C100: Would you buy a C100 Mark II new, now?
- Thread starter Finnegan
- Start date
control4userguy
Well-known member
Today, I can say, I wouldn't consider either edition. But, if the budget isn't there then yes, 1G C100 would have to be my choice.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Other than not shooting 4k, the C100 MKI will still blow away the new 5D MKIV for video, at $1,000.00 less. If you need 4k, you need it. For me personally, I wouldn't buy a none 4k camera today but my needs are different than most and I deliver to the studios. So far, they are not demanding 4k but that will probably change in the next 12 months.
tumbleweed
Well-known member
I completely disagree with the c100 mark ii not being worth the price difference from the mark i. There were a few horrible things about shooting with the mark i that were fixed for the mark ii. If you shoot indoors on sticks maybe it doesn't make a big difference. But if you shoot handheld and go outside in sunlight there is no comparison. The mark i has a completely useless viewfinder. The mark ii is 100% better. The LCD on the mark i wasn't good because you couldn't move it completely out of the back of the camera which made it very difficult to add a hoodman of any sort while shooting outdoors in bright daylight. The mark ii rotates more for more options and enabling room for a hoodman. The onboard cam mic on the mark i was on the removable top handle so if you were shooting in a car for instance and wanted to get rid of the top handle because you were trying to deal with small space you also lost the capability to have audio. If I recall correctly the XLRs were attached to the handle. The processor is improved. And the mark ii offers 60fps. For me this makes the mark ii a much improved camera with it being worth the extra $.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I don't disagree with anything you said here tumbleweed. I own the C100 MKI and have shot with rental C100 MKIIs several times. Just the 60 fps and a usable VF are worth a lot. I do about 50% on tripod for interviews and green screen and about 50% handheld shooting EPK and BTS on film and television sets. I have managed to work around the lack of a usable VF with the use of my Ninja Blade with a good sun hood when shooting HH in bright sun. It is a workable solution, I usually can nail exposure and focus using the Blade screen. I also agree that the LCD screen on the MKI folds out to a stupid position. I find when I am operating handheld I use the LCD and flip it up sideways so it faces the person standing on the right of the camera. It keeps it out of my way when operating and my sound mixer can glance over and see what my frame is for boom clearance OR my producer can look over and see what shots I have framed up. The big question is, is the good VF and 60 fps worth almost twice the money to you? The C100 MKI has just as good of a picture and sound, it just has a bad VF and no 60 fps. That extra $2k can buy a recorder and or some pretty nice glass. Just depends on your needs. If I shot more than 40-50% handheld, it would be worth the extra $2k to me to get the MKII but I bought my MKI before the MKII was out and it was paid for itself three times over in client camera package charges so I can't complain.
I'm on the other end of the spectrum from puredrifting. . .absolute bottom of the barrel, MOST of the time (the very occasional higher end shoot, nothing for studios, broadcast, etc. etc. Did a sizzle reel for a company that only makes sizzle reels and then tries to sell the shows to networks, even that was with an EX1), mostly for web/computers, never had a 4K request, so I'm thinking it would not be insane even now to get a C100. Still probably going for the M1 since I don't care about 60p and I was planning to get the zfinder plus for the LCD issues.
Plus, all the 4K offerings that aren't ENG-style/fixed lens/smaller sensor cams are either DSLRs (no thanks) or way more than a C100, either version, would be.
Plus, all the 4K offerings that aren't ENG-style/fixed lens/smaller sensor cams are either DSLRs (no thanks) or way more than a C100, either version, would be.
Matt Turner
Well-known member
If you are going to get the C100 MKI and add stuff to it to make it better then just get a C100 MKII.
All the improvements make it a much more well rounded camera.
It's still a lightweight *, compact HD camera with S35 4K sensor with EF mount designed for events and handheld work. That hasn't changed and neither has the need for HD content. What has changed is it's now much more affordable.
PS In some ways the lightweight codec could be seen as a plus (though I wish they'd updated it to the C300 MKI codec).
* A minimal setup with a pancake lens and VideoMic Pro comes in at 1.7kg, try doing that with a C300 MKII!
All the improvements make it a much more well rounded camera.
It's still a lightweight *, compact HD camera with S35 4K sensor with EF mount designed for events and handheld work. That hasn't changed and neither has the need for HD content. What has changed is it's now much more affordable.
PS In some ways the lightweight codec could be seen as a plus (though I wish they'd updated it to the C300 MKI codec).
* A minimal setup with a pancake lens and VideoMic Pro comes in at 1.7kg, try doing that with a C300 MKII!
Have shot a lot with the FS7, and yeah takes a little to get used, but I can easily see if a person owned one themselves they'd quickly find it easy to navigate around the menus when they've got their own personal FS7 they use all the time.
Plus, the FS5 menus are much snappier the FS7's menus.
The FS5 is the perfect lightweight run and gun camera out of the box, but with an Odysessy 7Q+ you can tap into FSraw from the FS5 and get a much much more powerful camera for when you wish to rig it up for higher end jobs.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Besides my Betacams, I've owned numerous Sony cameras, pro and prosumer, TRV900, V1000, Z1, EX1, EX3. It's weird, back in the Betacam/DigiBeta days, Sony did pretty well with menus and navigation. Never as good as Panasonic but usable. I've noticed as the years go on, their menu navigation has just become worse and worse. I hated the EX1 and EX3 menus. Even the F55 and the FS700s I have rented lately have terrible navigational menu structure, makes little sense. The GH4 I owned had pretty lame menu structure. For me, the Canon menus make the most sense and are easiest to navigate. I agree with Iron though, if you own it, you can get used to lots of quirks and bad design, but we shouldn't have to when you shell out a small fortune for a product like an FS7.
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
The custom user menu is key on the FS7. Just put all common used functions there and they are a click away. First thing every FS7 user should do but most just don't know about it.
I used to use C300's all the time and have been using the Fs7 for the past 2 years almost. Just did a shoot with a C300II the other day and found I couldn't find anything in the menu. I had gotten so used to where everything was on the Sony that the Canon menu seemed un-intuitive after the 2 years away from it. I think its all about familiarity with any camera system.
well, the improved EVF doesnt really do it for me cause I dont like using that anyway vs the flipout, still doesnt solve the issues with the lcd in sunlight ,plus cost of zfinder plus is way less than the $1500 to upgrade to the M2.
Bassman2003
Veteran
720p60? I don't use the camera but it seems all I have ever heard is that the camera only shoots interlaced for the "live" look. This is the C100 MKI correct?
I think he means this:
http://blog.benzenvideoproductions.com/blog/2015/2/10/9cemjuvo6ymfa7vti3pwunpdleoqhe
http://blog.benzenvideoproductions.com/blog/2015/2/10/9cemjuvo6ymfa7vti3pwunpdleoqhe
If I understand that correctly the original post was for PAL /50i settings. . .which I guess means they're saying use 60i for NTSC and do some post magic. Wouldn't that mean your "60p" would be half vertical resolution? If you're somehow separating those fields into frames then you're losing half the res each time no?
Matt Turner
Well-known member
I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from the MKI, it's still a great camera and if $1500 is an issue then that will override other concerns.
I just think the MKII is the complete camera package instead of an initial compromised version. People talk about adding a Z-Finder to fix the EVF, using 60i to get slo-mo and issues with the LCD, but Canon already fixed all of those problems in the MKII, all you have to do is pay $1500
. Personally I think it's worth it, it's a small fraction of the cost I've spent on gear.The OLED is much better and brighter, but yes still not useable in bright sun, you can get something like this hood, it's not 100% perfect but works great:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1115070-REG/sachtler_sa1018_mini_hood.html
Yes, from 50i to 25p you will get about half vertical resolution, but with "fluid morph" slowmotion is result much better, really nice.
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
Yeah, I don't understand people who get the Mark I and then spend another $1000-$1500 on bulky and unwieldy accessories to make it still not quite as good as the Mark II for about the same price.I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from the MKI, it's still a great camera and if $1500 is an issue then that will override other concerns.
I just think the MKII is the complete camera package instead of an initial compromised version. People talk about adding a Z-Finder to fix the EVF, using 60i to get slo-mo and issues with the LCD, but Canon already fixed all of those problems in the MKII, all you have to do is pay $1500
The OLED is much better and brighter, but yes still not useable in bright sun, you can get something like this hood, it's not 100% perfect but works great:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1115070-REG/sachtler_sa1018_mini_hood.html
I think if you're going to get a Mark I, you get it to save $1500 which you can do if you don't feel the need for a Z-finder & external recorder/monitor setup.