C300: Looking for advice C100 mrkII, C300 mrkI, C500!..?

M

Marco Beyermann

New member
Hi guys,


I am thinking on invest in equipment soon and had a few cameras on mind but not too sure of what is the best option (my budget is 3k-4k)I' ve been filming the last two years with sony a7s and a7sII and can say that I enjoyed them but I got a bit sick of them already cause all the plus you have to add to make it a proper video camera (rig,monitor, million of batteries ha...). I have always been keen on the C300 but never had the budget for it. I can see that second hand prices are really low but the question is, is it worth it to get a C300 mrk I this days? I thought that maybe it would be a better idea to invest in a new c100 mark II but it just seems to overpriced. I believe the C 300 offers a better internal codec than the C100 mark II but just saw an offer of the C100 that includes Atomos ninja Blade for 3k... Is it a good Idea to buy the C300 with no external recorder? I have an Atomos shogun 4k which I used with the a7s but is not really suitable for these cameras since they don't record in 4k.

I just read some recent post about the C500, apparently the price dropped down making them really affordable but I think they are hard to find and probably still out of my budget. What I like of this gear is that it gives you the possibility of recording in 4K via SDI and 120fps (which I will miss from the a7sII).

I am not too obsessed about the 4k anyway since I never really needed for my clients, I just like to have the output option. I am more keen in a good camcorder that can offer a good 1080p signal and that will still standing out for the next 2 yrs.

I would really apreciate your advices and knowledge

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Ok...so basically the same as me. A C100 mkII would be probably the best purchase. I still have my C100 mkI and still loving it (My clients don't need or ask for 4K.). Only thing I don't like about it is lack of 60p and bad EVF. I have a Ninja Blade for when I need a more robust codec but I end up using it a lot anyway has a second monitor to better judge focus and exposure.
 
IMHO, owning both, the C300 doesn't really buy you much in features over the C100 MKII (although I have a C100 MKI, but have shot with the MKII a lot). C300 doesn't even have 1080 60p, only 720 60p, the screen and EVF on the C100 MKII are better. The C300 does give you name recognition with some corporate clients though and it has TC i/o, which your sound mixer will love, if you work with professional sound mixers. The in-camera 50Mbps codec on the C300 is stronger but like Doug, I strongly suggest a Ninja Blade with the C100 MKII, it will give you a 4:2:2 10-bit Prores HQ option at 220 Mbps, which blows away the internal Mpeg codec on the C300. C100 is also nice small and light while till giving you the XLRs, TC, built in NDs that you crave. Frankly, trying to do professional work with the DSLR/Mirrorless form factor SUCKS! Nothing like having a video camera for video camera work. Not saying the images from DSLRs/Mirrorless are bad, they are amazingly good but day to day working with them is a PITA for a video professional as you have experienced.

If you don't care about 4K, I would buy the C100 MKII or even a MKI if you want to save some money, add a Ninja Blade, which are now dirt cheap, I've seen new ones for $395.00. I just shot a ton of companion pieces for an animated film that I cannot name and in looking at the interviews I shot, the images from the C100 are amazing with little to no color correction, shot WDR into Prores HQ and just a tweak of contrast and saturation and they look REALLY, really good. Shot a piece with green screen, talent looks amazing in them, the keys are beautiful, shot a dance piece, worked great. The C100 continues to impress. I just bought the C200 and have been shooting with it and have been also shooting a lot with the C300 MKII rentals and to be honest, I miss the small size and light weight of the C100. The C200 and 300 MKII are more capable but are bigger, heavier, clunkier to use, the C100 is just effortless to shoot with in comparison.
 
Last edited:
Marco Beyermann said:
Hi guys,


I am thinking on invest in equipment soon and had a few cameras on mind but not too sure of what is the best option (my budget is 3k-4k)I' ve been filming the last two years with sony a7s and a7sII and can say that I enjoyed them but I got a bit sick of them already cause all the plus you have to add to make it a proper video camera (rig,monitor, million of batteries ha...). I have always been keen on the C300 but never had the budget for it. I can see that second hand prices are really low but the question is, is it worth it to get a C300 mrk I this days? I thought that maybe it would be a better idea to invest in a new c100 mark II but it just seems to overpriced. I believe the C 300 offers a better internal codec than the C100 mark II but just saw an offer of the C100 that includes Atomos ninja Blade for 3k... Is it a good Idea to buy the C300 with no external recorder? I have an Atomos shogun 4k which I used with the a7s but is not really suitable for these cameras since they don't record in 4k.

I just read some recent post about the C500, apparently the price dropped down making them really affordable but I think they are hard to find and probably still out of my budget. What I like of this gear is that it gives you the possibility of recording in 4K via SDI and 120fps (which I will miss from the a7sII).

I am not too obsessed about the 4k anyway since I never really needed for my clients, I just like to have the output option. I am more keen in a good camcorder that can offer a good 1080p signal and that will still standing out for the next 2 yrs.

I would really apreciate your advices and knowledge

Thanks!
Click to expand...

If you are going to go with a C500 then it really is only useful with an external recorder otherwise the C300 MKI is a much better option, both are 8bit internally though so, if you want to invest wisely, then something like an FS5 with atomos recorder will give you everything you need for the next few years at that sort of price but if you can push for a C200 then you get the 4K 60p 8bit anyway as well as the raw if you have any special projects.

I'm not sure its good to invest in 8bit HD right now but I guess the C500 has a great image with external recorder, it's just those noisy fan problems that might be a bit risky for corporate interviews etc.

The C200, C300 MKII or Sony FS5/FS7 would be the ideal cameras for most corporate/doc/event projects
 
Doug_EX said:
Ok...so basically the same as me. A C100 mkII would be probably the best purchase. I still have my C100 mkI and still loving it (My clients don't need or ask for 4K.). Only thing I don't like about it is lack of 60p and bad EVF. I have a Ninja Blade for when I need a more robust codec but I end up using it a lot anyway has a second monitor to better judge focus and exposure.
Click to expand...

But the C100 mark II does 1080 60p, doesn't it?

Thanks!
 
puredrifting said:
IMHO, owning both, the C300 doesn't really buy you much in features over the C100 MKII (although I have a C100 MKI, but have shot with the MKII a lot). C300 doesn't even have 1080 60p, only 720 60p, the screen and EVF on the C100 MKII are better. The C300 does give you name recognition with some corporate clients though and it has TC i/o, which your sound mixer will love, if you work with professional sound mxiers. The in-camera 50Mbps codec on the C300 is stronger but like Doug, I strongly suggest a Ninja Blade with the C100 MKII, it will give you a 4:2:2 10-bit Prores HQ option at 220 Mbps, which blows away the internal Mpeg codec on the C300. C100 is also nice small and light while till giving you the XLRs, TC, built in NDs that you crave. Frankly, trying to do professional work with the DSLR/Mirrorless form factor SUCKS! Nothing like having a video camera for video camera work. Not saying the images from DSLRs/Mirrorless are bad, they are amazingly good but day to day working with them is a PITA for a video professional as you have experienced.

If you don't care about 4K, I would buy the C100 MKII or even a MKI if you want to save some money, add a Ninja Blade, which are now dirt cheap, I've seen new ones for $395.00. I just shot a ton of companion pieces for an animated film that I cannot name and in looking at the interviews I shot, the images from the C100 are amazing with little to no color correction, shot WDR into Prores HQ and just a tweak of contrast and saturation and they look REALLY, really good. Shot a piece with green screen, talent looks amazing in them, the keys are beautiful, shot a dance piece, worked great. The C100 continues to impress. I just bought the C200 and have been shooting with it and have been also shooting a lot with the C300 MKII rentals and to be honest, I miss the small size and light weight of the C100. The C200 and 300 MKII are more capable but are bigger, heavier, clunkier to use, the C100 is just effortless to shoot with in comparison.
Click to expand...


Yeah, the fact that the c300 can't record in 1080 60p really puts me off, will an Atomos or Odissey change anything?. I can see the C100 Mark II as a better option already but also agree that the C300 has name recognition, I just had a client last week asking me for the 300 ha. I guess a good option is renting if there is a job that requires the camera.

Thanks!
 
Marco Beyermann said:
But the C100 mark II does 1080 60p, doesn't it?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
Yes. The C100MII made up for all the shortcomings of the MI and even added 1080p60 many where missing on the C300.
BUT the C200 is what the C100MII should have been already: Easy (low bitrate) 4K.
So at this point I wouldn't invest in a new C100MII or only if it came dirt cheap from someone upgrading to the C200 right now.
This is from a business point of view, the image is still great for your application, but over the next months the C100s will drop in value considerably,
because they are HD only.
This means patience might land you a great deal on the C100MII, I guess around/after Xmas will be a good time to buy
used.

EDIT: Didn't type fast enough I guess :)
 
cane141 said:
If you are going to go with a C500 then it really is only useful with an external recorder otherwise the C300 MKI is a much better option, both are 8bit internally though so, if you want to invest wisely, then something like an FS5 with atomos recorder will give you everything you need for the next few years at that sort of price but if you can push for a C200 then you get the 4K 60p 8bit anyway as well as the raw if you have any special projects.

I'm not sure its good to invest in 8bit HD right now but I guess the C500 has a great image with external recorder, it's just those noisy fan problems that might be a bit risky for corporate interviews etc.

The C200, C300 MKII or Sony FS5/FS7 would be the ideal cameras for most corporate/doc/event projects
Click to expand...

I thought about the FS5 just cause the possibility of the 4k and the 120p but... i just love the canon C look, I know is such a cliche to say. I have the Atomos Shogun so that would be helpful for the fs5 though.
 
Marco Beyermann said:
I thought about the FS5 just cause the possibility of the 4k and the 120p but... i just love the canon C look, I know is such a cliche to say. I have the Atomos Shogun so that would be helpful for the fs5 though.
Click to expand...


You can get a great look out of the Sony nowadays with EOSHD and other camera profiles out there but I just can't get past the fact that if you like Canon ergonomics then the C200 would really give a lot of bang for the buck in the long term, the Canon raw workflow will eventually get integrated into most editing softwares and you still have the option transcode that raw 12 bit data to a prores HQ as well as having the 4K 8bit internal and 120fps at HD

Saying that, the FS5 + Atomos is cheaper I guess...
 
puredrifting said:
I strongly suggest a Ninja Blade with the C100 MKII, it will give you a 4:2:2 10-bit Prores HQ option at 220 Mbps, which blows away the internal Mpeg codec on the C300.
Click to expand...

Really? I know spec-wise on paper it sounds way more robust & I guess it's been like 4-5 years since I tested an external recorder with my original C100mk1, but I remember my takeaway being that I literally couldn't tell a difference between the Prores & internal recordings. Recently when I did a test comparing internal C100mk2 to internal C500 (same as C300mk1) the internal C500 blew it away with how much sharper the image was.

If this is true, it might be worth picking up a Ninja Blade to give new life to my C100mk2, but I'd need to see some side by side comparisons that are drastically different than what I've seen.
 
Last edited:
I've never noticed a worthwhile difference in comparison video I've seen online.

I bought a Blackmagic Hyperdeck Shuttle to use as an HDMI to SDI converter, and never ended up using it as a recorder (though the bundle I bought came with hard drives). I later sold it. Then a few months ago I bought the Ninja Atomos Star since it was a Deal of the Day at B&H, and haven't used it once. Figured it would be good to have if I ever need ProRes straight from the camera for delivery, which hasn't happened yet.

I find external recorders are a big risk and something to be highly avoided for anything other than backup. Dan mentioned his external recorder recording the magnify on the C200. I was doing a C300 Mark II shoot once where the producer/shooter put his Atomos on the C300 Mark II and after the shoot realized the recorder was recording the peaking signal from the C300 Mark II, so the footage to the external recorder was useless. Too many things can go wrong with an external recorder to rely on it.

Of course you often have the in-camera backups if you're counting on the external as your A-copy, but then you still have to explain to the client if the A-copy goes bad (which is fairly likely) why they are now going to get an inferior copy of the footage, and having to figure out if you have to dock your rate (and reputation) since you are no longer delivering what they ordered if you promised them say, 4:2:2 from a C100.
 
You have to make sure the camera is not sending anything through the HDMI or the recorder will record everything. All of that output/overlay info has to be off.

Some cameras will benefit from recorders more than others like the C500, FS5, LS300...ones that unlock hardware potential not available via internal recording.

But many will be hard-pressed to see a difference with other cameras like the C100 and probably only want the PR for post.
 
cane141 said:
You can get a great look out of the Sony nowadays with EOSHD and other camera profiles out there but I just can't get past the fact that if you like Canon ergonomics then the C200 would really give a lot of bang for the buck in the long term, the Canon raw workflow will eventually get integrated into most editing softwares and you still have the option transcode that raw 12 bit data to a prores HQ as well as having the 4K 8bit internal and 120fps at HD

Saying that, the FS5 + Atomos is cheaper I guess...
Click to expand...
C200 sounds like my ideal camera so far but slightly out of my budget atm but I can always wait and save more I guess. FS5 sounds pretty good but I think I'm becoming an enemy of Lenses adapters, most of my lenses are Canon. A friend of mine just recommended to me to have a look at Black Magic. The Mini URSA seems to offer similar features as a7s II or FS5, however, I don't like the ergonomic of the camera and perhaps, this camera is more oriented to commercials. Why are they so cheap though ?!
 
Last edited:
chris f said:
Really? I know spec-wise on paper it sounds way more robust & I guess it's been like 4-5 years since I tested an external recorder with my original C100mk1, but I remember my takeaway being that I literally couldn't tell a difference between the Prores & internal recordings. Recently when I did a test comparing internal C100mk2 to internal C500 (same as C300mk1) the internal C500 blew it away with how much sharper the image was.

If this is true, it might be worth picking up a Ninja Blade to give new life to my C100mk2, but I'd need to see some side by side comparisons that are drastically different than what I've seen.
Click to expand...

After three years of shooting it, the differences are subtle but there. For the average shot, I agree, hard to tell a difference. Recently I shot a lot of material off of moving boats of other boats racing on the ocean and being on the ocean with everything in frame in motion all of the time, it can break the AVCHD codec pretty easily. The Prores HQ holds together better. And I shoot a ton of greenscreen, the Prores can be pushed in composites a lot more. You are recording 220 Mbps versus 24 Mbps, there are subtle differences, especially in wide shots with a lot of foliage moving in the wind. The AVCHD codec is easy to break, if you know how to.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
I've never noticed a worthwhile difference in comparison video I've seen online.

I bought a Blackmagic Hyperdeck Shuttle to use as an HDMI to SDI converter, and never ended up using it as a recorder (though the bundle I bought came with hard drives). I later sold it. Then a few months ago I bought the Ninja Atomos Star since it was a Deal of the Day at B&H, and haven't used it once. Figured it would be good to have if I ever need ProRes straight from the camera for delivery, which hasn't happened yet.

I find external recorders are a big risk and something to be highly avoided for anything other than backup. Dan mentioned his external recorder recording the magnify on the C200. I was doing a C300 Mark II shoot once where the producer/shooter put his Atomos on the C300 Mark II and after the shoot realized the recorder was recording the peaking signal from the C300 Mark II, so the footage to the external recorder was useless. Too many things can go wrong with an external recorder to rely on it.

Of course you often have the in-camera backups if you're counting on the external as your A-copy, but then you still have to explain to the client if the A-copy goes bad (which is fairly likely) why they are now going to get an inferior copy of the footage, and having to figure out if you have to dock your rate (and reputation) since you are no longer delivering what they ordered if you promised them say, 4:2:2 from a C100.
Click to expand...

True, there are more things to go wrong with an external recorder, as I have experienced.
 
NorBro said:
You have to make sure the camera is not sending anything through the HDMI or the recorder will record everything. All of that output/overlay info has to be off.

Some cameras will benefit from recorders more than others like the C500, FS5, LS300...ones that unlock hardware potential not available via internal recording.

But many will be hard-pressed to see a difference with other cameras like the C100 and probably only want the PR for post.
Click to expand...

Yes, for greenscreen, a noticeably superior result in pulling clean edges on keys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top