C100: Canon C100 Mark II Film & BTS Video from Joe Simon

jindrich said:
I have nothing against Canon shooting a video with say, a pair of indie or wedding guys, explaining how much the C100 brings to their business and how satisfied their clients are, etc etc. That is both realistic and laudable.
Click to expand...

Dafuq?

People can actually do very good looking images on a budget and here's a producer who needs an Alexa for very simple shots. I don't get it. There's nothing in those shots that scream "this has to be shot on an Alexa". That's just rubbish thinking.
 
NOA said:
My gopro can do slomo at 2.7K, heck, all my camera's I have owned the past years could do slomo at 1080p so there is nothing special about that. I think you should see that video for what it is, a well prepared and well shot commercial. I wouldn't expect anything less from Joe, give him a smarthpone and it will most likely look good as well.
Click to expand...
Does your Gopro have an S35 format sensor? Does it even have manual controls? LOL. How about that low light when shooting slomo on the Gopro? Come on man....
 
Again, I have nothing against the video. I like it and it looks very nice. The images out of that C100mk2 look pretty good also.


My problem is with Canon and their silly marketing. With this Commercial piece they are apparently sending the msg, "buy an affordable C100mk2 and you can also do shorts like this, just like we did".
Only that they shot it with a C100mk2... and a budget over €100k, which is absurd, as no sane professional would use a basic entry level 24Mbps camera to shoot that video when confronted with a similar budget.

Take a look. There's at the very least €50k in screen rights for the main actors, plus another €50k more at least in production. That's a very rough guesstimate, as the average standard 30sec commercial runs us for €250k, so while I know out of experience that you CAN shoot Joe Simon's video for €50k if pressed, it can easily cost 5 times as much.

There are FOURTEEN (count them) Wardrobe Sets for the two main actors in that video. A Pintoresque Farm. A fully restored Vintage Pickup. A pair of horses. Two more secondary characters plus a lot of extras, all properly dressed and characterized. Weeks of preproduction, several days of shooting plus Post, that includes edit+cc and Sound design+Music+VO.
A professional crew including styling+MUA, rented HMI lighting and gaffer truck. Catering, locations, insurance, etc, etc, etc.

Would any professional use other than an ARRI cam to shoot this video? As a Producer your first responsibility is quality control, and you don't risk a €€ project by using the wrong tool (a cheap camera), and you'd surely fire a Production Manager/Director/DP who'd risk the project by doing so. Therefore the C100mk2 in THAT particular project sticks out like a sore thumb and looks as ridiculous as say Renault picking out a regular street car to run the Interlakes Rally. Ludicrous to any in the know.
 
A lot of small independent productions get made for less money than industry standard commercial rates. Especially when its a mix of professionals and hobbyists working together.

Peruse Vimeo for samples.
 
dustylense said:
Does your Gopro have an S35 format sensor? Does it even have manual controls? LOL. How about that low light when shooting slomo on the Gopro? Come on man....
Click to expand...

Yea, not to mention just how remarkable the iPhone is in low light!

To prove his point, perhaps Noa will surprise us, sell all his cameras and start shooting wedding videos on iPhones.
 
jindrich said:
Again, I have nothing against the video. I like it and it looks very nice. The images out of that C100mk2 look pretty good also.


My problem is with Canon and their silly marketing. With this Commercial piece they are apparently sending the msg, "buy an affordable C100mk2 and you can also do shorts like this, just like we did".
Only that they shot it with a C100mk2... and a budget over €100k, which is absurd, as no sane professional would use a basic entry level 24Mbps camera to shoot that video when confronted with a similar budget.

Take a look. There's at the very least €50k in screen rights for the main actors, plus another €50k more at least in production. That's a very rough guesstimate, as the average standard 30sec commercial runs us for €250k, so while I know out of experience that you CAN shoot Joe Simon's video for €50k if pressed, it can easily cost 5 times as much.

There are FOURTEEN (count them) Wardrobe Sets for the two main actors in that video. A Pintoresque Farm. A fully restored Vintage Pickup. A pair of horses. Two more secondary characters plus a lot of extras, all properly dressed and characterized. Weeks of preproduction, several days of shooting plus Post, that includes edit+cc and Sound design+Music+VO.
A professional crew including styling+MUA, rented HMI lighting and gaffer truck. Catering, locations, insurance, etc, etc, etc.

Would any professional use other than an ARRI cam to shoot this video? As a Producer your first responsibility is quality control, and you don't risk a €€ project by using the wrong tool (a cheap camera), and you'd surely fire a Production Manager/Director/DP who'd risk the project by doing so. Therefore the C100mk2 in THAT particular project sticks out like a sore thumb and looks as ridiculous as say Renault picking out a regular street car to run the Interlakes Rally. Ludicrous to any in the know.
Click to expand...

I think you are digging yourself deeper and deeper into a hole.
 
Nah... Have to agree with jindrich a bit here.

Yeah, you can deploy that much gear and crew on a much smaller budget, so thats not it...

HOWEVER...

...In their marketing, Canon takes a ~$5500 camera touted for its superlative ergonomics and vastly improved on-camera monitoring, and promptly slaps a $3000 EVF and at least $2000 in Zacuto rigormarole upon it. Its like saying, "our new Oldsmobile pick'em'up truck can carry all your cargo with ease in one convenient package! To prove it, we'll hook it up to this here trailer..."

Joe & Co. did a great job on the production side. The spot looks exemplary. The camera seems very useful for HD production, and the C100 line is squarely aimed at event shooters. But like jindrich says... I don't get the marketing. Given ~$12k camera budget, would an AVCHD cam really be choice #1? How would this spot be significantly less if shot on an an ancient AF100 or FS100 with a Gratical, rig, and maybe a Speedbooster? Is double checking focus with AF really worth twice over the price of either? Whats the real value in this camera?
 
mcbob said:
Nah... Have to agree with jindrich a bit here.

Yeah, you can deploy that much gear and crew on a much smaller budget, so thats not it...

HOWEVER...

...In their marketing, Canon takes a ~$5500 camera touted for its superlative ergonomics and vastly improved on-camera monitoring, and promptly slaps a $3000 EVF and at least $2000 in Zacuto rigormarole upon it. Its like saying, "our new Oldsmobile pick'em'up truck can carry all your cargo with ease in one convenient package! To prove it, we'll hook it up to this here trailer..."

Joe & Co. did a great job on the production side. The spot looks exemplary. The camera seems very useful for HD production, and the C100 line is squarely aimed at event shooters. But like jindrich says... I don't get the marketing. Given ~$12k camera budget, would an AVCHD cam really be choice #1? How would this spot be significantly less if shot on an an ancient AF100 or FS100 with a Gratical, rig, and maybe a Speedbooster? Is double checking focus with AF really worth twice over the price of either? Whats the real value in this camera?
Click to expand...

Why not look at it from the viewpoint of what you can accomplish with a C100. People who buy a C100 will buy accessories like those who buy another camera. I don't get the sense that the video is saying...... look at this production and tell us what the best camera in the world is..... like a few of you are suggesting. Get over it already!
 
What if you did not look at the video as a whole at all? Don't see it as a complete production with forethought. See is rather as individual situations. Example...this is what it would look like outdoors with diffusion. This is the color rendition when these elements are present. Look at the video more like a collection of possible situations that you may encounter, or attempt to set up, in some shape or form.

I think many are viewing this video as an entire production....seeing it as one cohesive thought. In that respect...yes, it has a lot of valuable production elements to it and a very well planned out execution. If you view it as a segmented piece that has possible real life situations that you most definitely will strive to achieve....through that lens, its very helpful.

Personally, I want to see what this camera looks like when the scene is lit properly. I want to see it respond in areas of movement. I want to see how it handles different environments. Yes, to have all of these elements present in a single production takes a lot of effort and money. It is nice to show potential customers how the camera looks in these environments. For that reason, I place no blame. There will be plenty of run and gun images that come out of this camera. I am thankful that I can see how it looks at its best. I wish all companies would make a release showing off their products in their best light.

What I hate is when a nice camera is released and the first dozen videos are dog s*%t.
 
Last edited:
It is advertising and it is clear that most of people don't use C100 in this way.

My two friends make documents (both are filmmaker, an old men), they both bought the C100 as a camera for while when they need to shoot accidentally without crew. They use a minimal props and the mostly no extra lightning, they need a natural feeling of people - and when I see the first video above then I know after several shots the way how this was done (lightning, preparing , etc), the second video makes me smile, it is not the way how they both did their works.

My third friend make the advertising and he use a lot of light, all what you see at videos above (zacuto rig, monitors, slow way of preparing scene, etc.), but he is using the C300 and the C500 now (for 10 or 12 bits pictures), He will never buy the c100 camera for this sort of job.

So, if some amateur see these pictures at promo video, must say - wow, wonderful!
But as a profesional from broadcast (who has the c100 for small personal works and for fun) I must say to this amateur - no, this is not typical output from this camera, it is advertising and you need another test if you want to compare the C100 mark II with other relatives product (profesional know all about this).

- for me all of us has part of true at this debate, but Canon with this video makes me smile. The main power of the C100 is the mostly in other way of using.

(sorry for my english, it is too much complicated text for me, but I want to tell the full story).
 
Last edited:
dustylense said:
Does your Gopro have an S35 format sensor? Does it even have manual controls? LOL. How about that low light when shooting slomo on the Gopro? Come on man....
Click to expand...

My reaction was based on the comment that the C300 can't do slow motion at 1080p, as if 50p or 60p now on the c100 mark II is something we should be exited about at this moment, it's nice to have but it's standard on about every other camera for the past years.
 
Last edited:
Advertising 101: show the consumer what the product is capable of.
Car ads don't show a car stuck in traffic just because it's how it will be use by most.

i really don't see the problem here. It's not like Joe shot a Hollywood film with it.
 
sonofaresiii said:
oh come on, let's not bring that s*%t in here too.
Click to expand...

You are right and I apologize, I could have said his comment was ridiculous as well but I just don't like it when people react like that when all I do is have an opinion, just like anyone else.
 
I'm surprised by the reactions. For me it's a nice ad, nothin' more, nothin' less. With this effort you could have achieved quite similar looks with a lot of other cams, imho. Not that impressed with the lighting of the night scenes, a lot of slightly boring standard shots as well but that's probably what to exspect.
Don't get me wrong, I like this cam and I will grap one next week, but I could not find anything really spectacular which is worth any serious discussion? I think we have seen much more interesting and better stuff out of the MKI allready here in this forum...

At least they were very honest and did not suggest that everyone will get the same quality in his footage by simple run-n-gun an afternoon. :-)
So, in the end it's never the gear alone.
 
I'm probably one of those guys who Canon made the video for....

I remember reading about a blindfold comparison of audio pre-amps by professional recording engineers, and they couldn't pick out the expensive pre-amps from the cheap ones. I imagine its a lot like that in this case, with good lighting, skilled videographers, and production crew I doubt the professionals here could pick out a C100 from a Red. I know 99.9999 of the public can't.

A good video will combine content with technique. While I can appreciate the camera used and the skill involved in making the video this was the primary reason I watched it at all. I have a very hard time with this type of content for any length of time. These wedding videos are mind numbing as far as content goes. This isn't a reflection on the skill of the maker, as some wedding videos are amazing technically.

Oh and yes, I just can't stop thinking how much better the content would have been if it were shot on an Alexa, in fact I've been obsessing about it all day. Maybe I'll call Canon and raise the issue with them damn it!
 
Erik Naso said:
I'm disappointed by a lot of the comments on this thread but that's the internet. Maybe Joe should have just shot some charts for you spec folks. He shows how the camera performs and in a real production environment and I think the C100 MKII looks very good. Actually surprised and I owned a C100.
Click to expand...


What exactly are you disappointed about? A few people did not like what they saw and vocalized their opinions about it. Should we instead sugar coat our opinions in marshmallow gooey'ness? I for one appreciate those that point out blatant flaws in my work as in the end it only serves to make me better.

It's pretty clear that whoever shot this video has a limited knowledge of light/cinematography and likely wouldn't know what to do with a test chart if he/she had one. Bantering aside, I think the majority of criticism is pointed at the project and not the creator. I for one would have rather seen someone with a solid understanding of light and cinematography go for gusto with the c100 and a healthy budget. This is a big step back in terms of quality for Canon marketing as it pales in comparison to anything they have previously commissioned.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top