New Camera Choice Quandary

[David W. Jones]

Yes camera X may have better low light ability, and camera Y may have a wider dynamic range, but the truth of the matter is, almost any modern camera is capable of delivering professional results when used by talented people. Don't be pressured into a camera purchase which exceeds your budget by online banter. Pick the camera which offers the tool set you need to meet your clients expectations at the budget level you are comfortable with.

All the best!

Dave

 

[Policar]

Yes camera X may have better low light ability, and camera Y may have a wider dynamic range, but the truth of the matter is, almost any modern camera is capable of delivering professional results when used by talented people. Don't be pressured into a camera purchase which exceeds your budget by online banter. Pick the camera which offers the tool set you need to meet your clients expectations at the budget level you are comfortable with.

All the best!

Dave

Absolutely. The only camera that I feel offers significant advantages over the C100 (unless you need 4k, which no one does) is the Alexa, which is inappropriate for most owner/ops and is HEAVY. The F5 is nice... better DR, less skew, great internal codec, etc. But I actually prefer the "look" of the C100 and it's ergonomically much better. The viewfinder sucks, though.

 

[morgan_moore]

I think the c100 is limited but sweet - I think I bought my f3 used for the same money - but if course there may now be used or discounted c100s too.

I would second the advice to try before you buy - either in a store or more ideally meet some owners and see how they have set them up ..

 

[KINOKS]

The F5 is nice... better DR, less skew, great internal codec, etc. But I actually prefer the "look" of the C100 and it's ergonomically much better. The viewfinder sucks, though.

How is C100 ergonomically better?

 

[Policar]

How is C100 ergonomically better?

This is a trick question, isn't it, because you build the F5 out how you want to build it out whereas with the C100 it's "built" out of the box and even with that in mind it's subjective. So I won't defend my statement as objective truth but articulate instead why I feel this way about my personal preferences.

In terms of button placement and menu placement the Canon cameras are superior to the Sonys. No weird deep menus that are inconveniently labeled, no reaching to press record or change white balance while operating; MUCH lighter and more balanced; furthermore the HDSDI ports on the F5 aren't spaced widely enough, for instance, and require right angle brackets to be convenient, not that the C100 even has HDSDI ports to worry about and HDMI is awkward as a connector (though the locking bracket is nice at least and port conveniently placed). The F5 feels like it tried to lift the Alexa's design but still stuck a lot of its usability deep in menus that couldn't be accessed except through options only available cycling through the viewfinder... it's like an Alexa style body built on top of an F3. The elegant looking face is kind of just for show and you can't access everything through the exterior menu system, like with the Alexa. It's a weird bastard child. The C100, meanwhile, operators like a dSLR, elegantly modified for video production (not "cinema" specifically) and if you're stepping up from a dSLR it's a big improvement. The button layout is easy to access while operating and most functions require one hand or if they require two hands it's a hand on the camera and one operating the joystick that's designed to be accessed by the hand gripping the camera. Very easy camera to use quickly. But the viewfinder sucks!

The C100 with a small lens operators like a dSLR but with all the features needed to make that work (peaking, convenient menu access, record buttons in the right places, etc) and they're easy to access. Building it out to a heavy "cinema camera" is very awkward. The F5 needs to be built out to a cinema camera by design and in my experience it's less balanced than the Alexa, if lighter, and less customizable than the Epic. That said, if your goal is to operate a big film-style camera (and I know ACs who stress like crazy turning a C300 into one of these), the F5 is fine. Really quite nice. But it's very heavy for doc use and clumsier to operate than the sprightly and intuitive C100.

The FZ mount gives me pause. Our PL zooms, which are parfocal, are not behaving as exactly parfocal, and I'm questioning the mount's collimation and the accuracy of their witness marks on the F5. The timecode goes out of sync a lot (not that the C100 even has timecode sync).

All this said, the F5 is the best thing on the market today under $20k, almost no doubt, even if I don't love the character of the image or the ergonomics. I would take it over the Epic, let alone the Scarlet, and it's a generation beyond the C300, which is hard to recommend when you have the F5 available for not much more and it's so much stronger technically. I just don't love it from an operator perspective or recommend it to someone moving up from dSLRs wanting more of the same but better... it's also $15,000. Not $5,000.

 

[KINOKS]

Nice write-up man! I haven't shot with the F5 so you got me at a disadvantage here. I just thought that the F5 was the camera we were all waiting for. A s35 shoulder mount camera.

I can't comment on the F5 but I can on the C100...: to me C100 is a strange schizophrenic camera. It's a dslr-ish camera. To me this is nonsense. But coming from a marketing standpoint it's brilliant. Canon monetized on the dslr market and form factor with the C100. But marketing sadly doesn't have to do much with actual usability of the camera. I like the button layout around your right thumb but I hate the holder - it's to far away from the body. I like the little waveform on the lcd but I dislike it because it's really small and not 100% usable. I like the fact that it's made to be used as is but hate the fact that it's rather short and tall and not the best camera to be rigged. I dislike the top handle in general and also the audio cables that come from it. I don't like the mounting options it gives on the bottom of the camera. I dislike the vf and the lcd placement. Don't like the nd "wheel".

It's not fair comparing the F5 and C100 as one is meant to be rigged and the other not so much. This are to different cameras aimed at different productions. I haven't used an F5 so I can't really comment and I also haven't used C100 That much just a couple of times. I see more potential in F5 for rigging purposes and that's what counts the most to me I guess.

 

[Policar]

Nice write-up man! I haven't shot with the F5 so you got me at a disadvantage here. I just thought that the F5 was the camera we were all waiting for. A s35 shoulder mount camera.

I can't comment on the F5 but I can on the C100...: to me C100 is a strange schizophrenic camera. It's a dslr-ish camera. To me this is nonsense. But coming from a marketing standpoint it's brilliant. Canon monetized on the dslr market and form factor with the C100. But marketing sadly doesn't have to do much with actual usability of the camera. I like the button layout around your right thumb but I hate the holder - it's to far away from the body. I like the little waveform on the lcd but I dislike it because it's really small and not 100% usable. I like the fact that it's made to be used as is but hate the fact that it's rather short and tall and not the best camera to be rigged. I dislike the top handle in general and also the audio cables that come from it. I don't like the mounting options it gives on the bottom of the camera. I dislike the vf and the lcd placement. Don't like the nd "wheel".

It's not fair comparing the F5 and C100 as one is meant to be rigged and the other not so much. This are to different cameras aimed at different productions. I haven't used an F5 so I can't really comment and I also haven't used C100 That much just a couple of times. I see more potential in F5 for rigging purposes and that's what counts the most to me I guess.

The ND wheel is somewhat more counterintuitive on the F5 than on the C100 (pull and twist from the front rather than turn within the body) but at least it's clearly labelled and more difficult to knock accidentally, not that this is a real problem.

I agree that the C100 is a "grown up" dSLR integrating a dSLR form factor with a video camera's functionality while the F5 is a cinema/video hybrid. The Alexa feels like a "digital cinema" camera, and if it weren't for the weight and cost would be the best thing out there (ok, it is anyway). Oddly none are as ergonomic as old Betacams in some respects... not balanced.

For your purposes I can recommend the F5 with some minor reservations. It really is quite nice, though it didn't quite live up to my expectations. If you have 20K to drop, it's a great choice, but for $40k or whatever I've go with the Amira, without having even used it. SLOG2 is better than Canon Log but it's no Log C and the texture of the image does not compare to the Alexa. Furthermore, it looks ergonomically built but using it is not nearly as friendly as using an Alexa and it is not remotely well-outfitted out of the box. The C100 is pick up and shoot.

DEFINITELY try out the F5 if you've been waiting for it. It has a lot going for it and is designed to be rigged, just without the built-in shoulder mount that helps the Alexa balance so well. But for the poster on this thread, C100 all the way! I dislike the handle for audio, too, fwiw, but don't mind the placement of everything else UNLESS you're trying to build a larger rig with an external monitor and EVF, etc. The C100 is a well-built dSLR upgrade (not in terms of image; the image is full "cinema camera" other than the codec) whereas the F5 is a poor attempt to emulate the Alexa, but a fully useable one nonetheless and the best thing for the money still.

 

[KINOKS]

The best thing about C100 is it's IQ. It's the best in it's class. But I would invite Catherine to consider buying a used fs100. I know that she has reservations about buying used but you can get a used fs100 for half the price of a new c100. And a fs100 has a bonus: you can put a speedbooster on it, so it becomes a better lowlight camera then c100 plus all your lenses become wider and their mtf increases.

 

[morgan_moore]

I shot for ages with my fs100 and really cannot recommend it as an A cam.

Lack of Nd is so annoying. With a Dslr you can live with no Nd with base 100iso but with base 800 it is just a consistent problem.

 

[alaskacameradude]

I owned an FS100. I liked it but lack of NDs was a bit annoying. I used the Xume system which lets
you magnetically snap NDs on and off your lenses. That helped a LOT! I ended up working as an
AC on several fairly big productions....all of which used C300s. When it came time for me to buy, I chose
a FS700. And I don't shoot much slo motion either (but its there if I need it.). But the FS700 just
has more options than the Canons in my opinion. However the ergonomics are not great. You make
your choice and live with the particular advantages and disadvantages I guess.

 

[Policar]

I owned an FS100. I liked it but lack of NDs was a bit annoying. I used the Xume system which lets
you magnetically snap NDs on and off your lenses. That helped a LOT! I ended up working as an
AC on several fairly big productions....all of which used C300s. When it came time for me to buy, I chose
a FS700. And I don't shoot much slo motion either (but its there if I need it.). But the FS700 just
has more options than the Canons in my opinion. However the ergonomics are not great. You make
your choice and live with the particular advantages and disadvantages I guess.

The ergonomics and image are both significantly poorer, however given that you've bought into the Sony system previously the purchase makes sense. (These are all good cameras.) But would you really recommend the FS700 over the C100 for someone who hasn't bought into the Sony ecosystem already?

 

[David W. Jones]

While having a camera with built-in ND filters is nice, you are going to find plenty of camera choices out there without that function. Both low and very high end. That's where owning a nice set of ND filters comes in. You buy them once, and you can use them on any of your future cameras. We keep a set of 4x5.65 and 77mm screw-on in our kit as we shoot with a number of different cameras.

 

[alaskacameradude]

The ergonomics and image are both significantly poorer, however given that you've bought into the Sony system previously the purchase makes sense. (These are all good cameras.) But would you really recommend the FS700 over the C100 for someone who hasn't bought into the Sony ecosystem already?

I sold my FS100. I had the choice to buy either a FS700 or C100 maybe could have stretched to
a used C300. After shooting a ton with the C300, I thought the FS700 was a better choice.
My personal opinion is different from yours regarding the image between them (I do think the C300
image is a bit better from the Sony but not a ton, and the C100 I'd put at about a wash. Unless
we are talking about the HD image from the FS700 derived from the 4K stream, which I'd expect
would be better than either Canon but this requires the Odyssey 7q). Basically my opinion is that the
Canons do a couple things very well, and the Sony does a lot of things pretty well. Things the Sony will
do that the Canon won't:
if you are going to use external recorders as some suggested you do with the c100, the Sony
will give you better image quality than either Canon with a 10 or 12 bit HD 4.2.2 or 4.4.4 image
with the Odyssey 7q, RAW 2k or 4k or 4k compressed, high frame rates,
timelapse with slow shutter speed, full frame look with speed booster, much better range of lenses to
use, autofocus (which the C100 has), zoom rocker with selected lenses, face detection, tap screen to
focus on that part of the screen, the Canon has Clog, the Sony Slog2. My personal opinion is that
the Sony is the better deal....but that's also because I am a one person production company and
need lots of flexibility more so than doing one or two things really well. Sony isn't as easy to handhold
and has a dumb LCD placement. C100 LCD placement and function is kind of dumb too. I like all the
buttons on the fs700 and many don't. I think that is because I never was a DSLR shooter but came
from traditional video cameras. DSLR guys seem to really like the Canons more than the Sony's
as it feels more familiar to them. The opposite is true for me. Again you make your pick and deal
with the negatives and try to highlight the positives. All these cameras are trade offs....better
at some things and worse at others.

 

[Policar]

DSLR guys seem to really like the Canons more than the Sony's
as it feels more familiar to them. The opposite is true for me. Again you make your pick and deal
with the negatives and try to highlight the positives. All these cameras are trade offs....better
at some things and worse at others.

Absolutely. The C100 is clearly inspired by dSLRs more than ENG or cinema cameras.

Fwiw, I also can't stand raw workflows so the lack of support is almost a relief, bizarre as that sounds. Not that AVCHD is so great either.

 

[Scott F]

That said, B&H is having a special. The camera is $5499 plus if you buy Canon lens, you get a $500 rebate. So, I want to do B&H but its final sale . . any thoughts on this?

Thoughts? Yeah, I would pull the trigger on this if it is in your budget.

Am I the only guy from the DVX crew that still shoots with a FS100? hahahaha.

I waited and waited and waited for Canon to produce a DSLR-style form-factor camera that is the C100. (300 too rich for my blood) That day did not come in time, so I had to go with the FS100. To each his own, but I love the traditional Canon DSLR "look", I don't have time to futz around with severe grading & CC.

FS100 is OK, but I never really warmed up to it, based on a variety of factors, some covered in this thread.

 

[alaskacameradude]

Absolutely. The C100 is clearly inspired by dSLRs more than ENG or cinema cameras.

Fwiw, I also can't stand raw workflows so the lack of support is almost a relief, bizarre as that sounds. Not that AVCHD is so great either.

I agree, I'm not much of a fan of working with RAW either except maybe for very short things
(like a :30 TV spot maybe). I am much more interested in the 10 or 12 bit 4.2.2 or 4.4.4
'popular codec' on the FS700. I was just saying the option is there on the FS700, but
I'm not going to do much with it, at least right now, myself even though I own a FS700.

I wish we could combine the best features from Canon's Cinema line, with the best from Sony's......

 

[morgan_moore]

"Sony Eco system" to me there is no such thing only the Canon mess.

the Sony e mount will accept nearly any lens and speed boosters too. The canon system is just a mess as the ef mount has completely the wrong flange distance for video. Observe the c500 available in pl and ef mounts - what a mess

I'm no Sony fan boy - but their product seem better at every level. The fs700 has high fps and a route to 10bit output the f5 has high fps, raw, and now super useful crop mode.

one thing about high fps is you find it slipped into more and more shots - partly as a simple stability tool

 

[mcbob]

Thinking about this after some recent rentals... there seems to be some conspiracy amongst large sensor video camera makers against shooting from high angles... AFAIK, the only modest-budget option that facilitates it is the AF100A (or a used F3, or a FS100 held upside-down).

 

[Policar]

"Sony Eco system" to me there is no such thing only the Canon mess.

the Sony e mount will accept nearly any lens and speed boosters too. The canon system is just a mess as the ef mount has completely the wrong flange distance for video. Observe the c500 available in pl and ef mounts - what a mess

I'm no Sony fan boy - but their product seem better at every level. The fs700 has high fps and a route to 10bit output the f5 has high fps, raw, and now super useful crop mode.

one thing about high fps is you find it slipped into more and more shots - partly as a simple stability tool

To me Canon is a lot like Apple... not great specs but easy to use products. And once you buy in, you're in.

Red is a lot like a custom built PC.

Sony is in the middle. Yes their specs are better (thus they "seem" better), but I dislike all the footage I've seen from the FS700 and so far my experience with the F5 has been mixed. Technically good, but aesthetically and ergonomically just ok. Again, it's all a matter of taste. I'm not a "technical" person, and I am a diehard Apple fan and Canon fan simply because I like things easy, so I'll always err on the side of fast and simple. (The Alexa to me is the ideal because Log C prores is the easiest format to work with in post, but it's too expensive obviously for me to use except on rental jobs.)

I'm not sure why the PL and EF mounts being distinct options is a mess. Seems a lot simpler to limit your options. The flange distance of my FZ to PL mount adapter on the F5 I'm currently operating is wrong and our high end Angeniuex zoom is not behaving as parfocal and I can't trust my witness marks either. Meanwhile the C100 has autofocus upcoming and interfaces with EF mount lenses to provide useful metadata to the camera and I never worry about flange focal distance being incorrect. I'd rather have limited options than freedoms that are really liabilities.

 

[morgan_moore]

To me Canon is a lot like Apple... not great specs but easy to use products. And once you buy in, you're in.

Red is a lot like a custom built PC.

Sony is in the middle. Yes their specs are better (thus they "seem" better), but I dislike all the footage I've seen from the FS700 and so far my experience with the F5 has been mixed. Technically good, but aesthetically and ergonomically just ok. Again, it's all a matter of taste. I'm not a "technical" person, and I am a diehard Apple fan and Canon fan simply because I like things easy, so I'll always err on the side of fast and simple. (The Alexa to me is the ideal because Log C prores is the easiest format to work with in post, but it's too expensive obviously for me to use except on rental jobs.)

I'm not sure why the PL and EF mounts being distinct options is a mess. Seems a lot simpler to limit your options. The flange distance of my FZ to PL mount adapter on the F5 I'm currently operating is wrong and our high end Angeniuex zoom is not behaving as parfocal and I can't trust my witness marks either. Meanwhile the C100 has autofocus upcoming and interfaces with EF mount lenses to provide useful metadata to the camera and I never worry about flange focal distance being incorrect. I'd rather have limited options than freedoms that are really liabilities.

When we use cameras we all have our own list of 'givens' .. things that we think are critical to our shoot process.

The OP must work out her 'givens' and that will lead to the correct choice.

----

As for Canon being a mess - well to me a 'given' is the ability to have fine control of focus - that excludes IMO 90% of AF lenses.

At C300 money I would hope to rent proper cine glass for higher end jobs - not possible with the EF mount.

Another 'given' is when doing fast work is to have a zoom that can do a wide, a tight and a CU, 18-35-80

That option is only available in top end PL, or with a speed-booster and a 24-105 - EF mount allows neither. (or a 2/3 ENG lens and adapter - also not possible on EF)

The EF mount is designed to clear a mirror in a full frame stills camera, and fundamentally has the wrong geometry for motion imaging.

I have other 'givens' the ability to focus - this requires at least 720 monitoring - as the onboard canon evfs aren not 720 you must add another monitor or EVF - but you cannot take the Canon one off (because you lose another 'given' being XLR)

So you end up with a rig like a christmas tree.

Higher up the price scale one is looking for a thicker 10bit or raw file, lacking from the Canon options (excluding the excellent C500).

At least that is coming the way of the FS700

As for the F5 looking bad - well - the bust PL is unacceptable - and the image - to me it seems awesome in raw, sweet in SR, and somewhat challenging in Xavchd and Slog2

at least you can get awesome for those special jobs.

S