Canon EOS C100

joe 1008 said:
Puhhh... red through all the postings here. Obviously this camera divides. I personally am inclined towards the positive side considering the quality of the sensor (resolution, dynamic range, color reproduction). For the - maybe - too weak codec there exist available solutions. The only bigger issue for me is the lack of 720 50/60p. But I would use it only in few situations and therefore could consider the workaround of 50/60i to 50/60p. Never did it, though. But I red in various blogs that it can give satisfying results. Is that right?
Click to expand...

But that was a a real 60i camera, not one with progressive segmented frames pretending to be 60i as I suspect the C100 is, but that is a pure guess. Anyone know for sure? Jim Martin at FilmTools?
 
Jay Birch said:
That doesn't mean the C100 is overpriced, it just means there are aspects that you don't consider worth the upgrade. For me, 3 more stops of DR are worth the price alone... But that is just me.
Click to expand...

A 32GB iPhone has ~$4 higher component cost than a 16GB iPhone. Apple charges $100 more for it because they can get away with it.

A poorly designed 9-stop S35 sensor costs around the same amount to manufacture as a well designed 12-stop S35 sensor (~$50 according to Thom Hogan's guess) and XLR ports costs less than $10. Canon charges you thousands of dollars for that stuff because they can get away with it.

If you need 32GB of storage, or XLR ports, or more dynamic range, or whatever, you suck it up and spend the money. I'm not criticizing that decision.

But why are you happy about it? Get mad! Complain!

Apple has millions of slavishly devoted customers who would buy a $500 iPlunger if the salesman at Best Buy told them to. We're never going to do anything about their five-times-industry-average profit margins.

But the cine market is different. It's small enough that the manufacturers have to listen. If we get mad and tell Canon (and others), "In today's climate, it's possible to make money selling a 4K raw camera for $9k. You can no longer convince us that $8k is a fair price for highly compressed 1080p. Get real!" they might just have to.
 
Last edited:
Pure speculation.....

The sensor might only cost $50 more, but the R&D to perfect it will have cost a hell of alot more. In fact, I very much doubt the C100 would even exist if Canon didn't need to try and recoup some of the costs of the C300 R&D.

The C100 will sell in the low 1000s, comparing it to any sort of consumer product is pointless, at best.
 
Lee Saxon said:
A poorly designed 9-stop S35 sensor costs around the same amount to manufacture as a well designed 12-stop S35 sensor (~$50 according to Thom Hogan's guess) and XLR ports costs less than $10. Canon charges you thousands of dollars for that stuff because they can get away with it.
Click to expand...

sorry, but i have to disagree with that...

The sensor might only cost $50 more, but the R&D to perfect it will have cost a hell of alot more. In fact, I very much doubt the C100 would even exist if Canon didn't need to try and recoup some of the costs of the C300 R&D.
Click to expand...
exactly!

i don't know if you ever worked in a big company, where Engineering, R&D, Manufacturing and Quality Assurance were involved into Projects or Products...
Its not just the price tag of a single piece of electronics... there are several things to consider such as the mold tool in which the housing gets manufactured, also the mechanical engineers that need to develop such a housing, so many things no one thinks of, if you have never run through that huge process.

the most important part of such a device is that the user can rely on it. if it fails once a year instead of once a week (because something not well developed screwed up the whole result) - who cares about 8000$ instead of 3000$ then? its supposed to be professional, not a gadget...

Edit: no doubt that an iPhone is way overpriced, but a Smartphone doesn't pay our bills (unless you do a feature on it - lol)... a C100 does.

cheers
 
Last edited:
R&D cost of this camera is cheapest part of production price ....
4 years old electronic + s35 crop sensor of who share same tech as canon 5d3 and 1dx ...
CANON didnt break a sweat making this camera ...
reason why c300 has such high resolution because is done by pixel binning from 8mp to 2mp (and it is done in sensor) as a difference gh2 goes from 14mp to 3.5mp and than downscaling to 2mp (by camera electronic) and that addition step reduce image quality ... CANON choose perfect size and MP sensor for HD camera but that was smart move not that high tech ...
 
Last edited:
really?
what is a difference ?
sensor from 1dx can shoot full 4k in 1dc ...
same as c500 and c300 share same sensor ...
no company design few different sensors at once (to expensive and wasteful)...
same tech just size difference...
same as af100 vs gh2 ...panasonic brag about specialty design video sensor for af100..
marketing BS ...
 
Last edited:
Noel Evans said:
A good place to start would be going to the old XHA1 forum. A few of the guys used to get good results doing it.
Click to expand...

Just did a quick search on Vimeo. Found some HV20/30 stuff converted 60i to 24p. Looks quite good. It would be interesting to see a c300 60i conversion compared to original c300 60p footage. I wouldn't mind if the conversion was a bit time consuming. I don't intend to shoot a lot of 50/60p footage. But it would be nice to be able to do so.
 
I have used the interpret footage function in after effects. I would take 60i footage, interpret it to 60p, then put that on a 24p timeline. VIOLA quickest easiest way that I have found. There's also some ways to convert it in vdub. If I recall you have to use a bob field doubler, then,,, then,,,, damn I forget. But im pretty sure it's the manuel way, and close to the way after effects does it automatically. But don't take that as gospel. The issue I have is, why in gods name are we moving in reverse and have to convert footage the way we did five yrs ago. it's insane.
 
yeah i read that ..
nice colorfull charts now i know how cmos sensor works ...
:)
i like how they point better snr in green pixels (maybe because there is two times more than red or blue)...
its just generic specification for pixel binning except they slap CANON in front , nothing new here , this is how any other sensor does pixel binning ...
but i can see how some people find it fascinating ...
 
Lee Saxon said:
A 32GB iPhone has ~$4 higher component cost than a 16GB iPhone. Apple charges $100 more for it because they can get away with it.

A poorly designed 9-stop S35 sensor costs around the same amount to manufacture as a well designed 12-stop S35 sensor (~$50 according to Thom Hogan's guess) and XLR ports costs less than $10. Canon charges you thousands of dollars for that stuff because they can get away with it.

If you need 32GB of storage, or XLR ports, or more dynamic range, or whatever, you suck it up and spend the money. I'm not criticizing that decision.

But why are you happy about it? Get mad! Complain!

Apple has millions of slavishly devoted customers who would buy a $500 iPlunger if the salesman at Best Buy told them to. We're never going to do anything about their five-times-industry-average profit margins.

But the cine market is different. It's small enough that the manufacturers have to listen. If we get mad and tell Canon (and others), "In today's climate, it's possible to make money selling a 4K raw camera for $9k. You can no longer convince us that $8k is a fair price for highly compressed 1080p. Get real!" they might just have to.
Click to expand...

The market price for goods is what a willing buyer will pay a willing seller. The cost of production doesn't really have anything to do with it.

The right artist can create a million dollar painting with a few hundred dollars worth of paint and canvas. Nobody is telling them their painting isn't worth a million dollars because paint is cheap.
 
Last edited:
so if the 5d3 has the same sensor as the c100, 300, 500 - how can a 4K sensor with 4096 pixels width shoot 22,3 megapixel stills with a width of 5760 pixels, if its not a vertical panorama-sensor lol? sounds a bit insane to me...
 
same tech ...just made in different size and minor pixel difference ..
5d3 is full frame , c300 is s35 (pixel size between 1dx and 5d3)
interesting c300 has identical pixel size as 5d2 (probably made in same fab line )...
1DC use same sensor as 1dx but its crops to APS H 4k ...
5d3 does pixel binning (as CANON state no line skipping) and we can see there is no aliasing and moire...
and it should be much better hd resolution (in theory better than gh2)...
why is not?
probably CANON magic to protect more expensive camera...
 
Last edited:
stefanhuberfilms said:
hmmm... i am really confused now - can anybody tell us the truth please? lol
Click to expand...

Just look at the numbers (active pixels - 3840x2160).... It is a sensor designed for perfect 1080p downscale with accurate colours. It is a video centric sensor, built from scratch for the Cxxx line.

It is not a DSLR sensor, why vladszp is saying that, only he knows.
 
What's the point Vlad......you are being argumentative.....from day 1, it has been known the the Canon Video division developed the C300/500/100 sensor from scratch. I personally know the head of the design team that spent 2 1/2 years on the camera. He stated that the did get some input from the still division but the Cinema EOS cameras were a product from the video division....2 1/2 years! That doesn't sound like they went over to the still division and said "can you whip up a sensor for us to use". This is a VERY SPECIAL chip they came up with and the fact that they made it for the 4K camera AND put it in the C300 & now the C100 is brilliant. 3 cameras - the same chip....
on a side note, I did ask the head of the team if they were a little mad that marketing came up with the name Cinema EOS for his cameras and he said yes...a little bit, but he understood.....a bridge between the highly successful 5D DSLRs and the new Cinema division....makes total sense to me.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
 
Jay Birch said:
Just look at the numbers (active pixels - 3840x2160).... It is a sensor designed for perfect 1080p downscale with accurate colours. It is a video centric sensor, built from scratch for the Cxxx line.

It is not a DSLR sensor, why vladszp is saying that, only he knows.
Click to expand...


Exactly! This is a fantastic sensor, totally unlike any DSLR sensor used for video to date.

It is a "true color" sensor, with every color represesnted in the final image being a color truly sampled in the origianl image. Some medium format cameras could do this for still life in the past, running 4 individual "scans", one for each color, to make up the final image. Those images were much, much higher quality than regular DSLR images in the past, even as the DSLR's surpassed the pixel dimensions of the 4 color images.

Almost every DSLR now uses "interpolation" to estimate the color of a pixel using nearest neighbor techniques. This is at the pixel level, so it does not matter whether the camera uses line skipping or downsampling techniques. You are using estimated or "false" pixel information to approximate the color in the original scene.

True color imaging gives you an incredibly beautiful image that will blow away any interpolated image at the same size, regardless of bit size, etc. (There are no extra "bits" required to carry the same color information. But it is accurate color.)

I don't know why there is so much garbage chatter in this thread. It is definitely a hallmark of the amateur to chatter on about something they really don't know much about. That is not how a regular CMOS sensor works!
 
any sensor who makes decent (no moire , line skipping) video is video centric sensor (gh2 , 5d3 , c300) etc ...
3840x2160 perfect number of pixels for 2x2 pixel binning to get 1080p ...
do you think that they make 1dc sensor from scratch or it is 1dx ?
accurate colors? has same color look as other canons...
image from c300 has look identical to 1dc except resolution ...
there is nothing special about that sensor ....
canon could make 5d3 image perfect if they want...
but then who would pay 15000$ for c300...
BMC show as what can you do for little money ....
but they don't try to milk market...
@undog
nope gh2 does same as c300 no interpolation...
or Olympus omd it has resolution as c300 but bad codec ...
no voodoo magic here fiolks ...
https://vimeo.com/41044945
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top