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

I like this new EVF and better positioning LCD, but I don't understand why this new C100 needs for HD output 3x8MPx - DIGIC DV4 works internally at quad HD with 24MPx and for HD needs to make some down conversion. It is three times more pixels than old C100 needs for the same output, a lot of interpolation and power (old C100 needs no interpolation, 4K sensor was designed for RGB output at HD - http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/p...RGB-Resolution-Considerations-White-paper.pdf ).

I think that this C100 MarkII is designed for 4K output but there is no recording for 4K at Canon now. It is the main question for me if the resulting picture quality will be the same, I think that image will be a little sharper but with a little less color accuracy (there is interpolated about 2/3 of color information and we don't know how is that down conversion made, if there is some lanzos filtering and how good is color interpolation for HD YCC422).

If we get new 4K version of this C100 next year then a lot of people can be unhappy with purchasing of this MII model at "half 4K stuff".

Add:
and it's a little crazy to have a 4K camera with no 4K output (with firmware update, etc.).
 
Last edited:
Pave1 said:
I like this new EVF and better positioning LCD, but I don't understand why this new C100 needs for HD output 3x8MPx - DIGIC DV4 works internally at quad HD with 24MPx and for HD needs to make some down conversion. It is three times more pixels than old C100 needs for the same output, a lot of interpolation and power (old C100 needs no interpolation, 4K sensor was designed for RGB output at HD - http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/p...RGB-Resolution-Considerations-White-paper.pdf ).

I think that this C100 MarkII is designed for 4K output but there is no recording for 4K at Canon now. It is the main question for me if the resulting picture quality will be the same, I think that image will be a little sharper but with a little less color accuracy (there is interpolated about 2/3 of color information and we don't know how is that down conversion made, if there is some lanzos filtering and how good is color interpolation for HD YCC422).

If we get new 4K version of this C100 next year then a lot of people can be unhappy with purchasing of this MII model at "half 4K stuff".

Add:
and it's a little crazy to have a 4K camera with no 4K output (with firmware update, etc.).
Click to expand...


I still belive the c100 Mk2 should be the first gen. Canon is just fixing their problems. C100 wasn't ready 2 years ago.
 
Shawnvfx said:
I still belive the c100 Mk2 should be the first gen. Canon is just fixing their problems. C100 wasn't ready 2 years ago.
Click to expand...

I like Canon imperfect cameras because without XH-A1 we don't have Sony FX1000 with 20x zoom and three rings .-) (the Sony Z1 was good example of these manufactures interaction). But the first XH-A1 cameras have terrible CA on wide, XH-A1s was much better (I saw seven XH-A1s and five XH-A1).

XF100 was also some wonderful concept, but lens was not perfect, I like this imperfect camera.

The C100 with its wonderful ergonomy and picture with "4K down conversion" quality (a very good sharpness without moire) was really good but it missed AVCHD 2.0 (but I personaly don't need 50p, 50i to 25p is a good way to make a little slowmotion for me). But I really like the native great colors without interpolation, great and native colors are the best for me, I hope that this new C100 MarkII will go on with this level of quality - more native colors and less sharpnes at luma, I like this old concept .-) .
 
Shawnvfx said:
I still belive the c100 Mk2 should be the first gen. Canon is just fixing their problems. C100 wasn't ready 2 years ago.
Click to expand...
I don´t think "fixing their problems" is what's going, but rather segmenting markets.
Two years back there already was the C300 and the C100 basically is the same camera.
So it was all about deliberately cutting features, not unknowingly screwing up;)
Maybe some parts like the C100's LCDs also saved on manufacturing costs, but it always is about reaching those,
who would never be able to afford the next step up in the production line.
Now those same people would not be ready yet for an investment in a 4K workflow, so they get better HD acquisition,
while 4K will further help to distinguish the C300 for those who can afford it.
My wild guesses, but based on long years of me hanging around with my camera when CEO type guys meet and conspire;););)
 
I just don't understand why the keep muzzling their products, leaving the door open for other manufacturers. All the threads on this post point to the fact that this camera is solid but underwhelming. Blackmagic has proved that Canon should have the money and the manpower to make THE camera to own for pro video/film, but they choose to hold back every time. Sure this camera will sell, and people will do amazing work with it. As will people with the A7s. Pocket, GH4, etc. But Canon could just bury sales of those other cameras if they had added 4K and a 10-bit 422 codec to this body. And if they had done this a year ago everyone else would be dead by now. But Sony and Panny live on. Just my $.02.

And for whatever it's worth, I prefer Sony's color science.
 
stevedocmaker said:
And if they had done this a year ago everyone else would be dead by now. But Sony and Panny live on.
Click to expand...

Sony and Panasonic releasing cameras that upend their lineup every year is the equivalent of Canon killing them - it's a clear indication that they aren't approaching the market share of Canon and have to come back for another try. Canon won't be killing all of Sony or Panasonic dead here, those are huge multinational corporations, but they have regularly been killing their cinema camera lineups for a few years now.

The rhetoric in these anti-Canon rants that are all over this site these days is getting out of hand.
 
Shawnvfx said:
I still belive the c100 Mk2 should be the first gen. Canon is just fixing their problems. C100 wasn't ready 2 years ago.
Click to expand...

I paid my C100 off in rentals. Never once had a client complain about the quality of the footage. Had several editors who were used to cut/grading C300 footage remark how surprised they were that the C100 looked nearly identical to the 24p C300 footage, especially when both were shot c-log.

Yes, the camera had some room for improvement but it's worked well for me so far!
 
IndyFilmPhreak2013 said:
Sony and Panasonic releasing cameras that upend their lineup every year is the equivalent of Canon killing them - it's a clear indication that they aren't approaching the market share of Canon and have to come back for another try. Canon won't be killing all of Sony or Panasonic dead here, those are huge multinational corporations, but they have regularly been killing their cinema camera lineups for a few years now.

The rhetoric in these anti-Canon rants that are all over this site these days is getting out of hand.
Click to expand...
It's not only here, it's everywhere. And the funny thing is that Canon cameras are still selling extremely well. People are still buying brand new 5d3 (that are "dead"). Internet is one thing, reality is another.
 
From the Canon Rumours article on 4K products:

"Canon has its sight set on being the 'A camera' "...

So don't count them out yet, I think NAB 2015 is gonna be a must see before making any major decisions.
Hopefully there's something big coming from Canon.
 
I have my good old Canon C100. I also have bought the Gh4, the BMC4K and the A7s (All for different reasons and situations). The C100 still as one single package perform better than the other 3 combined. Even though I await a 4k version of the C100, I can patiently wait. But when a job demands a fast moving camera that has all the goodies built in, I reach for the C100.
 
dustylense said:
I have my good old Canon C100. I also have bought the Gh4, the BMC4K and the A7s (All for different reasons and situations). The C100 still as one single package perform better than the other 3 combined. Even though I await a 4k version of the C100, I can patiently wait. But when a job demands a fast moving camera that has all the goodies built in, I reach for the C100.
Click to expand...

It's not strange the most sensible comment is from an actual user of the cameras. The C100 is a great camera, the mk II is almost perfect and fixed everything the mk I had. If you want a 1080p camera, this is one of the best there is for a very good price. If you want 4K, well, it's not a 4K camera, buy a 4K camera, it's the only way you can shoot 4K, with a 4K camera, not this one! :D
 
IndyFilmPhreak2013 said:
Sony and Panasonic releasing cameras that upend their lineup every year is the equivalent of Canon killing them - it's a clear indication that they aren't approaching the market share of Canon and have to come back for another try. Canon won't be killing all of Sony or Panasonic dead here, those are huge multinational corporations, but they have regularly been killing their cinema camera lineups for a few years now.

The rhetoric in these anti-Canon rants that are all over this site these days is getting out of hand.
Click to expand...

Sony, yeah, they release a new cinema cam ever 10 minutes. But Panasonic? They were
first to market with the AF100, and what exactly have they done since then? Oh yes, I've
got it now. It's because Panasonic is killing Canon and Sony right? Canon and Sony can't
approach the market share of the AF100, so they have to keep trying other cameras......right??
 
all i can say that, i cannot wait till the 1dc and c300 successors come out. Because id finally be able to afford either a 1dc or c300 which is what always wanted. The current c300 is much better cam than the c100 mk II I rather go for that.
 
curious why edry. The only difference is

-4:2:2 internal
-SDI and genlock

1 can be solved with a 300$ ninja star, that's much less than the 7K$ difference!

The mk II even has the advantages of Dual Pixel AF, and the 60p at 1080p, lighter smaller and better design and two internal microphones.

I am pretty sure the C300 will need to be updated very soon as it doesn't have an advantage over the 5K c100 mk II aside from SDI output.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
I am pretty sure the C300 will need to be updated very soon as it doesn't have an advantage over the 5K c100 mk II aside from SDI output.
Click to expand...

I suspect that the key difference between the C100 II and C300 II is going to be 4k. ...and a few thousand dollars.
Right now the C100 II would compete well against a FS7 except for frame rates, 4k, and it's a few thousand dollars cheaper. If you're doing weddings and events where you need to deliver in HD and turn it quick, the C100 II still makes a lot of sense. If you're shooting broadcast for Japan or in a market that actually needs 4k then you'd be looking at the FS7 unless a C300 II comes out with 4k and beautiful colors straight out of the camera.
The more I think about the C100 II, the more it makes sense and is less of a let down. I'm not going to run out and get one, like I might have been tempted to do if it recorded 4k, but I get it. But I'm not getting one.
 
Back in the 80's when a friends parents bought a brand new Mercedes I was really excited to see all the high tech space age bells and whistles I expected to come on such an expensive car. I was surprised to get in and see a very simple interface of just a few analog dials instead of a ton of new digital readouts with lots of lights and blinky buttons. What the hell? No digital speedometer? No digital anything. Now I appreciate the approach of that car...keep it simple, functional, and do it better than everyone else. My other neighbor had a Chevy that had a digital speedometer, but the rest of that car was complete crap.
The Alexa is just a 2k camera. An expensive one at that, but it's the one everyone wants. On paper a GH4 looks radically better, but on screen not so much. I'm guessing this is a little bit of Canon's approach here too. The C300 was supposed to be a complete failure compared to the Scarlet, but we all know how that turned out. Let's see what the second generation of the C series can really do...
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
curious why edry. The only difference is

-4:2:2 internal
-SDI and genlock

1 can be solved with a 300$ ninja star, that's much less than the 7K$ difference!

The mk II even has the advantages of Dual Pixel AF, and the 60p at 1080p, lighter smaller and better design and two internal microphones.

I am pretty sure the C300 will need to be updated very soon as it doesn't have an advantage over the 5K c100 mk II aside from SDI output.
Click to expand...

I hate external recorders.. very much. I hate running extra cables I just want to put my cards in and shoot. External recorders just add another point of failure. The c300 will most likely drop in price so I much rather jump to a c300 than a c100 mk II since i can record internally at with 50 mbs. Believe it or not I might actually end up going to the 1dc itd probably be even cheaper than the c300 when they are replace. This is because im finding myself shooting more stills than video so it'd be just perfect hybrid for me not to mention the lovely 4k.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top