C100: used c100 mk1 - still make sense?

R

robfilms

Veteran
i'm a long-time sony shooter-ex1-ex3-fs100-rented fs700.

i shoot mainly corporate/non-profit, shorts docs that are distributed via the web.

no client has asked for 4k...yet...though the idea of being able to punch is appealing.

there is a possibility of a used c100 being offered to me.

not many hours.

i know the current owner and he doesn't abuse gear.

my fs100 is a very good indoor talking head camera.

the c100 does a lovely job with skin tones.

the c100 has nd for exteriors where the fs100 needs a vari-nd.

both are "just" hd workhorses.

to those who know the c100, does the c100 still make sense?

does it make sense at $2k?

tia

be well.

rob
smalltalk.media/nyc
 
i hope it does! Im about to buy one in all liklihood. who is knocking down your door to shoot 4k? answer for me is "no one".
 
Good, good deal. I would be all over that. I paid $5k for mine and it's still making me lots of $$. Do you have lenses? 4K is not needed for your work yet. You should be able to pay for the camera in your first few shoots then it is just making you money by owning it/costing it out on your projects. I charge $250.00 per day for my C100 and Ninja Blade, I love those week long location trips ;-)
 
I had the same thoughts looking at used prices, and finally got a great deal on a used one with DAF (+Zacuto vf). I have to say, after a couple of jobs, I wouldn't have a problem paying twice as much, it's just a great little camera, especially when used with an external recorder. I also love using it even barebones, no side handle, no xlr handle, with just a small stm pancake lens, like a Hasselblad.

It's mind blowing that you can get a C100 for the same price of a used 5D3, I own both and I chuckle when thinking I had to pay approx. the same price. Of course the 5D3 is a photo camera, so no direct comparison, but still. I also have a couple of Blackmagic cameras, the C100 gets 98% close to them image wise to my eye, when used with an external recorder. The ND filters, C-LOG with good dr, low light capable, the small files when needed, long battery life, nice audio, DAF, and great ergonomics (apart from the evf), help create a nice overall experience.


p.s. Also, albeit it's <just Full HD>, I find myself punching in without issues, the internal downcoverting from 4K to HD is amazing and saves so much time and space.
 
Last edited:
I'm in the market for another C100 mkI so I don't have to match it with the 5D3. $2000? What a deal! I had a CAnon XH-A1 and watched in horror as it quickly became irrelevant. I don't see the same thing happening with the C100. Go for it!
 
2000 clams is a good deal for a low hour C100. I'd grab it. It'll be useful for you for years to come, even when 4k becomes more mainstream. The C100 is the Panasonic DVX of this generation, IMO. Cheap, versatile, sturdy, great for run and gun or higher end professional work. I love mine.
 
I hope so! haha - Mine exactly the same but with 900 hours on it... selling early 2016 assuming first adopters of the FS5 give positive reviews!
 
to see what a "good deal" is i would look at ebay and what similar packages sold for. youu get an idea of what it SHOULD be worth.
 
If you don't have the credit/funds to spring for an fs5, I would say the c100 is the next best choice. I'm sure each have their pro's and con's but its hard to look past 4k, 10 bit internal HD, variable ND and 240fps at that price point.
 
LeoGrey said:
If you don't have the credit/funds to spring for an fs5, I would say the c100 is the next best choice. I'm sure each have their pro's and con's but its hard to look past 4k, 10 bit internal HD, variable ND and 240fps at that price point.
Click to expand...

FS5 = $6000 + vs C100 used $2000 - I would say the price point for the kind of work that the OP stated is definitely in the C100's favor. You can always buy an FS5 or whatever down the road once they get all the kinks worked out. FS7 came out about a year ago and they are still fixing issues with firmware.
 
thoughts how how many hours are too much?

500hrs? 750hrs? 1000hrs?

where is the "nah, i'll pass" line?

thanks in advance.

be well.

rob
smalltalk.media/nyc
 
Michael Thames said:
I paid $4500 for mine with a brand new Ninja Blade one year ago........ I think it had 64 hours on it.
Click to expand...

It had 48 hours on it.

With a solid state camera that's in great shape, hours are relatively meaningless. The hour meter had a LOT more relevance when we were threading tapes through a transport mechanism.
 
The past two used cameras that I bought had less than 60 hours on them. I think they were both more like 40 something. I think my "too much" line for a camera that I was buying as my main, most expensive camera I own, would be around 100 hours. That's just me, though, and I agree that a C100 with several hundred hours on it would still possibly be a good buy. It's more of a way of knowing how much use and possible wear it might have. Which still depends on how well they treated the equipment and how/ where it was used. A camera with 200 hours on it that was only used on a tripod in a studio would likely be in better shape than a camera with 50 hours on it that mostly was used in harsh outdoor environments.

Now if it was a B cam and I didn't consider it primary, and a lot of money (that's all relative), then I might go into the 300+ hours area.

I've had really good dealings with Adorama's used dept. Bought two used cameras from them, and sold one to them. I'd also try B&H's used.
 
Last edited:
Tough to say hour-wise.... depends on how its treated by the person who owns it.
Very possible a camera with 1000 hours on it is in better shape than a camera with 90 hours on it.

I can tell you mine works exactly the same as it did brand new as it does now (900 hours later). But you never know how someone has treated it etc. If you're unfamiliar with the camera, bring someone who knows or get the person showing you to run through everything.

Personally I plan on switching to the FS5 Q1 of 2016!
 
greenheron said:
FS5 = $6000 + vs C100 used $2000 - I would say the price point for the kind of work that the OP stated is definitely in the C100's favor. You can always buy an FS5 or whatever down the road once they get all the kinks worked out. FS7 came out about a year ago and they are still fixing issues with firmware.
Click to expand...


I think average real world numbers are more like 2800-3600 vs 5600(with the exception of the OP's friend) which is why I mentioned it. C100's still produce great looking images but if it were me at this point, I would put my $2k towards a 0% interest loan from Sony :)
 
jbregar said:
It had 48 hours on it.

With a solid state camera that's in great shape, hours are relatively meaningless. The hour meter had a LOT more relevance when we were threading tapes through a transport mechanism.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected..... ha ha! A great deal....... thanks Jbergar!
 
The C100 is still very much respected, every single time I am shooting with mine in public I get asked the same question "Is that a C100 or a C300?" Followed by "NICE", it still very much has the juice. I got mine used in May and it has paid for itself 3 times over with change to spare. Best camera I have invested in so far and I have invested in a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top