User

As I understand it, using a recorder offers little or no real benefit (unless one only shoots heavy movement/ motion ie. leave fluttering on trees, rivers/ oceans etc. and even then it's near impossible to see the difference) other than encoding to a more edit friendly codec. It's 8bit 4.2.0 all the way though Canon are working some serious mojo magic along the pipeline.

Exactly.

Are you talking raw or h.264? If it's h.264, it's been my experience that extra DR of the C100 beats the 5D when grading. Maybe. But we are not the OP and he has stated that 'he' require a quick turnaround for the situation 'he' is in.

OP states that raw on the 5D3 is not an option for the production, so naturally I'm talking about h264.

Set your zebras at 90-95%. There is still some small room for recovery should you pass 100 IRE. I like the WDR picture profile for day shooting. Do not use Clog or WDR for low light shooting. Caucasian skin tones at 60 on the waveform. The C100 renders a WAY more detailed image than the 5DM3. That little extra tonality and pop that Policar describes coming off a big sensor is not worth sacrificing the wonderful detail of the C100 4k sensor. Story is everything.

I ran a 5DM2 for a long time before moving to the C100M2 and I'm much happier with the image. Also, I had more issues achieving deep focus on the 5D. As I understand it, a 35mm sensor is the cinematic benchmark for look and feel.

I'd like to see a 'firmware update' that enables the C100 MkII to shoot 4k and 1080 at 120fps. Any thoughts on weather the current hardware could handle that?

Americans... as cartoon characters.

Does the Canon 1DX Mark II have focus peaking?

Yes, but are you diggin' the 1DC image? How does it compared to all the other cameras you've run the gamut with? God like?

I'd like to see 4k upgrade software made available (purchase or otherwise) for the C100 MkII. I'm curious if the current hardware could handle it?

Does this mean you are taking your ball and finally going home? The nerve!

I'm currently running a C100 MkII with various lenses including a Sigma 18-35mm and a Canon 100mm 2.8 that really shine on this camera. Of course I'd love a robust codec but I'm quite surprised by how much I can pull the image around in post. I've always lusted after the 1DC, but I hate the fact that you require an external monitor to get focus peaking. And shooting 4k, one better know where one's focus is. The 1DX II is mostly likely only camera that I'll move towards after the C100... plus a couple of Little DARlings for audio. Let's see.

100%. Again, huge thanks for jumping in here Zach

Great Zach. Thanks! Love this community. And a question about audio, if I may? During a previous shoot, I ran the wireless receiver into the 3.5mm jack. The signal came in very hot so I attenuated the receiver to -25 to knock things back to a reasonable level, but I'm wondering if the quality of the audio would have been higher if I would have lowered the input volume in the camera (via your method) instead of via the wireless -25 attenuation. Any thoughts? Thanks again Zach.

This thread sunk like a stone... methinks there must be a way seeing as many folks run a mic (Rode Video Mic etc.) into the CX00 cameras minus the handle containing the audio controls. Anyone?

For the C100 users, I'm trying to find a way to control my audio levels when inputting audio through the 3.5mm mini jack without the top handle (audio controls) attached to the camera. I looked in the menu and everything is greyed out. Also, I figured it would be possible to assign this to a custom button but can't make that happen either. Anyone?

No sweat Tomsemiterrific, under the gun here but happy to help when I can. I believe these 'values' are for C-Log. But take a look at this thread an contact Cinegain as he (to his credit) put this chart in front of me: And please, feel free to update this thread with your result which are valuable to us all!

Hi Tomsemiterrific I'm in a bit of a hurry here but here are some notes that I've collected over the past few months. Hope this helps. Canon C-LOG 18% Middle grey = 32.79% IRE 90% White = 62.74% IRE http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?300371-how-do-I-know-I-m-properly-exposed-when-shooting-in-C-log/page2&s=d408a43004d503887fd6bc7fd4a2ab77 On another forum, James Longley, who has been using C-log for his Afghanistan documentary, posted this: "One thing about exposure: Don't overexpose the C300. Just set the zebras at 90% (+/-5) and don't let anything go over unless absolutely necessary. You may think that the shadows are gone, but they're not. The camera is very forgiving – you get so much more than what you can see of the darks on the LCD screen in daylight. You have to just have faith that the shadow detail will be there when you bring the material home." It is always important to test, but I think you can expose highlights in C-log up to 90% on a waveform. Using a lower ISO won’t cause more noise, but will result in less dynamic range, in particular in the highlights. Instead of using a lower ISO, use an ND filter. Also, to reduce noise, I recommend overexposing by about a half stop. Canon doesn’t recommend this, but Shane Hurlbut does and my testing has confirmed that this camera needs a little extra light to keep the noise down. Ebrahim Saadawi: Activate waveform, expose until just before 100%. Trust me, this is the best image for the C100 C-Log in noise, DR, colour, skin. You'll see when you try it. The image is so much thicker and nicer when brought down while falls apart while pulled up. It's so easy to expose as the waveform is super fluid (real time at 25 fps). And yes ETTR even by pumping up ISO, on the C100 an under exposed 850 image is noisier than an ETTR 3200 image. But ideally, ETTR with iris and shutter and lights at 850 native ISO. Yes if you don't want to spend the huge effort of neat video in post, in shoots where you're going above 6400+ ISO, increasing the NR to 5 in the menus gives a ENORMOUS lowlight advantage with no detail loss. Beyond that you start losing. Also test using WDR instead of C-Log. Especially for +6400 ISO with +5 NR. I would actually shoot the first one shot in WDR at 850 ISO under sunlight just to avoid the initial momentary disappointment you might get with seeing your first shot in C-Log, especially if it's in lowlight, with Cinema Lock (no DR) and exposed down a bit. WDR serves GREAT in fast jobs, some people even prefer it for grading. So compare both too as a test. http://www.hingsberg.com/index.php/2013/01/canon-c-log-exposed-literally/ The chart below that I put together is based on information provided from Canon’s whitepaper on C-LOG. From the chart you can see how image brightness values are remapped to new values. For example 18% middle grey which is normally 50%IRE moves down to around 32-33%. 90%IRE (white) will appear on your waveform monitor at only 62-63%. It’s really important to use these new values (even if you don’t understand them) when setting your exposure in C-LOG mode since it will maximize the dynamic range your sensor is capable of and preserve as much of the scene information as possible. This “maximum” amount of information is needed later when you de-LOG your footage and begin grading and color correcting in post. http://blog.abelcine.com/2012/10/05/working-with-canon-log/ http://www.hdvideopro.com/columns/help-desk/the-rules-of-log-exposure Canon C-LOG-18% Middle grey .textClipping Pasted Graphic 1.tiff Pasted Graphic.tiff

I'm reposting my previous comment (from another trread) as it seems more suited here: I was really tempted by all that Sony has brought to the table recently and I know that some are able to render decent images out of their consumer/ prosumer line, but I started to sense that they were dangling little carrots in their A7 line that didn't really amount to much or would actually cause headaches. Then came the FS5 with a codec wound so incredibly thin that it falls apart while needing a monster processor to cut through it with effects. Fuck that shit. I've been running the C100 MkII for the past 3 month full time on a doc under difficult conditions. It might not be everyone's thing, but I can honestly say that at the end of the day this camera is a solid work horse with beautiful colour, resolution, and a host of tools to help one get the most out of it. I am continually surprised by what it delivers and have zero regrets buying it. If I was to move towards another camera for use under more controlled shooting environments (monitor and extras attached), it would be the 1DC or 1DX II.

Not to take anything away from the larger point being made here, but let's remember that it's the camera that interprets the image from the glass. So I'd think that they are both pretty up there.

I was really tempted by all that Sony has brought to the table recently and I know that some are able to render decent images out of their consumer/ prosumer line, but I started to sense that they were dangling little carrots in their A7 line that didn't really amount to much or would actually cause headaches. Then came the FS5 with a codec wound so incredibly thin that it falls apart while needing a monster processor to cut through it with effects. Fuck that shit. I've been running the C100 MkII for the past 3 month full time on a doc under difficult conditions. It might not be everyone's thing, but I can honestly say that at the end of the day this camera is a solid work horse with beautiful colour, resolution, and a host of tools to help one get the most out of it. I am continually surprised by what it delivers and have zero regrets buying it. If I was to move towards another camera for use under more controlled shooting environments (monitor and extras attached), it would be the 1DC or 1DX II.

I understand that some camera can have an overly sharp 'electronic' image which can set the stage for criticism, but I'm curious to know if anyone else finds many of the shots in 'Micro' to be soft?

Resolution streaming options available here in Asia. Sent feedback anyway.

I think I came across a thread a few months ago indicating a 1st gen model. The complex thoughts and feelings part came in the second batch.