Canon EOS C100

joe 1008 said:
I'm quite sur that Noel would agree with you about the limitations of 8 bit processing. He refers in his post to the smarter implementation of an 8 bit codec by Canon by the higher allocation of information to critical tonal areas. As here was stated from various people who did work with the C300 that trick really seems to work.

Referring to the C100 I deeply hope that trick will work with its AVCHD 4:2:0 codec, too. Not to mention the HDMI-out.
Click to expand...

Yes I understand, there is no doubt that the 8bit output is very nice at this camera. I would like to see the same viewfinder on both cameras. The C100 can differ rather in something other than in EVF. The 10bit output versus the 8bit output could be a nice option at this price level and makes more sense for me than a worse EVF on the C100 (with AVCHD 420 codec for the internal record). I can only hope that LCD on the C100 will be ok.
 
philiplipetz said:
Sony crippled the output from the FS100 so that it does not compare to output for the F3 with whom it shares a sensor, will Canon make the same mistake? This is the ccritical Unanswered issue.
.
Click to expand...

If you ask me, F3 aswell as FS100 both look like digital cameras with a large sensor.

The Canon C-series cameras produces images that look like digital film.
 
camarade said:
If you ask me, F3 aswell as FS100 both look like digital cameras with a large sensor.

The Canon C-series cameras produces images that look like digital film.
Click to expand...

Yes. That's something that people tend to forget when comparing the C series to other brands. It's the image that is worth the extra $$$.
 
I'm hoping that the Black Magic camera breaks the hegemony that keeps the prices for these cameras so high. I wonder what the profit multiple is? I would think new R&D costs are fairly low at this point in the digital imaging life cycle.
 
artsygirl said:
I'm hoping that the Black Magic camera breaks the hegemony that keeps the prices for these cameras so high. I wonder what the profit multiple is? I would think new R&D costs are fairly low at this point in the digital imaging life cycle.
Click to expand...
+1
 
In a years time my guess is the Blackmagic camera will be a bit more expensive but also free of most child-deceases and then I'll buy into that. I also agree that the EOS line looks less video than Sony cameras.
 
artsygirl said:
I wonder what the profit multiple is? I would think new R&D costs are fairly low at this point in the digital imaging life cycle.
Click to expand...

For the Canon? It is a totally new sensor, so that is not a minor investment. Hopefully there will be many similar sensors in the future - no color interpolation, etc.

It will be an excellent value used in a year or two for those of us that can't justify that much investment in video-only tools right now (shooting a lot of stills also.) Or once the Yen weakens, as other world economies stabilioze.
 
camarade said:
If you ask me, F3 aswell as FS100 both look like digital cameras with a large sensor.

The Canon C-series cameras produces images that look like digital film.
Click to expand...


My friend shoots his projects with both the C300 and FS700. He prefers the look of the FS700. To each his own.

I really want this, umm...rig.

C100target_model_zen4.jpg
 
Last edited:
vanvideo said:
My friend shoots his projects with both the C300 and FS700. He prefers the look of the FS700. To each his own.
Click to expand...

The FS700 is more neutral. It looks more "true to life". It doesn't have a look as the C300 and the Canon DSLR's have. That look is actually pretty awesome too but it's just different styles. FS700 users need to learn to grade to get the style they want. I always find it funny when someone says they look like video. Real life happens to not look gloriously glamorous.

FS700 is a great cam, ergonomics and avchd not-withstanding.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top