BrunoLandMedia

Hey everyone, been following this post and wanted to get an opinion for 2 different questions. I am 100% going to upgrade to R5 or R6 BUT I also need a full upgrade of my rig to 4k. I'm a single shooter and do a bit of everything from Real Estate, event photos/video, lots of live streaming these days, and up to 5 camera live music shoots. Video is my primary concern. Here is my current rig. EOS R - EOS R - C100mk2 - C100 (1) - 2 Go Pros. RF15-35, RF70-200, RF24-105, RF351.8, Sig18-35, EF70-200, EF501.8, EF10-18 I want to upgrade mostly because although R is a good camera, it's just not as good of a picture (the c1002 is still better video quality)and so many clients are asking for 4k. For Real Estate walk throughs and smaller jobs I trick clients by up res exports to 4k and it looks just as good on Vimeo for them. But for the live music I really need to just get out of the old rig. It's not a 1 camera investment but I can't be buying 3 c200's or anything. But my first upgrade needs to be my main camera. Question 1 - Real Estate and single camera videos shoots. I'm not sure if anyone does real estate with one or both of these, but would love to know if the R5 is the worth the price for RE. I need 4k60 and see people using the R6 and most are happy. Also, the overheating doesn't' seem come in to play because it's a bunch of short clips with plenty of breaks for WB and ISO adjustments. I just need something with better DR for dark spaces and better picture. I currently use Clog and have a pretty good grade, but I still know it can be better. Question 2 - For 5 camera shoots. (Not fully on topic) I do full concerts and promo stuff. I don't know if I'd shoot 4k for 60+ min things, but I currently have a job (COVID depending) that is a 15 min promo real that MUST be in 4k. Just want to get any thoughts from people who do multi-cam stuff at this sort of semi-pro level by themselves. I mostly shoot inside for live music but I totally need at least one camera with build in ND's for outdoor streaming. Here are my ideas. Idea 1 (cheapest): Get R6 (or 5?) for main camera. Keep R's and use their not-as-good crop 4k, and upres the c1002. This would be a bandaid and not long term for 4k. Idea 2: Looking into the BM pocket 6k and Pro or waiting for C50 depending on price. Has anyone used BM6k with canon and color matched well? At the price and having EF glass the BM6k looks very appealing but not sure anyone else's experience. Any thoughts would be helpful, Cheers, Thanks.

Thanks for the few replies. I haven't made a decision yet on what to get, but now I'm leaning towards another R. Randomly though, I picked up a C100 (first gen, no DPAF) for $500 from a huge sale. I literally could not turn it down for what was a $6,000 camera. I owned a mk i before but upgraded to the mkii because I also got a great deal on it and a sigma 18-35 1.8. This will not replace my need for a R or c100mkii for the immediate future. But I plan on using the c100 to replace my GoPro as my "drum cam". It will crush the go pro and I can creatively use that somewhere else at a live show if needed. BUT, I now have 2 more quick questions. 1a. Does anyone think the DPAF upgrade is worth it on this old boy for essentially the same price as I got the camera? My non-DPAF plan was to widen to F/4 or so to get the drummer one shot AF on his face (or snare drum depending) and call it a day, since the drummers face wouldn't be center frame anyway and would need constant tracking. 1b. Is there a way to do the upgrade yourself or by 3rd party? after all these years it seems it might be something you could get done cheaper than spending $500, if canon even does that upgrade anymore. I'd be fine doing it for $200 or so, but not $500 I don't think. 2. I know there is a difference in the mki and mkii image wise, but does anyone have a trick for exposure and WB so that the cameras match the closest without having to CG much. For example i KNOW that in the same room, my R needs to be about 200 cooler on the K scale than my mkii. I remember reading somewhere the mki was about 400 cooler. So if I set mkii to 5000, R is about 4800, and c100 mki would be 4600??? something like that? Thanks again for any thoughts! Cheers, Chris

Hello, I asked this question in another topic (about EOS R Raw) and I appreciate the responses there but someone suggested I make this it's own topic. FYI: I have both the EOS R & The c100 Mark ii already. 1. WHEN TO USE IT: Should I be using c-log for live concerts and weddings? I just started using C-log and working on grading. I'm wondering if anyone shoots live concerts and/or weddings and decides to use C-log vs Wide DR (on the c100) or the "flattest" profile on the R. I need to get a 3rd camera (next question) for matching purposes. Does anyone have advice for how/when to shoot C-log and if the R and c100ii match well using either option. 2. Besides the R and c100, I have a 6d2 at my disposal for a "fourth/C" camera, but I need a third camera to go with these 2. Which one would you choose with these factors below. - I'm not changing systems, I want to match these cameras as close as possible. - I'm not doing 4k for these clients. - I need it basically now so waiting for R+ etc, or c100 mk iii is not an option. - Budget is around $2,000, and the c100ii is popping up around that price a lot recently, although I could stretch to $2,200 if needed, and the R is down around $1700 on ebay. - I'm a solo shooter and really need 3 main cameras to match quickly for clients and have my 6d2 and gopro as 5% total of shots just for some close ups and Drummer shots (at the live concerts) - Audio will always be separate multi track so scratch is fine from camera. EOS R is cheaper, has the touch screen for face tracking (especially on camera I'm not operating) is cheaper, and more modern. the c100ii has a great image, no time limit, dual slots. I just don't know enough about clog to know if the R can match the quality of the c100ii (or better it) so that all I'll have to worry about is restarting one every 30 min if I go with it. If anyone has any experience with this combo it would be helpful. Thanks for any advice! Cheers, Chris

Thanks, I really feel like a question like that would get ignored, that's why I posted here. But you have a good point about the thread. @webrunner, weddings are one thing for me, I'm in the middle of the road (or at least that is where I'm shooting for) but only 6-10 a year to supplement the other stuff I do. I'm a working musician who also does studio mixing and live music videos. It's a little all over the place on paper, but it serves me well. I'm never trying to rich on any of it, just make the best of it. When the live music is slow, a couple weddings can pad a month. Bottom line though, I need a 3rd good camera to match for these Live recordings, and for a wedding ceremony coming up for sure. Enough work that renting would be wasting because the $$$ is already set. If I'm going to rent for 4 days, might as well put that towards the camera. Cheers

This is not 100% on topic but since this discussion has people using the R and C100ii together I thought I would post here. So regardless of the RAW rumors, I'm wondering if anyone has a suggestion for me. I currently own an R and a c100 mark ii. I'm not using c-log because most of my projects are quick turn around and the Wide DR mixed with the R's profile is pretty good. The Question: Do I get a second R or c100 mark ii for Wedding and Live Music usage. I've done plenty of 2 camera Wedding and 3 camera live concerts but with the 3rd camera and XA10 camcorder. I'm moving into much high cost projects for weddings and solo/duo/DJ performances. I need a 3rd camera (and can only afford one right now) for what the clients want and wanted to see where you all would put your money assuming what I have already. Lenses I have: RF 35 1.8, RF 24-105 f/4, Sigma 18-35 1.8, Canon 16-35 f/4, Canon 70-200 f/2.8ii (planning on adding a lens once I make a camera decision) My plan is use c-log on the cameras so they match better. These would all be solo shooting gigs (mostly). I like the R for a lot of reasons but it's nice having the built in ND and unlimited record time of the c100. But, if the c-log is just as good on the R, and I have some RF lenses with the idea of expanding, why not get a Grey Market R for $1650/$1700 instead of a used c100 mark ii for $2100+. I got my c100ii for $2400 and that was a darn good deal so 2100/2200 is awesome as well. I need to more fast, and I honestly don't have time to shoot a bunch of c-log footage to compare, but I assume the grade well together. I know how to use both camera's well and plan on the c100 being my main shot (unlimited recording) the camera in question to be my B static, and the R I own on my Ronin S moving around the whole time for both wedding ceremony's and the live music stuff. Thanks for any advice. Cheers, Chris

Hey Everyone, I hate to keep posting in this topic, but I don't want to start anything new as it seems this is where everything GH5 is. I've been asking and researching around for months trying to figure out what is best for me and I still had a few questions and wanted to get everyones take. 1. I really need a camera with no recording limits and clean HDMI out for streaming to replace my old Canon XA10 camcorder. So after tons of research, it came down to c100 (I or II) or GH5. 2. I also currently use my canon 6d2 for my run and gun video and have lots of Canon Glass. (was planning on replacing with EOS R, but that's another story at the moment) 3. My initial thought was to get a c100 as the A cam for all event stuff and continue to use my 6d2/EOS R as run and gun. 4. Then I did 100 hours of research on GH5 thinking maybe it could replace BOTH cameras with the speedbooster (Metabones or other) for my canon glass to do events, interviews, etc, and get a native Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8 for the dual IS for run and gun. compact and easy package. 5. My biggest issues and questions. - Will I be disappointed in GH5 color vs Canon, regardless of functions. - Will the speedbooster work well enough with my glass, and which brand and multiplier? - are the native Panasonic Lenses worth buying at all. is the 12-35 good and with Dual IS, or should I just use a canon 24-105 f/4 - Will the autofocus be as good as Canon for the run and gun. Not needed as much for events as I usually man focus for the stage. Notes. regardless. I will be keeping my Canon 80d at least for home photo/video use plan to keep most of my Canon glass. I won't shoot 4k 99% of the time due to fast and easy delivery of content. My budget can handle a GH5, Speed booster and the 12-35, but that is about it without selling some other gear. Thanks so much. Just so nervous about using another system

Hey everyone, been going back and forth on a ton of ideas, and have landed at looking at GH5 for a few reasons. I am all canon at the moment, considered a c100 and EOS R, but those I don't think are going to really work. SO now looking at GH5 for: - IBIS with their 12-35 f/2.8 lens. Dual IS - No recording time limit and Clean HDMI out. Live Streaming, Events longer than 29:59 which I do a bunch of at work. - 1080 up to 180p. I use slo mo a lot now at 60p and it’s OK, but 120 or 180 would be awesome How would a GH5 + 12-35 f/2.8 & 35-100 f/2.8 compare to Canon with 24-70 and 70-200? Does that native combo do well or should I look at Metabones, for my Canon Glass? Is low light really that bad on GH5? Will it match Canon 80d and 6d2 footage? Is IBIS + Dual lens IS great? or just a little better than Canon IS lenses? Budget was around $3,500 and this could get body and 2 lenses, or body, adapter, and 1 lens. Already have 80d, 6d2, 16-35 f/4, 35 f/2, 70-200 f/2.8, 18-135 USM, 10-18 STM, Nifty 50. Thanks in advance

OK, Now I'm going to look a little stupid. I've had a little time with the c100 ii and having a hard time adjusting. Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe this camera is just not right for me and my run and gun style First, exposure is a total issue right now, I am completely out of wack with it. on DSLR, I keep my Aperture wide open most of the time (except for certain shooting), shutter at 180 degrees and let Auto ISO do it's thing for Run and Gun. Of course when I have time to set up shots like Interviews, longer programs, performances, I will manually adjust ISO, and white balance. But for the run and gun, Auto ISO is really a fantastic option. BUT with the c100ii, that isn't an option and now I find my self fumbling with ND's and auto Iris or trying to click a few buttons to adjust ISO above 850 and it is really not very easy to do on the fly. Also, ND's are easier to understand and seem to work great outside and in brighter light, but auto Iris totally changes my DOF obviously. Then if 850 ISO is too dark, I can't assign the handle wheel to ISO (only shutter) so I have to click into the menu and fumble there for a bit. Is there anyway to get faster exposure?? or am I just going to have to work way different? Another issue: I use 60 fps all the time intermixed on run and gun. Just about in every video. I have it saved as a custom button on top of 6d and 80d. on the c100, I'm having hard time finding a quick way to navigate this. Has anyone found that fastest way to switch between 24fps and 60fps without 4 or 5 steps. Now, I have a full event shoot tomorrow and I am going to suck it up and try to use it the best I can and see what I get but if anyone has any help or ideas about this it would be great. I'm starting to feel like, although this camera will give me better quality, it might not work for my work flow. Cheers

It's actually the 18-135 usm Nano. Problem is that I'm inside a lot with not great lighting. In the past with DSLR's, I've bene using auto ISO when just running around a classroom, or hallways, or outside (in and out of shade etc) just to get shots without have time to re expose every shot. Obviously that's not going to work as well on c100, so I was hoping constant aperture would be at least one benefit. Thanks for the video, I have the 70-200 as well, just fantastic, but not a run and gun lens.

Picked up one for $2400 from a production company. Totally still the top of my budget at the moment, but it will hang on the credit card for a month till I can make it up with an extra job. I have seen some great footage online from the mark 2's. I am a pretty good editor and know my way around the canon DSLR's so I hope the learning curve isn't that steep. I also am going to try out the 24-105 Mark II. I know the original 24-105 is a workhorse but the world is sort of split on it's results. Half say it works, half say it's to dark. So I picked up a 24-105 Mark ii yesterday during eBays %15 off sale ($100 off) I'll either keep to replace my 24-70 f/4, or resell if it doesn't work. I have used my 18-135 a lot, but I know the quality is just not that great. I did a test a while ago on 80d of the 18-135, my current 24-70 f/4 and at the time, a Canon Refurb Purchased 24-105 Mark ii. The L's were so much sharper, even at iso 100 that it was hard to even justify having the 18-135, but before my 6d2, I really needed something for the range, so returned the 24-105 and kept switching between the 35 f/2 and 18-135 when I needed it. Now, with a 6d2, and the c100ii I have use for a 24-105. I'm hoping that the new 24-105mkii, while not "blow you away good" will be much closer to f/4 and with the better low light on c100 compared to my 80d tests, won't make it suffer. I know the IS is much better than the original. Of course I'll use 35 f/2 for a lot of B-roll, but I'm hoping the 24-105 will cover way better than the 18-135. Also, c100 is only 1.5 crop instead of 1.6, so that might help the wide end of the 24 a little bit. I have my 16-35 f/4 or even 10-18 stm if I need wider. I've also seen a lot of people using 24 primes on c100's so it can't be that bad of a focal length. No matter what my desire for primes or my 70-200 f/2.8 offers me, I still need that run and gun zoom lens so I'm not missing shots in and out of classrooms and other places in my school. Can't wait to start using it! Thanks for all the advice.

Not sure if anyone has experience with eBay sellers internationally, but this looks like a great deal from a reputable seller. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-C100-MK-II-Cinema-Camera-body-EF/223106003077?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649 Any thoughts? Will I have to pay import taxes or something?

I've never been compelled to get the 24-105 from all the reviews, and on a crop/s35, it just isn't great, but the constant f/4 still seems better than the 18-135, but maybe I'm wrong. 18-135 USM with power zoom: I have it, haven't used it with the c100 yet, but not amazing with my 80d. It totally works, but I always get better overall quality from my other lenses, even if they don't fit the situation. I guess I'll just have to see the quality with the c100 once I use the combo. 70-200 f/2.8 II: Definitely the best lens I have, but not wide enough for a lot of situations, and not great for run and gun (weight & focal length). 24-70 f/4 IS: It's weird, I'm just not that impressed with this lens. I've had it for a while, and the IS works for video, but I still keep the 35 f/2 on my 6d or the 16-35 f/4 most of the time. It's just never fast enough inside and things just never look as good. 24-70 f/2.8 could just never work for me without the IS for handheld and monopod video. Primes: 35 f/2 IS is great for me, I might even buy a second. Works for both Crop and FF. I'm looking at the 85 f/1.4 IS but it's so expensive. I might just settle for the 100mm f/2.8L IS but there are not a lot of reviews on this lens for video. Any thoughts? I know a slower 85 f/1.8 would be good for tripod but seems like a waste if I can't handhold. I guess everyone has a need for a fast zoom with IS. 24-70, 16-80. Anything really, but nothing seems to exist there right now. Ok, those are my lens complaints/questions.

You all have been great. One more question in regards to lenses. Ive seen a lot of talk of people using 24-105 f/4. Constant ap is Great but I thought f/4 was pretty slow still. Is it for the c100 or is the low light so good that f/4 can be as good as 2.8 on some dslrs? my 70-200 2.8 and 35 f2 will be great but is there a go to zoom? 17-55 2.8? 24-105? Are those the only options?

Yeah, after reading and re-reading the advice here and after seeing things head into the M4/3 conversation, it only makes me feel more like moving towards a c100 mkii. Since everyone's shooting situation is different and people hear have thoughtfully commented on mine, it seems the big signs point that way. c100 mkii offers me; - 60p for my slow mo - Native lens support and DPAF - ND's Built in (which helps a guy running around outside at a school, weddings sometimes, etc.) - No Time Limit recording - I also believe that current USED price point (around $2500-2800) is going to be my best bet for a Cinima camera. mk3 would be out of my price range if one came out and who knows what the future holds. I actually almost pulled the trigger on one for $2480 2 weeks ago, but ended up being too scared, and now I'm kinda kicking myself, that was a good price I believe. Once again, thanks everyone for your thoughts and advice. I think I am going to wait for a good price and start worrying about my shooting, not my gear. Cheers, Chris

Wait, I'm confused. Isn't the GH5 a DSLR? How would I use that for long form (I assume you mean no time limit recording) and what lenses would have to buy to make that work. I've heard from just about everone that speed boosters just don't work as well and are never as good as native lenses for M4/3 systems. Now I'm a little confused. Am I missing the boat somewhere?