Canon EOS C100

dcloud said:
only cine like gamma (but it is said to have 12 stops of DR?)
Click to expand...

Read a site last night saying the FS700 had 14 stops of dynamic range. Now, whether that's a full 14 of USABLE stops I'm unsure. Sounds nice though. I've read the C100 is 12 stops THROUGHOUT the ISO range from 320-20,000. If that's true....that is super impressive. From my understanding generally the native ISO is the DR sweet spot and as increase the ISO you lose more and more DR stops. The C300 has amazing low light and the C100 is supposed to as well. If you could shoot 20,000 ISO when needed and still retain 12s stops of DR, I'd have to say that's pretty amazing.
 
* you're unlikely to need more than 10 stops of DR if you actually need to shoot ISO 20,000
* from the short clips I've seen, the DR from the FS700 seems really great; no idea how it will stack up against that from the C300/C100, though
 
I think the hacked GH2 would still turn out a superior image than the C100 with these specs. This is a very strange product. Why would anyone pay more than 1k for this?
 
I can confirm that the C300 does hold on to it's full DR throughout the ISO range, and it's one of the best things about the camera's performance. The dynamic range performance alone would make me choose the C100 over a hacked GH2, and I've shot extensively with the GH2 (3 shorts, 1 pilot, and a feature on it). The price discrepancy becomes less of an issue once you factor in additional items needed to bring a DSLR up to performance and ergonmic level of the C100. Not to mention C-Log and clean uncompressed hdmi. This cam just gives stronger options, and I think it will find a welcome place in the market.
 
txdp said:
Guys, reminder that you don't have to finish in 4k for the extra rez to be extremely useful. Especially for music videos and other such creative endeavors.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree - but you still need to deal with the 4K file. This is the exact reason for the sensor you find in the C500 / C300 / C100. As stated the C300 takes a full raster 1080 RGB+G from that (not full raster 1080 in total), a full raster 1080 of Red, a full raster 1080 of Green, a full raster of 1080 Blue and another full raster 1080 of green - let's face it this is what the market was asking for in much debate over the last few years. Remember all those discussions on DSLR line skipping, the best debayer process etc from CMOS sensors? Canon's line made all those debates null and void as it doesnt need to do any of those.

I'm then assuming in the case of the 500 it will employ some kind of debayer process similar to Red.
 
Noel Evans said:
Oh I agree - but you still need to deal with the 4K file. This is the exact reason for the sensor you find in the C500 / C300 / C100. As stated the C300 takes a full raster 1080 RGB+G from that (not full raster 1080 in total), a full raster 1080 of Red, a full raster 1080 of Green, a full raster of 1080 Blue and another full raster 1080 of green - let's face it this is what the market was asking for in much debate over the last few years. Remember all those discussions on DSLR line skipping, the best debayer process etc from CMOS sensors? Canon's line made all those debates null and void as it doesnt need to do any of those.

I'm then assuming in the case of the 500 it will employ some kind of debayer process similar to Red.
Click to expand...
+1
Noel hit it on the head and made it as understandable as it can be. It's also why Canon cameras come in as a higher price than some people want to accept. It is what it is. ANd that RGB+G, can you find that in other single sensor and even 3chips anywhere? It's also why they claim that 8/bit is plenty.
Again, It is what it is and other cams don't have that is.
 
cowpunk52 said:
I can confirm that the C300 does hold on to it's full DR throughout the ISO range, and it's one of the best things about the camera's performance. The dynamic range performance alone would make me choose the C100 over a hacked GH2, and I've shot extensively with the GH2 (3 shorts, 1 pilot, and a feature on it). The price discrepancy becomes less of an issue once you factor in additional items needed to bring a DSLR up to performance and ergonmic level of the C100. Not to mention C-Log and clean uncompressed hdmi. This cam just gives stronger options, and I think it will find a welcome place in the market.
Click to expand...
+500

Stop comparing the gh2 to the applications you can do with the C300. PLEASE. Yes, the Gh2 for what it is and it's hacks is cool. But I would take a C300 over a FREE Gh2 any day and every day!
 
L1N3ARX said:
I think the hacked GH2 would still turn out a superior image than the C100 with these specs. This is a very strange product. Why would anyone pay more than 1k for this?
Click to expand...

Are you seriously comparing the GH2 to this? I would pay 5k for this..let alone 1k... Heck, even if it was 3k I'd grab it without hesitation and go up to Canon HQ and give the guys there a hug.
This GH2 fanboyism has become quite ridiculous...
 
If the C100 outdoes the GH2 it will be on the way to some success. Better or worse, the GH2 for a grand is the new baseline, and if you can't pass it (we'll see about the C100), you're in trouble.
 
L1N3ARX said:
I think the hacked GH2 would still turn out a superior image than the C100 with these specs. This is a very strange product. Why would anyone pay more than 1k for this?
Click to expand...

No way. Not in reality. lol. On paper is may seem that way to some, but no. Just no. That's not reality. The C100 will have far superior dynamic range (the biggest reason for the coveted film/movie look, IMO), far superior low light capability (while retaining DR, apparently), much reduced rolling shutter/jello, built in ND filters, Canon G-Log for a flat grading profile, Wide Dynamic range for a high dynamic range without the need to really grade much, uncompressed output capability. Even without that last one the FS100U I've read shoots at the same bitrate, yet holds up very well.

The C100 will easily beat the GH2. GH2 is nice, but nearly every time I see it I wish it had more dynamic range, plus better grading profiles. Is the Canon worth $7,000 or so more? In most cases, probably not. Especially with the BMCC on the horizon, but it has its pluses for sure. $4,000-$5,000 it could do some serious business.
 
Gh2 shouldn't be in this conversation. It has the dynamic range of a bat - sure its up there for sharpness with the hack (choose your variant) - but it simply doesn't perform in other areas as much as people want it to.
 
Noel Evans said:
Gh2 shouldn't be in this conversation. It has the dynamic range of a bat - sure its up there for sharpness with the hack (choose your variant) - but it simply doesn't perform in other areas as much as people want it to.
Click to expand...

Indeed. It also looks incredibly plastic. I mean, yeah, for 700 dollars, its great..but you really can't compare it to the big boys..there's just no comparison. Besides, in regular viewing after grading/editing/rendering/compressing, no one is going to be able to discern between 1000+ lines for the GH2 and 900+ lines for the fs100 etc. What the audience WILL notice is the better dynamic range and more organic looking video. For 700, once again, its great, but compared to the other Large chippers, the GH2 is definitely lagging very far behind.

Besides, we ALL know who to blame for creating this ridiculous perception and ideology to consumers that the GH2 is better than everything else... (here's a clue, his first name starts with an A.) And also, to a lesser extent, the horriblly misleading zacuto shootout 2012 (aka DoP shootout 2012)
 
Lets try not to veer the conversation to that place again LOL.
i would love to have a c100. It just misses some marks that the af100 has. If the price was far lower, i think it will be worth it. 4-5k
 
dcloud said:
Lets try not to veer the conversation to that place again LOL.
Click to expand...

Sounds great. sorry :) It's just that my blood starts boiling once I think of that guy...
I too think that 4-5k would be far more sensible, though. 7k seems abit much for AVCHD... ;)
 
Noel Evans said:
Gh2 shouldn't be in this conversation. It has the dynamic range of a bat - sure its up there for sharpness with the hack (choose your variant) - but it simply doesn't perform in other areas as much as people want it to.
Click to expand...
Noel, I'm gonna have to ask for you to send me a new keyboard as I just spit my beer all over it laughing at the Bat DR.
 
Guys, no way that the C100 is going to come in at $4-5k. Zero chance. The advance price in Europe went from $6300 to about $6900. That is probably more accurate, although I hope it is too much. A lot depends n how good the AVCHD image is and how much Canon wants to protect its market share in the FS100-FS700 range, and perhaps how threatening the new Sony full frame video cam body camera at half the price is. THe BMCC is amazing but it's ergonomics,moral,cost of ownership and newness may not make it much of a factor in Canon's calculations. This is a war with Sony, not Blackmagic. Panasonic has retired from this game since it put too many eggs in the 3D basket, and does not have rumored items for Photokina or IBS. This is a war with Sony, not Blackmagic.
 
Last edited:
philiplipetz said:
Guys, no way that the C100 is going to come in at $4-5k. Zero chance. The advance price in Europe went from $6300 to about $6900. That is probably more accurate, although I hope it is too much. A lot depends n how good the AVCHD image is and how much Canon wants to protect its market share in the FS100-FS700 range, and perhaps how threatening the new Sony full frame video cam body camera at half the price is. THe BMCC is amazing but it's ergonomics,moral,cost of ownership and newness may not make it much of a factor in Canon's calculations. This is a war with Sony, not Blackmagic. Panasonic has retired from this game since it put too many eggs in the 3D basket, and does not have rumored items for Photokina or IBS. This is a war with Sony, not Blackmagic.
Click to expand...

So no chance of an AF200 with a proper 1080 sensor and better DR/low light? aww.
I was hoping for panny to throw that one out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top