C100: Extreme Lens Frustrations

[BeeHop]

Careful what you wish for.

Someone mentioned that the grass is greener.

What they didn't say is that the turds are bigger.

The FS7 is an utterly different beast to the Canon C. If I was to sum it up, I'd say it can produce lovely results - but it's almost entirely contingent on your abilities with Davinci Resolve. I sometimes miss the ready-out-of-the-box-ness of Caonon WDR.

Also, re the 18-105. It's a significant compromise. Both Sony and Canon have got this wrong so far.

Haha awesome glad u understand. I will be sticking with both my C100 & 300 for now, I love the Wide DR its too good to be true. Im not a fan of Log as being 8bit even to ProRes HQ when we push it in Resolve we are not too happy. Ill work within the Canon lens limitations for now, I was just venting my Lens frustration.

But i do love the form factor of the FS7 its terrific, tho not at all impressed with their 28-135 lens. Why on earth make a lens thats suppose to be their general purpose 28mm on the wide?

God i sound like a big fat complainer :happy:

 

[coutard]

Haha awesome glad u understand. I will be sticking with both my C100 & 300 for now, I love the Wide DR its too good to be true. Im not a fan of Log as being 8bit even to ProRes HQ when we push it in Resolve we are not too happy. Ill work within the Canon lens limitations for now, I was just venting my Lens frustration.

But i do love the form factor of the FS7 its terrific, tho not at all impressed with their 28-135 lens. Why on earth make a lens thats suppose to be their general purpose 28mm on the wide?

God i sound like a big fat complainer :happy:

correctly exposed, I find clog to have a really nice margin to work with in grading. But the slightest error while exposing can really reduce it.

 

[Jim Martin]

With 3 1/2 years of selling the C300 (and then the C100 & c500), the 3 lenses everyone bought were the 16-35, 24-70, and the 70-200mm...... as for the wide, the 16-35 does have distortion on the wide so people started using the 14mm EF lens....and for those who could afford it, the 14mm Cine prime.....then 2 years ago, the reality/run-n-gun guys discovered the 24-105mm and, it being a tad slow, the F4 only helped the cause in terms of focus and getting a bigger DOF. The Rokinon 14mm was also used as an economy option.
We have asked Canon for a affordable CineServo but, I have a question for all of you:
What is a price you'd pay for an affordable CineServo with a decent range and F stop? $2000, $3000, more? ...and I 'm saying $2000 and up because realistically, it can't be made with any quality or accuracy under that price knowing how lenses are priced and what you get for said price.....

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

 

[cpreston]

What is a price you'd pay for an affordable CineServo with a decent range and F stop? $2000, $3000, more? ...and I 'm saying $2000 and up because realistically, it can't be made with any quality or accuracy under that price knowing how lenses are priced and what you get for said price.....

Did you forget a zero in that price quote? In all seriousness, I had come to assume that the type of lens you are describing would cost at least $20,000.

 

[BeeHop]

With 3 1/2 years of selling the C300 (and then the C100 & c500), the 3 lenses everyone bought were the 16-35, 24-70, and the 70-200mm...... as for the wide, the 16-35 does have distortion on the wide so people started using the 14mm EF lens....and for those who could afford it, the 14mm Cine prime.....then 2 years ago, the reality/run-n-gun guys discovered the 24-105mm and, it being a tad slow, the F4 only helped the cause in terms of focus and getting a bigger DOF. The Rokinon 14mm was also used as an economy option.
We have asked Canon for a affordable CineServo but, I have a question for all of you:
What is a price you'd pay for an affordable CineServo with a decent range and F stop? $2000, $3000, more? ...and I 'm saying $2000 and up because realistically, it can't be made with any quality or accuracy under that price knowing how lenses are priced and what you get for said price.....

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

Why don't Canon spend the same amount of time designing and building a general purpose lens that compliments the C100/300 and bundle it with the body. The 24-105 is old, and they try to bundle it with these brand spanking new EOS cams.

I was over at the FS7 forums here and seems they are really struggling with the quality of Sony's 18-105 as well also not happy with the wideness of the 28-135.

Yep $2,500 for a 20-90 f4 or 18-85mm f4 both L series without horrible barrel distortion/vignetting and with constant apertures can't be too hard.
Get it together Canon !!!