C100: How much does a used C100 go for these days?

[alaskacameradude]

Canon is not going to give all their specs to Nikon either. They're really under no obligation to do it, and I can't blame them. Unfortunately the result is that sometimes things like this happen with third party products. I hate to say it, but the Canon tech was right if the camera was performing correctly with the canon glass. Canon isn't obligated to make their cameras work with anyone else's gear.

Yup, it's surely their call. On the other hand, it's a customers call to publicize stories
like this one. Not a good way to win customers in my opinion. I much prefer Sony's
approach of making Emount open to third party lens makers. They even included a
Metabones adapter (for using Canon lenses) with the purchase of a FS700 for
awhile.

 

[dustylense]

There hasn't been a lens with an Eos mount be it Canon, Sigma, Tamron, etc that has not worked on my C100. Every single one talks to my camera. Blackmagic with it's Eos mount on the other hand is like playing craps in vegas.

 

[scorsesefan]

There hasn't been a lens with an Eos mount be it Canon, Sigma, Tamron, etc that has not worked on my C100. Every single one talks to my camera. Blackmagic with it's Eos mount on the other hand is like playing craps in vegas.

Yes, and that was my point to Canon. These lenses almost universally work with C100s, so why would my friend's be different?... And thanks for that info "alaska". To me Sony's approach recognizes the reality that people out there are using third party lenses... BTW to Blackmagic's credit they did put out firmware patches to fix lens compatibility issues with their BMCC EF (however I have heard that the 4K is now having some of the same problems).

 

[indiawilds]

I don't think that Canon should be responsable for this. Tamron should test the lens with the camera, not the other way around.

I understand your anger. Several years back I had a similar problem with a sigma lens and a canon film camera (still). At that time there was no Canon service center in India, so sent the lens and camera to Singapore. Canon tested the camera and said that the camera is right. Then gave the lens to Canon and then they said that the software of the lens is not matching with the software of the camera. So I sent the lens to Sigma singapore and they in turn sent the lens to Sigma Japan and couple of months later I got the lens with updated firmware. I promptly sold the lens and realised that it is always better to use original canon glass.

You have to send your lens to tamron and tell them to update the firmware. No point in blaming Canon as that is not their problem.

 

[scorsesefan]

I understand your anger. Several years back I had a similar problem with a sigma lens and a canon film camera (still). At that time there was no Canon service center in India, so sent the lens and camera to Singapore. Canon tested the camera and said that the camera is right. Then gave the lens to Canon and then they said that the software of the lens is not matching with the software of the camera. So I sent the lens to Sigma singapore and they in turn sent the lens to Sigma Japan and couple of months later I got the lens with updated firmware. I promptly sold the lens and realised that it is always better to use original canon glass.

You have to send your lens to tamron and tell them to update the firmware. No point in blaming Canon as that is not their problem.

Thanks for the tip, but any ideas why the same lens would work flawlessly (on the Canon and the BMCC) and then suddenly not work on the Canon while continuing to work on the Blackmagic?

 

[indiawilds]

Thanks for the tip, but any ideas why the same lens would work flawlessly (on the Canon and the BMCC) and then suddenly not work on the Canon while continuing to work on the Blackmagic?

Fair question.

I am not trying to defend Canon. I am responding based on my knowledge of having faced a similar situation as well as my prior experience of working in electronic manufacturing (Nokia) and heading an information technology industry association before moving into filming full time. The version of the lens has a software which needs to communicate with the firmware in the camera body. It doesn't matter which brand of camera it is. All it matters is whether the version of the firmware in the camera is compatible with the lens or not. Camera companies keep on improving their firmwares. Most of the times an older lens will have a problem with a new camera body. If you check with the older cameras like the 5D IIs, the same sample of the lens may work well.

At times one thinks that a lens works with a camera, but after some use one can discover that the working is not fool proof and is erratic at best. If you send it to the lens company and get it updated then it would work well.

If you find one lens working with the same body and another piece of the same brand and same lens not working, then you may find that the two lenses would have been manufactured at two different times and not close to each other and having two different versions.

As consumers, all we can do is accidental sampling ie. pick a lens sample from here and there and a few cameras and the information that we find is not statistically significant to make a conclusion. We also ask in forums and get annoyed when we hear that someone else's lens works well. However, it is difficult for an individual to actually find out that there may be a different version within those lenses. It is natural that the consumer gets annoyed.

To be sure that a particular lens doesn't work in the C100 cameras, one needs to do a systematic test with a greater sample size. Manufacturers have a protocol which ensures that testing is done with a statistically significant sample size. Only then one can say that it works or not.

I am not sure how much electronic information the BMC camera takes from the lens. Pardon my ignorance but is the BMC not a dumb mount? If so, your lens should work well with that camera. The C100 would seek all kinds of info from the lens (stabilisation, one shot focus, peripheral illumination correction etc) as opposed to the BMC.

Still photographers often resort to taping of pins. For ex when a still camera doesn't autofocus at f8, people use a f5.6 lens plus 1.4x TC and tape the pins so that there is improper communication and get some auto focus. It is erratic at best, but nevertheless people try it. I am wondering if that trick will work with your lens.

I am not sure if my answer will satisfy you. However, given the situation in the electronic industry, this is bound to happen all the time. Companies who own the mount, like Canon and Nikon can't and won't share all the details. Third party manufacturers will create a lens to the best of their understanding. With so much of coding involved, it invariably becomes a hit and miss for the third party guys. So I understand people going with third party lenses due to cost, however the reality is that for paying projects as well as for critical projects one has to be a bit cautious. If you still want to use a third party lens or any major lens for that matter, have a back up.

 

[scorsesefan]

Fair question.

I am not trying to defend Canon. I am responding based on my knowledge of having faced a similar situation as well as my prior experience of working in electronic manufacturing (Nokia) and heading an information technology industry association before moving into filming full time. The version of the lens has a software which needs to communicate with the firmware in the camera body. It doesn't matter which brand of camera it is. All it matters is whether the version of the firmware in the camera is compatible with the lens or not. Camera companies keep on improving their firmwares. Most of the times an older lens will have a problem with a new camera body. If you check with the older cameras like the 5D IIs, the same sample of the lens may work well.

At times one thinks that a lens works with a camera, but after some use one can discover that the working is not fool proof and is erratic at best. If you send it to the lens company and get it updated then it would work well.

If you find one lens working with the same body and another piece of the same brand and same lens not working, then you may find that the two lenses would have been manufactured at two different times and not close to each other and having two different versions.

As consumers, all we can do is accidental sampling ie. pick a lens sample from here and there and a few cameras and the information that we find is not statistically significant to make a conclusion. We also ask in forums and get annoyed when we hear that someone else's lens works well. However, it is difficult for an individual to actually find out that there may be a different version within those lenses. It is natural that the consumer gets annoyed.

To be sure that a particular lens doesn't work in the C100 cameras, one needs to do a systematic test with a greater sample size. Manufacturers have a protocol which ensures that testing is done with a statistically significant sample size. Only then one can say that it works or not.

I am not sure how much electronic information the BMC camera takes from the lens. Pardon my ignorance but is the BMC not a dumb mount? If so, your lens should work well with that camera. The C100 would seek all kinds of info from the lens (stabilisation, one shot focus, peripheral illumination correction etc) as opposed to the BMC.

Still photographers often resort to taping of pins. For ex when a still camera doesn't autofocus at f8, people use a f5.6 lens plus 1.4x TC and tape the pins so that there is improper communication and get some auto focus. It is erratic at best, but nevertheless people try it. I am wondering if that trick will work with your lens.

I am not sure if my answer will satisfy you. However, given the situation in the electronic industry, this is bound to happen all the time. Companies who own the mount, like Canon and Nikon can't and won't share all the details. Third party manufacturers will create a lens to the best of their understanding. With so much of coding involved, it invariably becomes a hit and miss for the third party guys. So I understand people going with third party lenses due to cost, however the reality is that for paying projects as well as for critical projects one has to be a bit cautious. If you still want to use a third party lens or any major lens for that matter, have a back up.

Thanks for that info. Very useful, especially coming from someone with a background in technology. I can appreciate the complexities of the interaction of a camera body and lens but my main issue with Canon was the dismissive manner and the poor communication they showed in this instance. If they offered an explanation such as you have that may have been some consolation. Instead we were faced with an inarticulate and clearly poorly trained go-between who's only answer to our questions was to parrot the answer "Too bad, it's not our lens so it's not our problem." I have not worked in tech but I have worked for many years in customer service and one gets the sense that this type of customer service is the new norm at many companies. You shouldn't have to argue and persuade for an hour (after 3 phone calls and 2 trips) to get a company to take in a $5500 lens that is under warranty for service.

I would equate it to going to a doctor with bad bedside manner. You have a cough. You don't know exactly what is causing it. You visit a doctor and he/she does a cursory exam and barely pretends to listen to a thing you're saying as you describe your problem. He says "it's viral, nothing can be done" and sends you on your way way. Maybe you go to another doctor who listens/carefully examines you and he/she has a different (correct) diagnosis. Maybe the same diagnosis. In either case the first doctor will most likely not get my business because as we know human interaction is not JUST about being wrong or right. It's also about paying for a product/service and being listened to.

Canon should have accepted the camera right away for service as was my friend's right under warranty. All we were asking them to do was to eliminate the possibility of a problem with the mount, the contacts, etc. Something that would not be visible by eye or by slapping a Canon lens on.

BTW my Blackmagic EF is an active mount and my friend did call Tamron and they claim there is no new firmware for the lenses.

 

[Pave1]

...If they offered an explanation such as you have that may have been some consolation. Instead we were faced with an inarticulate and clearly poorly trained go-between who's only answer to our questions was to parrot the answer "Too bad, it's not our lens so it's not our problem."...

...BTW my Blackmagic EF is an active mount and my friend did call Tamron and they claim there is no new firmware for the lenses.

If you want to hear that it is a wrong way of customer service from Canon then you are absolutely right, it is a really wrong way.
I have a better experiences with Canon service but it can be a local case. You need a good communication
of workers in the customer service, I understand you.

It can be better to leave the canon products, if you hate their customer service, it is better than be nervous for long time.
I know this feeling in case my old bank. Leave them!

 

[jameshealey]

Canon needs to accept that the reality is that not everyone can afford or wants to use Canon glass. In fact many owners use "off brands", even on this forum. Blackmagic initially dismissed complaints about the Tokina 11-16 and other lenses not reaching infinity focus on their BMCC EF mount and after an onslaught of complaints recalled the units and shimmed the mounts. Also, would Canon's logic also extend to a lens like Zeiss compact prime? Well, they're around $5000 -- what if they didn't work on the cinema series cameras?... Beyond any of this is the disinterested and generally dismissive attitude Canon displayed towards my friend... BTW Canon did test one of the Tamron lenses on another C100 and it controlled aperture.

Unfortunately, Canon does not need to accept anything when it comes to other manufacturers lenses or third party gear. If you want to buy their product, they garantee that the camera will work with their Canon lenses and that's the extend of their obligations. Black Magic on the other hand, does not make their own lenses to match the camera body, so problems with mounts being not properly calibrated is more common.

As for the way the customer service person handled it, maybe it could have been done better but your friend trying to impose on Canon that their product was defectuous when he is mounting a third party lens is also not the right way of handling things. Not trying to defend Canon here but it seems your friend is demanding Canon fix something that is not their fault....

Just playing devil's advocate.