C100: Starting new... C100 used or C100 Mark II?

D

dontbescene

Active member
I'm back and forth on a used C100 or a C100 Mark II new. I'm coming from shooting 5d2, 5d3, EX1, AF100, etc. Still hanging onto my DSLRs for the photo side of my business but wondering if it's worth the extra money for the Mark II or if that $2,000 would be better spent on something else. I already have an Atomos Ninja Blade, Kinos, Lowel kit, Rode Mics, tons of L glass, Red Rock stuff, etc. Just looking for a body. So it'd probably be adding a Phantom 2, Ronin or something else with the difference in money. But the more I look at it the more I feel like a better bet might just be going with the Mark II.

I'm shooting mostly corporate/documentary stuff. Haven't had a client ask for 4k ever, mostly web/presentation delivery. I think the 60p would be great to have, don't need much slomo besides that. I love the form factor of the C100 so I'm going that way vs FS700, and if I read one more person saying "A new C100 is almost the price of a FS7, why not go with that?" I'll lose my mind. It ends up being nearly double once you factor in the XQD cards and batteries to be able to cover 3-4 hrs of shooting (cost per hour of media/battery is almost $500 on the FS7).

Anyone else in a similar situation or have some input? (I apologize if this thread has been started somewhere. I did some searching but didn't find anything.)
 
I've had a C100 Mk I for the past 1.5 years and I've had a great experience with it. I was set on buying a C100 Mk II to replace my 70D which I've used alongside my C100 for weddings, but once they reduced the price of the C100 Mk I, it occurred to me that since I've had such a great experience with my current C100, I may as well save some money and get another one (as opposed to the C100 Mk II). For myself, I've felt that the "weaknesses" of the Mk I are very easy to work around and it didn't make sense for me to pay the extra money for the Mk II. So I would say that if you have used a C100 Mk I and feel that it's weaknesses (poor evf, inaccurate lcd, lack of 60p, etc) are something you can easily live with then go for the Mk I.

However, if you've used the C100 Mk I and have been very frustrated by it's weaknesses, I'd say it's worth going for the Mk II since it appears to fix all of these things that people have complained about. I know many current C100 owners who were very excited about the new features in the Mk II and they're probably the people who will benefit the most from it if they upgrade.

As far as IQ, I've read that many users barely notice a difference so my guess is that virtually no clients would notice the difference either.

So if you have the chance to try the C100 Mk I for a few shoots, that may give you a good idea of whether you can live with its shortcomings or not.
 
Haven't used the mark ii so I can't say for sure, what it really comes down to is do you think the features are worth the extra money to you? How valuable is two grand to you, how valuable is 60fps?

I would imagine for corporate work the additional features of a mk ii wouldn't be as worthwhile as for other types of work.
 
It all boils down to one thing - how does it impact our business. At the end of the day, despite this being our passion, it gives us bread, butter and beer. So you need to decide if the 2k saved by buying a C100 Mark I and investing that in say a Ronin/Helix will help you in getting better shots and will result in higher rates. (provided you are ok shooting with the Mark I )

Corporate clients physically see the amount of equipment you are carrying. Most of them don't understand what you are shooting with. At times some new gizmos help. And at times having money in the bank also helps. :)
 
indiawilds said:
It all boils down to one thing - how does it impact our business.
Click to expand...

I'm on the opposite side, the price difference is not a big in this case.

Your choice depend on your style of working - if you are often in quick documentary situations, when you have no time for prepare, where you need good EFV for better ergonomy and for good viewing of scene for right decision about framing, etc., then you can choose the C100 mark II. If you prefer picture from the C100 (mark I), for direct colors without interpolation and debayering or for less "sharpness" from 4K interpolation to HD, etc, (it is all about personal feelings), then can be better go with the C100 mark I.

There are a big differences in the way of signal processing between C100 (mark I) and C100 mark II, also temperature of processor can be interesting at regions with higher temperature. I'm really curious about all these circumstances, it seems to be a good idea to wait for while.
 
I opted for the Mark II. Mostly because every project I thought about that I wanted to do this year (in addition to client work) I'd want the 60p for. Plus, after selling some stuff off it wasn't that much of a price difference. I did go for the Atomos Ninja 2 kit. Figure I can sell that off and get the camera for more like $5200.
 
The mk ii is worth every penny. Debated selling my c100 to pick one up but going to likely end up going with what ever Canon announces in the coming months. If I were you I would spend the extra money on the mk ii though, it's well worth the difference in cost.
 
Go with first what you can afford, and look if the 60fps @1080p and the better viewfinder/screen is something that you absolutely need if you dont, then a MK I would just great.

Ps.
Im selling my c100mk I very very low hours if you decide lets talk :happy:
 
How valuable is true 1080/60p to you? You can get decent results on the MK I by shooting 60i and slowing down 50%.

How important is the ability to but the camera's viewfinder to your eye while shooting? If it's not that important, a $25 LCD hod will make the MK I perfectly usable in bright sunlight.

I'm buying a MK II because I was already planning on getting a second C100, and I like to vary frame rates a lot. And I also want to explore the option of shooting on my shoulder, and I think the usable EVF on the MK II will simplify finding a rig that I like. But I would have been perfectly happy had they never announced the MK II.
 
Buy the Mk II. If it were me, I would buy the MKII without hesitation...unless video would be a hobby and not a source of revenu.

The LCD on the MKI is never in the right position. If you shoot many interviews on your own you will ask yourself why you didn't buy the MKII. Of course, if you utilize a external EFV or monitor, this is not a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top