C100: Viewfinder where is better c100 or fs100

T

tom1

Well-known member
Hi I am thinking to jump from sony fs100 to canon c100 . I know there is some things which I can not get with c100, like 50p . But I think I will get more things which are more important for me , better roll out highlights , much more cinematic look . How Viewfinder is good in canon c100 , there is so many people to complain about it . In fs100 it is not perfect but let me work without any external ones . Is canon c100 has worse Viewfinder ? How lcd ?

 
You should take a look at the new C100 Mark II, as it's got the 60p you are looking for and a much better viewfinder.
 
Well you're in luck. The C100 mk II is here with one of the best 1080p 60p images ever, and one of the best EVF in the market (same as C500s one), and a fully articulating screen unlike the incorrectly placed LCD on the FS100. The C100 mk II is much better than the FS100 in every way, no downgrading at all. It also has about 2 stop improvement in low light vs the FS100, sharper image, better colours, better highlights, lower rolling shutter, smaller lighter body, ND filters, a great AF system that actually works, better button layout and much better overal handling and ergonomics. It is selling for 5499$. The FS100 is selling for 2499$ now so it's still an excellent camera for that price, the C100 mk II is just better, therefore at a higher price obviously. If you can afford it it's quite a big leap and you'll be very happy with it.

Edit: if your budget only allows a used C100 mk I, yes the EVF is unusable, really bad. Remember the EVFs on old 200$ handycams? they're better than the c100's. But when comparing it to the FS100, it doesn't have an EVF at all, only an LCD with a loup, therefore you can get the same with the C100 simply using a loup on the LCD. The LCD is lovely. The only downside is you'll lose the 60p 1080p ability. You'll gain better lowlight, colours, highlights, detail, internal NDs, much more ergonomic body, it's still a good jump from the FS100 but it does have those downsides, bad EVF, non fully articulating screen, no 60p, no AF, so I would stick with the Sony and wait until I can afford a C100 mk II.
 
Last edited:
the evf on the original c100 isnt great but I use it all the time - it needs the c cup or something similar but unusable is a tad harsh. You mention the 60p of the mk 2 being one of the best - any links to footage? cheers
 
Agreed, the mk 1 c100 VF is definitely usable with an upgraded eyecup, I use it all the time in bright sun with a 12.00 zacuto eyecup(works perfect). If you have the money for a mk i, do yourself a favor and save a little more for the mk ii, the upgrade features are PLENTY worth the money!
 
Tough call... the FS100 can't be viewed from a low angle. The viewfinder and lcd on the C100.1 aren't great but work OK, so long as you never need to see them from anywhere other than directly behind or slightly above/below+behind. You can't flip the LCD to view from the side (like when interviewing) or to view from in front of the camera to, say, shoot yourself or solo set up an interview shot before the talent gets on set. A monitor of some kind should be considered mandatory with the C100 if you ever need to do those simple things.

I'd likewise wait until the C100.2, IMO the C100.1 isn't that huge of a step up from the FS100.
 
If you're mostly concerned about the current C100's LCD, EVF, and not having 50p then you'll likely be much happier with the C100 mk II. The new one has a nicer LCD, MUCH nicer EVF, and can do 1080 50p. I've gotten used to the C100's LCD screen, but to be honest it's not all that accurate in terms of color, and I've never really been able to adjust it's brightness so that it matches a calibrated monitor. The EVF on my C100 is not very good and of course it doesn't do 50/60p. I will say that if you can get past those things then it's an amazing camera that has surpassed my expectations. The mk II will just be better in that they've addressed almost all of the things that people have complained about it plus it has a better processor and is likely even better in low light. Right now there probably aren't too many people buying the current C100 because in less than two months they can get a better version for just a little more money.
 
In my humble opinion, the C100's eyepiece is straight from hell. It's honestly the worst I've ever worked with and I'm going back to the XL1000!!!
 
I have to say that I don't think that the C100 is a "step-up" coming from the FS100.

If you master your FS100 with picture profiles (yes, it sucks, but you have to change it every
time!), nice lenses and speedbooster you'll need a different camera for a real upgrade.
I still have mine and produce with it happily - never replaced it but now with a FS7.

Put your money into lenses and audio and wait for a real upgrade next year!
 
Having owned both the FS-100 and the C100, I'd say hold out for the C100 mkII that was just announced. The first version of the C100 is my workhorse and I really like it, but yes, the eyecup is unusable and it lacks 60p. Other than that it's a pretty great little camera! The mkII fixes almost all the issues that most people had with the C100 in the first place. Definitely worth holding out for.
 
C100 mkII seems very nice , but price over 5000euro is not right for still 8bit . It is just overprice . I was thinking to buy used c100 (2500eur)for now , and when price C100 mkII will go down get it . C100 mkII could be nice as A camera . I like fs100 ,everything - LCD with a loup , even ergonomic body , but there is one thing where I can not manage color , highlights . I am using Frank pp g log ultimate and it is nice roll of highlights , but color is not exactly what I am looking for , too much contrast . I do not have too much experience with color grading and fixing everything in post .In this area C100 seems perfect straight out of the box .
 
Rent a C100 and set up a small shoot to see if you actually get from it what you think it will deliver. If you don't, then you need to spend a long weekend with your FS100 and a couple of lights working out how to get the most from it, really getting to know it, so that it serves you well. Fiddle with all sorts of settings, sending HDMI to a nice big monitor/TV. Watch a few tutorials on color correction. A new camera is rarely the fix-all that some folks believe.
 
tom1 said:
C100 mkII seems very nice , but price over 5000euro is not right for still 8bit . It is just overprice . I was thinking to buy used c100 (2500eur)for now , and when price C100 mkII will go down get it . C100 mkII could be nice as A camera . I like fs100 ,everything - LCD with a loup , even ergonomic body , but there is one thing where I can not manage color , highlights . I am using Frank pp g log ultimate and it is nice roll of highlights , but color is not exactly what I am looking for , too much contrast . I do not have too much experience with color grading and fixing everything in post .In this area C100 seems perfect straight out of the box .
Click to expand...

I can see the logic in this. Yes, the C100 II is nice and fixes a few things, but if you can't afford it you can't afford it.
Colors out of the C100 are nice, especially if you don't have the time or skills to grade it.
The C100 viewfinder isn't really a selling point, but if you need that functionality you can do it easily enough with the LCDVF BM loupe. IIRC, the FS100 does it the same way with a plastic clip on loupe to the LCD? It's been years since I've shot on one so I can't remember.
 
mcbob said:
Tough call... the FS100 can't be viewed from a low angle. The viewfinder and lcd on the C100.1 aren't great but work OK, so long as you never need to see them from anywhere other than directly behind or slightly above/below+behind. You can't flip the LCD to view from the side (like when interviewing) or to view from in front of the camera to, say, shoot yourself or solo set up an interview shot before the talent gets on set. A monitor of some kind should be considered mandatory with the C100 if you ever need to do those simple things.

I'd likewise wait until the C100.2, IMO the C100.1 isn't that huge of a step up from the FS100.
Click to expand...

mcbob said:
Rent a C100 and set up a small shoot to see if you actually get from it what you think it will deliver. If you don't, then you need to spend a long weekend with your FS100 and a couple of lights working out how to get the most from it, really getting to know it, so that it serves you well. Fiddle with all sorts of settings, sending HDMI to a nice big monitor/TV. Watch a few tutorials on color correction. A new camera is rarely the fix-all that some folks believe.
Click to expand...

I bought a C100 and it WAS a fix-all. Every new camera I ever bought was a Fix-all, and an upgrade I have never regretted! Once you get the bug to get a C100 it is hard to control. After seeing the footage of the Sony FS100 compared to the C100, after having ND filters, and the ergonomics, it's a no brainer.

I have a Ninja Blade so the viewfinder isn't really an issue...... I think the C100 and the Blade were made for each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top