C100: Canon C100 MkI vs C100 MkII Colour/ISO Comparison and AVCHD vs MP4

J

james.parsons

New member
Hi,

A VERY unscientific test of the picture quality coming straight out of both of these cameras, and comparing the noise at higher isos. Towards the end is a comparison of the AVCHD and MP4 in the MKII.

First thoughts, the MKII is sharper, much more detailed and cleaner. There is a significant difference in colours though between it and the MKI. Any thoughts on how to match better?

Also, the MP4 codec seems to handle noise much better, retaining detail. Thoughts? Are there any benefits to shooting AVCHD over MP4?

Only tested only tungsten light, will be doing a day light test later today.

Please download to really see the difference, vimeo compresses the hell out of it!

https://vimeo.com/116657534

UPDATE:

Attempted to match the cameras using a grey card. Still significant differences. However they do appear to match better in daylight.

https://vimeo.com/116777720

Still seeing a better picture from the MK II in terms of aliasing, detail and colour. But wouldn't use it with the MK I on a tungsten balanced shoot as they just don't quite match, unless of course you want to undergo a lot of colour correction.
 
Last edited:
I prefer the MKI....... the MKII got all Sony on us..... kinda cold, and less MOJO. I can see now why people have said the MKII looks less cinematic and more videoish.
 
- The color balance looks off on the MKII. ( too blue )

- The MKI is showing aliasing in the curved line of the guitar case, while it's nice and smooth with the MKII.
 
Look near enough the same, aside from the white balance difference. Mk2 actually has useable on-camera monitoring, which makes any other difference mere dithering.
 
TheDingo said:
- The color balance looks off on the MKII. ( too blue )

- The MKI is showing aliasing in the curved line of the guitar case, while it's nice and smooth with the MKII.
Click to expand...

If you see time 3:16 then you will see aliasing in the curved line of the guitar case with mkII, mark I is more smooth here. It is interesting change against the first part.
(Also take a look at the front edge of the chair, mark I is nice, mark II with bad antialiasing. )

MarkII is a little over sharpened, it is visible on T-shirt surface, at noise, etc.
 
Pave1 said:
If you see time 3:16 then you will see aliasing in the curved line of the guitar case with mkII, mark I is more smooth here.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Mk2 looks worse here, except that there is much more detail on the fabric of the red jacket with the Mk2, while there's a big loss of detail with the red jacket in the Mk1 footage.
 
TheDingo said:
Yes, the Mk2 looks worse here, except that there is much more detail on the fabric of the red jacket with the Mk2, while there's a big loss of detail with the red jacket in the Mk1 footage.
Click to expand...

I still think about this that it is only about more sharpen video at camera in this case. I saw sample from markII on vimeo markII group where was really less details, it is about camera setting and also basic NR seems to be bigger on markII. But I can be wrong .-) .
 
Either way...IMHO the decision to purchase is completely for the camera operator. I don't think there is a client on the planet who would care if you shot with one or the other.
 
ReelWorksMedia said:
Either way...IMHO the decision to purchase is completely for the camera operator. I don't think there is a client on the planet who would care if you shot with one or the other.
Click to expand...

I think you'd be surprised. "Some guy told me there's a new c100 out, do you have the new one or the old one?"

"Well it's the old one but here's the thing--"

"Thanks, we're looking for someone with the new one."

A lot of people are influenced by people they shouldn't be.
 
I have a feeling not too many jobs will be lost if just choosing between the two.

For those that down own a C100...its a no brainer. For me, a current C100 owner...the IQ itself is not the reason to upgrade. The draw is more user friendly operation than IQ, IMO.
 
Swink said:
A few more tests to eyeball while you ponder your purchase or, like me, wait impatiently for your order to come through:
Canon C100 MKII High ISO Tests: https://vimeo.com/116863754
Canon C100 MKII Slow Motion / Dual Pixel AF / Face Tracking Tests: https://vimeo.com/116869816
Click to expand...

I watched the ISO video, it was shot with two very different lenses, even though the guy said it doesn't make a difference in testing ISO.... it does. The 70-200 f2.8 is a much sharper and contrasty lenses than the 24-105 f4. That said for some strange reason I always find myself liking the over all image of the mkI better. At ridiculously high ISO the MKII did perform better, but who in their right mind cares.
 
You seem to have deinterlaced the MKII footage, lots of aliasing because half of the lines are missing, check your workflow.
 
It's absolutely an issue with the settings. My default, mine was set to 59.97i and showed up as interlaced. Switched the setting to 23.97 and s'all good. The 60p looks good and I'll still testing it but it could be a bit softer than 24p. More playing to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top