low light …etc.




With such a plan, I wonder how will Canon face the FS7 and F5 with the C300mk2.


We see Impossible.
 
Last edited:
Eh. If I didn't already have a c100, I'd probably spring for the mk II. Since I do, I'll just keep it and maybe pick up some new lenses or something.

I expect my experience will be typical. There will likely be few people looking to upgrade from the mk I to the mk II, but every day we're getting more people graduating from DSLR's, and having a newer camera is always going to be important for people making that jump (talk to the producers if you don't like it). The new features are going to be enough to justify the slightly higher cost between the mk I and mk II, but not enough for anyone to go crazy over.

In other words, sounds like a lot of "more of the same, but newer is better." And I think that's fine for Canon. For now.
 
I own a C100 and do weddings, event work(concerts, food festivals, etc), and corporate work as well.

If I didn't own a C100 already, I would get the C100 mkii when it comes out.
I do own a C100 though, and I won't be upgrading to the C100 mkii as it wouldn't allow me to offer anything more to people who hire me. (60p obviously isn't going to be a deciding factor).

I would want a tool that lets me offer something more than what I currently can. When I get a 2nd camera (which is hopefully soon, as I'm tired of renting, heh), I'll be looking for something that lets me do that. I've had a couple clients ask me for a 4K main angle (so I end up renting). If I'm already being asked for it, I certainly can't consider a non-4K 2nd camera. I would have hoped for more from a new version of the C100, maybe there will be an FS7/A7s/GH4/??? in my future instead of another C-series camera, which is too bad because I love my C100 and would love have had a C100ii/C300ii that can do 4K (fingers still crossed for that c300ii, heh)
 
PC--------------------- MAC
RED------------------- ARRI
ANDROID------------- iOS
GH3/4---------------- 5D mk..
SONY F--------------- Canon Cinema EOS


It might not be as clean cut as this, but there are brands that are very eager to "check boxes" and there are others that focus more on polish and experience.

It might very well be that the boxes that get checked are very important. Sometimes they are and sometimes they just appear to be and sometimes they just aren't.

To be comfortable in the "polish" camp, you need to appreciate what the added effort that takes place here, that sometimes is hidden from plain view, brings.
 
chappelldigital said:
I love my C100 and would love have had a C100ii/C300ii that can do 4K (fingers still crossed for that c300ii, heh)
Click to expand...

------------------

From Canonrumors.com with a [CR2]:

We’re told to expect “a bunch” of 4K products from Canon, starting in early 2015. There will be products in the EOS line, Cinema EOS line and possibly the VIXIA line.
Both the EOS C300 and EOS C500 will see updates in 2015, with the EOS C300 replacement gaining at least 4K. We have no idea if Canon will follow ARRI into 6K territory or not, but judging by Canon’s strategy thus far, I don’t see that happening. Though a good source keeps telling us Canon has its sight set on being the “A camera”, and that there could be a different form factor Cinema EOS product shown at NAB.
As for 4K DSLR’s, we weren’t told which camera(s) would get the capability. I asked if the 7D Mark II could possibly get 4K via firmware, to which there was no clear answer.
-----------------

Updates are on the way, but might be a long wait if you need it now.
 
AndreeOnline said:
PC--------------------- MAC
RED------------------- ARRI
ANDROID------------- iOS
GH3/4---------------- 5D mk..
SONY F--------------- Canon Cinema EOS


It might not be as clean cut as this, but there are brands that are very eager to "check boxes" and there are others that focus more on polish and experience.

It might very well be that the boxes that get checked are very important. Sometimes they are and sometimes they just appear to be and sometimes they just aren't.

To be comfortable in the "polish" camp, you need to appreciate what the added effort that takes place here, that sometimes is hidden from plain view, brings.
Click to expand...

+1
plus for me kodak w/ super 35mm camera for high end adverts…
 
I love all these what ifs etc.

My C100 mark 1 isn't getting as much use these days (apart from being a second camera in interview shoots using its audio) since I bought the GH4 so I have no reason to buy the C100 mk2. Maybe if the mark1 originally had 50/60p I wouldn't be a GH4 owner today. Who knows.

From an an outsiders point of view the Mark 2 is a very attractive proposition especially if you are a "Canon look" fan with its clean 1080p image up to 60p plus the new evf and lcd. I believe there's interesting days ahead for the EOS Cinema line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top