Shield3

I owned the 1dc. The 108060 is softer than the 5d3's 1080p24/30. It looks like upscaled 720p to me. So you took the camera on two international trips and used it extensively and still returned it for a full refund?

Kool-Aid glass...drank. Complete.

Wasn't this the same spiel Jones said to people to get them to move to Jonestown? I kid. Amazing skin tones / gorgeous.

I might be one of the few who's owned the 1dc and still owns the c100 mk2. in my honest opinion the c100 mk2 is slightly better in low light; 12800 ISO appeared to have less noise on the c100 mark 2 in very similar lighting conditions. C-log (to me) appears much cleaner as well on the c100 mk2. Yes the 1dc has a larger sensor, but it's a 1.3x in video mode vs around 1.53?-ish for Super35. Native ISO is 850 vs 400, so you tell me which camera is more sensitive.

Yes, when most ebay'ers list their used 5d3 for $1950 they are falling over themselves to take my offer of $1400 and have the hassle of ending the auction early. B&H and Adorama (and KEH) sure do deal on their price a lot as well. I would like you to show me just 3 examples of decent 5d3's under $1500 on any site listed in the last month. Yeah wow I thought we were just having a friendly discussion. I am the king of cheap and low ballers; always looking for ways to spend less on GAS. I bought a like new sectional last week (in store was $2799, seller had a 1 year old one and was asking $2100). I offered him $1200. Perhaps he's talking about some other currency than US dollars? They are now way below $1.5k and closing in on $1k? Prove it.

I was about to link to this. Keep in mind Gordon himself will tell you he has very shaky hands, so take the "shakiness" with a grain of salt.

Mattias seems to have better search engines than I do for his 1dc and 5d3 pricing. Everything I've seen is the 5d3 is holding onto the $1800k US mark (Plenty of people tried the Sony route and are buying back in; tired of adapters, poor ergonomics and fiddly adapters). Hell it may have gone up a bit price-wise in the last few months IMO. I'm on my 3rd 5d3 now having owned the first one for 2+ years. They never stopped working; I just buy and sell too much gear.

This is one reason I sold my a7r2 (plus the unreliability factor). The a6300 does 1080p120 and the a7r2 only 720p120; I found the slow-mo much better on the a6300. This little a6300 has S-LOG3 and is damn good in low light, and has less of an overall crop in 120p mode than even the a7s2! (I think, or it's close). To the poster than says the a7r2 can be used in FF mode for video - I agree, but I'd put my cutoff @ ISO1600. Image goes way downhill after that, but it's pretty damn nice footage at low ISOs.

I have offered to sell my LCDVFE by Kinotehnik to Dave - it's a must have for this camera. Can't wait to see future pictures of the entire setup if he decides to buy it. Here's a screen grab from a guy using the 1dc + the LCDVFE (and a mic): From http://www.hkarlsen.no/2013/09/the-canon-1dc-and-kinotehnik-evf/

Here's some screen caps from the C100 (shot in C-log) with either the 300 2.8 IS and/or the 100-400 II. Just for reference's sake. For reference, here's 2 framegrabs from 2013 from the 5d3 raw: (first is the 300 2.8 I think and the latter was the 135/2 wide open with a vari-ND. At the end of the day the image quality with properly exposed c100 C-log and the 5d3 are very, very close. c100 has more detail and resolution and the 5d3 raw shallower DOF. However the c100 just makes sense to me as it's more reliable and easier to work with. Much faster to setup and I can record for hours on end. With the 5d3 I was having to sync audio in post, unpack the mlv raw files, worry about screw on ND filters, would not continually AF in video nor could I punch in while recording. You can't go wrong IMO with either option. I'm in my mid 40's and I prefer having the EVF as it's tough for me to read the back of the screen (everyone's vision starts to suck after age 40)..:) But hey, I'm not a filmmaker. I have shot weddings and short paid documentary, but my primary focus is video of my family - I don't want the typical shaky camcorder "everything in focus / handycam look" typical of most home movies. In years from now when I'm dead my kids will appreicate the hard work when they show this stuff to their kids. At least I hope...

According to what I'm reading, "Slow west" was shot digitally with the Alexa: "Curiously, one asset New Zealand didn't have was a laboratory for developing celluloid. "We were told we'd have to send our negatives to Thailand," the DP remembered. There went the production's hopes of shooting on film. Yet using the ALEXA Classic camera with Panavision Primo vintage and Ultra Speed Z lenses had its advantages; and that's to say nothing of the giant mushroom sequence with Jay, shot with a Frazier lens. "With digital you can see all the detail," said Ryan, which might be a part of why it looks a little 3-D. Nothing is falling into the background; it's all in your face." http://www.thalo.com/articles/view/1037/cinematographer_robbie_ryan_on_shooting_slow_west

Have you shot both in C-log and color corrected / graded? The C100 is top notch IQ wise. Having a tad more DOF and quick push button AF, built in ND, zebras, waveforms and the ability to punch in while recording are very important. In fact, I'll bet if you shoot the same scene and downscale it to 1080 you'd never be able to tell which camera took what. Focus and better exposure tools IMO always trump everything else. I have 4k sets here - unless you plan on cropping/panning quite a bit I personally don't see the point of having the hassle of huge 500 megabit files, large memory cards, no EVF, no ND, poorer ergonomics, poorer battery life (if you get the larger Canon battery for the c100). The 1080p60 from the c100 KILLS the 1dc's soft 1080p60 mode. I hope whatever you're shooting doesn't move much, as holding focus at 1.3x crop is pretty tough. For DOC work I'd throw on a STM lens (10-18) or even the 18-35 Sigma stopped down a bit. But hey, to each their own. c100 has MOJO for days in C-log mode (and Wide DR is pretty damn nice too). Just my opinion of course.

Well in this case he does have the c100 (if it's version II or I with the upgrade) he can map a button to AF enable and problem solved. IMO I'd make the c100 in his case the "A" cam due to much easier to work with video-centric functions.

I was like you - I switched Canon to Sony (a7s, a7r, a7rii, a6300). I have a small handful of native Sony lenses but heavily invested in Canon glass. The Metabones adapter works ok but many times it'd lock up and I'd have to power the camera off and on again. Some compatibility with Sigma EF mount lenses (it didn't work at the time with the Sigma 150-600 C for longer than 1 minute of video). Random error codes, et al. Twice this year my a7r2 had an issue that required it to be sent into Sony for repair. My 5d3's never had this issue and I ran Magic Lantern. Despite all of this, I never liked the Sony colors esp. skin tones. So I started going back to Canon - got the 1dc and liked it, but didn't really shoot C-log nor understand how to grade it that well, so for me it wasn't worth keeping it. So I shot pics with the 1dx for a while (I have since changed my mind about the 1dc now that I'm shooting C-log. I will admit I was wrong there!) Then I bought a C100 Mark II. I figured out after reading and teaching myself how to expose and color (well, getting much better at it) C-log and I'm super thrilled with the results. Built in ND, proper XLR audio, waveform, 1080p60 that isn't soft (a la 1dc), in camera over/under crank, quick access menus, good EVF. Specs won't blow you away but the image is stunning. It's like the 5d3 with Magic Lantern in C-log (provided you get close on exposure) and I love the battery life, form factor and reliability. My son's spring travel baseball ended last week, so I picked up another 5d3 (and sold the 1dx). So I've come full circle after 4 years ago buying my first 5d3. At the end of the day it may not have everything (lower dynamic range, no 1080p60 or faster) but it's plenty fast enough for casual use, has gorgeous colors that need little tweaking in Lightroom. All I have to say is if you shoot people, stick with Canon. Landscapes or something else perhaps not, or the 5dsr. One more thing - the c100 is really, really, really good in low light. In my eyes as good as the Sony a7s original or pretty close. The Sony can crank up higher with less noise, but man, up to ISO 12800 the Canon retains a shit-ton of color detail and the Sony doesn't.

I am no stranger to market forums (this one, Fred Miranda, DVXuser, Photography on the Net, Sportsshooters.com and a couple others. Cheapest one I'm seeing is $4250 with an unknown shutter count (I do not count the water logged $3k one on ebay a valid option). PM me if you can be more specific. Thanks, Shawn

I thought your name sounded familiar - I've been following you on Youtube for quite some time. Question for you regarding the video "5 Reasons to Buy a Used Canon 1DC" You stated your used 1dc "cost less than a Sony a7r mark ii". Where did you find one that cheap?

I am holding onto my a6300. It's my camera of choice for quick snapshots, 120FPS in camera slow-mo, good static 4k of landscape stuff (not people) and my most used feature? Taking photos of things I'm selling on Craigslist / Feebay. The popup flash tilts. Plus it's very light. I cannot just set it on a tripod and let it roll in the heat though. For sure not 4k. It is what it is, but that with the 28 FE F/2 is a nice little combo. Yes I realize the 28/2 is for the FF bodies. Sorry to hear you're having bad luck. It's pretty good in low light - but the c100 Mark II smokes it handily noise wise - shot my kids letting off some smoke bombs last night - the c100 was very clean @ ISO 10,000; much cleaner than the (don't dare move it else you'll get rolling shutter) a6300 was @ ISO 6400. But hey, for the money? The a6300 is smashing for what it does. I'm sure you TURNED IT ON WRONG. That's my assumption. Did you eat chicken that week? I'm sure that did it...:)

Sitrep - UPS just dropped the a7r2 back off. Sony documentation read "replaced C board, cleaned and checked". Was put in the mail priority on Friday 06/10 and returned to my hands 20 days later. Considering shipping was easily 2-3 days each way, I'd say this isn't awful. It's awful that's it's broken twice in the last 3 months, but the turn around isn't terrible.

Not only that, but almost all the stills shooters put tape over the Canon logo so they aren't giving free advertisement. All I know is I shot in 95+ heat for hours Monday night with a 1dx + C100 II (both doing video) and neither camera even blinked. Meanwhile the Sony a7r2 I sent in for repair finally came back after the 2nd failure since March. I'll keep mine Canon or Nikon or pro Sony, not "mirrorless" when it counts.

Here's some reasons I won't be getting a GH5: 1. I am invested in Canon EF and EF-S glass. 2. Colors (esp people) not up to my 1dx/C100 ii combo 3. Speedbooster is nice, but bad AF (very slow). Adapters suck, really. 4. No adapter exists that will give me that full frame aesthetic. But after owning a few GH2's I really respect and admire what Panasonic is doing. If I were invested in m4/3rds glass it'd be a no brainer (this would alleviate my #1 and #3 reasons. Still can't ever get away from FF stills and/or Canon colors.

I shot some C-Log (aka CP9 Cinema tonight) and did some light grading. One really needs a Ninja with this to push the grade around quite a bit, but the skin tones are just stunning. If Sony could only adopt Canon's colors (ducks out of the thread now)...:)

To Mattias's point, I would rather have really good 1080p than less than stellar 4k. The c100 C-log looks every bit as good as the 1dc downscaled to 1080, and the c100's 1080p60 is far superior. No ND, proper audio, faster workflow with smaller files means for me the c100 is a better fit for my needs. But that c100/300/500 sensor has all the voodoo magic esp. with skintones that the 4k 1dc gave me.

Ben, what CP do you use for the c300? I have been using Wide DR on the c100 and just adjusting contrast basically in post and have been thrilled so far.

I noticed in the "champagne" celebration room folks with c100's. Then I noticed out on the court the same thing...Makes you think about how important pros value reliability over high Sony specs...:) Keep in mind I am biased as I have a c100 mk2 due here today and have been burned twice in the last 3 months with 2 Sony a7r2 failures that required the same camera to be sent in for repair.

Years ago I had the AF100 - the built in ND's as mentioned plus the ergo's far trump the Sony FS100 - I can't imagine dragging that rectangle brick around. I prefer the skin tones from the Panny vs. the Sony as well. With the 60p firmware update both will do 1080p60 and the Panny has some very cool over/under crank options and you can shoot 1 FPS timelapse with it. Obviously the Sony has the advantage in low light but IMO that's it. Maybe dynamic range also. The AF100 was a great camera and I got some amazing shots with it.