Canon EOS C100

This is the big problem for us right now on price. Since 2008, a 240,000 Yen item has gone from $2,000 to $3,000; from $4,000 to $6,000, etc. Really sucks.


yen.png
 
Barry_Green said:
I just saw the claims about pricing. I guess we'll see in November. Canon's own press release says available in November for $7999. That's what I'm basing my evaluation off of.
Click to expand...

You can pre-order one now, for a lot less than $8,000:

http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/index.php?t=product/canon_eos_c100

This is about $5,000 USD. I think this is a good price for what the camera offers. It puts it right smack in the range of the FS100, the EA50 and a bit more than the AF100.

ETA - Obviously, here in the US we don't worry about VAT.
 
Last edited:
I had a thought, that this might be a good camera to go with my 5d mark III, but then..... Is it any better?
Plus no photos.
 
The FS700 has a lot going for it, but filming 24p in 50 Hz countries isn't one of them. For those of us who travel abroad often it's not a great option.
 
The Learning Center, linked to above, also has some good White Papers on the C300, C500, and 1D-C design.


Here is the C100 entry on the Canon USA page:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100



One interesting point is that teh C100 will get a firmware update in 2013 to allow it to auto focus with the Canon STM lenses. It specificially mentions the 18-135 mm STM that ships with the T4i.

I would assune taht we will also see an expansion of those T4i features on a 5D-C or 7D-C camera.


With a future firmware upgrade and Canon's EF STM lenses (available for the EF-S 18-135mm IS STM lens in the first quarter of 2013), the EOS C100 will feature continuous autofocus. When mounted on the EOS C100, supported STM lenses will keep subjects composed in the center of the frame in continuous focus. Again, this will add a much needed feature in situations that are unpredictable and don't give the user the opportunity to focus, or the chance to try the shot again.​


As far as HDMI out: The only thing that we really know is that it is uncompressed out. I don't trust even teh best Canon reps on info that is not in written form. there is just too much detail coming out too quickly. Sometimes, someone will make an assumption because they only see one number, then that becomes gospel.

We will see over the coming days.

As documented in the Sensor White Paper, Canon is saying 12 stops DR at 815 ISO from the sensor for the C100.


They are also saying both Canon Log Gamma, and Wide DR Gamma that maintains the 12 stops, but is not Log, ready for immediate use.



Canon Wide DR Gamma​
To fully take advantage if the image captured from the camera's Super 35 sensor, Canon developed Canon Log gamma. First introduced in the EOS C300, Canon Log gamma was designed to allow users to get the most out of their Cinema EOS camera when recording footage (both internally or externally). Canon Log gamma is not a RAW recording option, but it does bring some of the benefits of RAW to colorists who want the most amount of information to work with when grading footage. When shooting with an ISO of 850 (2.5db gain) or above, users can capture image with 12 stops of latitude (6.7 stops below middle gray and 5.3 stops above).

While Canon Log gamma is ideal for workflows that include a post production stage for color grading, there are many productions that would greatly benefit from capturing the camera's full dynamic range, while generating a picture that is essentially ready to edit and output with very little to no color grading.
As a result of this need, Canon is introducing Wide DR gamma in the C100. This new Custom Picture Setting, based on the Wide DR gamma curve, is optimized for situations where no post-production processes are required. It is based on the Rec. 709 Color Space (the broadcast standard color space for HD content), but benefits from having a wide dynamic range and smooth gradation. Essentially, Wide DR gamma provides the same dynamic range as Canon Log gamma, but maintains a standard video curve. It will undoubtedly be very popular for the many types of production that this camera is ideally suited for.
 
thekreative said:
I had a thought, that this might be a good camera to go with my 5d mark III, but then..... Is it any better?
Plus no photos.
Click to expand...

XLR, ND, actual buttons not menus, better sensor, more dynamic range, more ISO options, Peaking, Zebras, better form, built in EVF, swivel LCD, Clean HDMI output with timecode, CLog etc.

Lots of reasons it is better than the 5DIII. For many broadcasters the extra manpower and time wasted synching audio will make up the cost difference right there.
 
Plus, I think Canon still has a 5D-C or 7D-C coming in teh future. A "Little Brother" to teh 1D-C, and a video-centric version of the 5D3.

That should plug the last "hole" on teh still/video side.
 
Not sure why some are bashing this camera so hard. All we've seen are specs and pictures of the camera, not from the camera. If it comes in at $5000, I might consider it for run and gun s35 work. This is what the 5d mk2/3 successor is suppose to be. If it had XF codec, I would jump on it in a heartbeat. But IF in fact it has uncompressed out at 422 (even at 8 bit) then there you go. THe ND wheel looks interesting. 800% wide dynamic range mode? OK whatever that means. I'll take 12 stops. 13 would be even better. Canon Log is nice.
Don't like it, pass on it then. I bet the camera will do just fine and if in the 5-6000$ it's what many DSLR shooters will jump too.
Barry, you say that you would just go AF100? Af100 has 10 stops range (I'm still shooting with my AF100, but I know it's image limitations in DR). If this thing comes out to 12-13 stops range it will be worth the money for that alone.
I say "good for you Canon". You are putting out some nice looking cameras that are kinda pricey, but for those that get paid to shoot it shouldn't be such a problem. Make it a tax write off in December?!
Stop bashing based on specs and wait until we see the images....
 
dustylense said:
If it comes in at $5000, I might consider it for run and gun s35 work.
Click to expand...
$5,000 is very different from the $8,000 that the press release lists. It's a whole different price class. That's the difference between an FS100 and an FS700, after all.

Barry, you say that you would just go AF100? Af100 has 10 stops range (I'm still shooting with my AF100, but I know it's image limitations in DR). If this thing comes out to 12-13 stops range it will be worth the money for that alone.
Click to expand...
Depends on how much money. $3500 vs. $8000 is a whole different planet. That's two cameras plus lenses, vs. one body alone. Now, if it's $3500 vs. $5000 then obviously there's more to consider. But it sure would have been nice if they'd just included the obvious upgrades (like 4:2:2) instead of moving sideways (you gain a larger sensor, you lose your SDI port; you gain some sharpness, you lose your frame rates, etc).

Plus, I think the EF mount is the most restrictive mount they could have chosen. If they had made it EF-M, I'd be much much more interested. Heck, at $4999 with an EF-M mount, I'd probably buy it today.

At $8,000 with EF mount and HDMI only and no variable frame rates and no 4:2:2, sorry, no thanks, I'd go FS700 for that money.
 
I just think Canon painted themselves into a corner with the C300. People like the image but at the price they want with the specs it has on paper 1080p 8bit 4:2:2, it's hard to come up with something cheaper without really crippling it.
 
Barry_Green said:
At $8,000 with EF mount and HDMI only and no variable frame rates and no 4:2:2, sorry, no thanks, I'd go FS700 for that money.
Click to expand...

Let me start with this. Exactly as I did when the C300 was announced. THe minute I went to the specs and found no 60p, I shut the page and wasn't bothered with what ever else they had to say.
This is two new cameras that I was excited to buy that I wouldn't touch.
What I don't get with Canon, and we've owned about every pro camera they've made in the last 20 years, is how they keep trotting out these new cameras with no 60p.

I mean really.

It kept us from the C300 just like it will turn us away from a pair of C100s. I'm invested in every nice piece of Canon glass I could want. I've been an advocate of their look and we're versed in their ergonomics and approach.
But they've just lost us with their lack of slo mo options. We do a lot of image spot work and sports doc and it's kind of a big deal.
Could we please have 60p like all the guests at the kids table?

The fact that nothing shy of their $30k C500 and 16K 1D-C (neither available yet) have 60p 1080 in 2012 is stunningly backwards.

It literally forces shops like ours to look at cameras like theFS100 and FS700, whose ergonomics I hate as well as the temporal thing that simply prevents me from filming with it.

Canon - please get your collective heads out of your collective behinds and offer 60p like, you know, your direct competitors do on $700 cameras.
Trust me, you'll sell a lot more of whatever you're developing to houses like ours.
 
Barry_Green said:
$5,000 is very different from the $8,000 that the press release lists. It's a whole different price class. That's the difference between an FS100 and an FS700, after all.


Depends on how much money. $3500 vs. $8000 is a whole different planet. That's two cameras plus lenses, vs. one body alone. Now, if it's $3500 vs. $5000 then obviously there's more to consider. But it sure would have been nice if they'd just included the obvious upgrades (like 4:2:2) instead of moving sideways (you gain a larger sensor, you lose your SDI port; you gain some sharpness, you lose your frame rates, etc).

Plus, I think the EF mount is the most restrictive mount they could have chosen. If they had made it EF-M, I'd be much much more interested. Heck, at $4999 with an EF-M mount, I'd probably buy it today.

At $8,000 with EF mount and HDMI only and no variable frame rates and no 4:2:2, sorry, no thanks, I'd go FS700 for that money.
Click to expand...
We have still yet to see an image. But lots of people are making early judgments. THink about just how many people bought Canon HDLSRS. They should already have the glass. I do. I have $15-18,000 worth is EOS glass. I also mount Leica R, zeiss, Nikon AIS glass to my HDSLR's. I have EOS mount Zeiss Cp.2's. If starting from scratch, lenses are gonna set you back no matter what. But with my collection, I want a camera that is ready to go without e-bay adapters. Let's just pretend this camera comes in at $5,800 and delivers 12 stops DR and the image, although avchd, simulates the C300. And lets hope Canon has a typo about 720/60 going on. Thats one awesome write off in Dec for me. I'd sell my Af100 for $1500 and not look back or think twice about it. I've made my money back 10 fold with the AF100. It's a great camera and I use it all the time. But it's still 10 stops DR and I have to be REALLY careful when shooting with my highlights.
I already like the C100 and if they get 720/60p in there its a fine package.
 
No the C300 is not painted in a corner.....it's the hottest rental item in town here and more rental houses are picking up or adding to their existing stock...and it has been gone over many times here and other blogs that "stop looking at the spec sheet and look at the screen". The consensus here among people who own the camera, have shot multiple projects with the camera, etc. is the chip is really special and the images hold up a lot better than the specs suggest.
Back to the C100, I just got off the phone with the key Canon engineering people and I can clear up 2 things.....the HDMI out is the HDMI standard 8 bit 4-2-2 color and the timecode is NOT superimposed on the screen, it's in the metadata were it should be...
AGAIN, list price means it's a price that you won't pay.....I think it's going to be at the most 7K, but probably lower.....I think....

To say the least, my phone has been ringing off the hook all morning with people wanting those questions answered and wanting to place orders. That doesn't seem to be a match with all of the people complaining about the C100 on this blog.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
 
jimagine said:
Let me start with this. Exactly as I did when the C300 was announced. THe minute I went to the specs and found no 60p, I shut the page and wasn't bothered with what ever else they had to say.
This is two new cameras that I was excited to buy that I wouldn't touch.
What I don't get with Canon, and we've owned about every pro camera they've made in the last 20 years, is how they keep trotting out these new cameras with no 60p.

I mean really.

It kept us from the C300 just like it will turn us away from a pair of C100s. I'm invested in every nice piece of Canon glass I could want. I've been an advocate of their look and we're versed in their ergonomics and approach.
But they've just lost us with their lack of slo mo options. We do a lot of image spot work and sports doc and it's kind of a big deal.
Could we please have 60p like all the guests at the kids table?

The fact that nothing shy of their $30k C500 and 16K 1D-C (neither available yet) have 60p 1080 in 2012 is stunningly backwards.

It literally forces shops like ours to look at cameras like theFS100 and FS700, whose ergonomics I hate as well as the temporal thing that simply prevents me from filming with it.

Canon - please get your collective heads out of your collective behinds and offer 60p like, you know, your direct competitors do on $700 cameras.
Trust me, you'll sell a lot more of whatever you're developing to houses like ours.
Click to expand...
The XF codec won't do 1080/60p. Just can't do it. Also, Canon is not holding a weapon to your head and making you buy anything. They just make cameras. Personally, I'm loathing the day when we see FS700 240fps slow-mo overused as a crutch for telling stories just like the full frame 1.5 inch DOF fad. You're right, it's 2012. There are a ton of cameras to choose from. I bet the C100 does just fine....
 
Jim Martin said:
No the C300 is not painted in a corner.....it's the hottest rental item in town here and more rental houses are picking up or adding to their existing stock...and it has been gone over many times here and other blogs that "stop looking at the spec sheet and look at the screen". The consensus here among people who own the camera, have shot multiple projects with the camera, etc. is the chip is really special and the images hold up a lot better than the specs suggest.
Back to the C100, I just got off the phone with the key Canon engineering people and I can clear up 2 things.....the HDMI out is the HDMI standard 8 bit 4-2-2 color and the timecode is NOT superimposed on the screen, it's in the metadata were it should be...
AGAIN, list price means it's a price that you won't pay.....I think it's going to be at the most 7K, but probably lower.....I think....

To say the least, my phone has been ringing off the hook all morning with people wanting those questions answered and wanting to place orders. That doesn't seem to be a match with all of the people complaining about the C100 on this blog.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
Click to expand...
+1 on the c300. It's hard to even rent. If you haven't shot with it, shut up. Look at the screen and not numbers in the specs.
 
Jim Martin said:
No the C300 is not painted in a corner.....it's the hottest rental item in town here and more rental houses are picking up or adding to their existing stock...and it has been gone over many times here and other blogs that "stop looking at the spec sheet and look at the screen".

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand me. I am not at all saying the C300 is a bad camera. But at it's price with the specs it has, it's hard for Canon to make a lower end camera without encroaching on the territory of the C300. Hence the 4:2:0 etc. of the C100.
 
dustylense said:
+1 on the c300. It's hard to even rent. If you haven't shot with it, shut up. Look at the screen and not numbers in the specs.
Click to expand...

I don't go only by specs, but for me, it still seems a bit over-priced. Yes the images the C100 can produce might be great, but will they be better than 12-bit RAW from the BMCC? I will say though, I'm thinking purely in cinema terms here. C100 will most likely be a bit better for events, some corp/commercial, ENG run and gun style stuff.

But for me, just wanting to add an affordable cinema camera, BMCC is a lot of bang for the buck at $3000 (bundled with DaVinci Resolve to boot). That is why something like the C100, even at $5000 seems a bit high (to me). Now, compared to the Sony EA50 I'm thinking the C100 is looking better. Although, I'm not totally sure if the EA50 is going to be closer to $3500 or higher in the $4500 range. So if EA50 is $4500 then I think Canon has the upper hand. Although, the ball is in Sony's court now, as it seems logical that an FS100 upgrade could be in the very near future.
 
dustylense said:
The XF codec won't do 1080/60p. Just can't do it. Also, Canon is not holding a weapon to your head and making you buy anything. They just make cameras. Personally, I'm loathing the day when we see FS700 240fps slow-mo overused as a crutch for telling stories just like the full frame 1.5 inch DOF fad. You're right, it's 2012. There are a ton of cameras to choose from. I bet the C100 does just fine....
Click to expand...

No offense but this is straw man stuff regarding what I said.

Of course no one is holding a gun to any one's head. But as a professional shop with 20 years into Canon cameras and glass I have every right to offer a reasonable critique of the lack of 60p when cameras with less of the image quality we're used to offer specs that most pros producing what we produce need on our multiple rigs.

I want to stay with Canon as I stated reasonably, I think. I made a rational point. People like us, who purchase multiple cameras, would like the company we have done business with for years to offer similar specs to their competitors.

Again, I would have purchased both the C300 and the upcoming C100 if they simply allowed us 60p options.

i obviously like Canon cameras and I'm heavily invested in their look and gear.
I really don't see the sense in offering two $16k cameras (the 1D-C and he C300) and still giving us no real option of a full featured cine camera with 60p 1080 that so many of us need for commercial work.
It shouldn't be an either or at this price point in this age, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top