C100 - Mark I, Mark II, or just wait???

[BrunoLandMedia]

Hey there everyone,

First time poster although I have been lurking for a long time. I’ve been bouncing back and forth on this issue for a while, and I finally have a little bit of a budget to make a move on a camera and I think a C100 is my best bet due to my needs. I want to be brief on what I do and what I have, but I want to include all the info to help limit follow up questions. Any help or advice on this matter would be amazing.

WHAT I DO
First and foremost I work at a private school shooting video of all kinds, short mini-documentary, cute videos of kids, longer documentaries, tons of run-and-gun events, interviews, development videos, and lots of performances on stage (2-3 camera shoots) including small theater (10), larger theater shows (4), and about 8 musical Performances. So it’s a HUGE variety of shooting and I’m a one man band. 

Also, I do private projects, some wedding stuff (not super pro, just as a musician at the gig, I do a ton of B-roll and Ceremony for shorter, not as expensive videos), small videos, Vlogging, and personal videos of family and music events. 

WHAT I HAVE
PERSONAL
Canon 6dmk2 - Mostly my home/family/travel camera for photos and videos. I bring it in for all multi-cam events, for wide shots with 16-35 etc. 

WORK OWNED
Canon 80d w/ 18-135 USM & Power Zoom Adapter. - Main School run and gun cam. I supplement with my lenses except when I’m shooting events where the 18-135 camcorder style works the best. 

Canon XA10 - Usually my long (safe) shot when I’m running 3 cameras, also severs as my uninterrupted shot when the DSLRs have to be restarted at 29:59. IT’s a big bowl of OK. I try not to use that shot too much. 

LENSES
10-18 STM
16-35 f/4 L IS
18-135 USM
24-70 f/4 L IS
35 f/2 IS
50 f/1.8 STM
70-200 f/2.8 L II IS USM
So I have some good stuff and like having the flexibility of a Crop and FF  at my disposal BUT….

WHAT I NEED (Why I’m looking at a c100)
I’m really looking for a camera to take the place as my MAIN A camera. I’m looking at a c100 because I have the lenses, I like Canon color, and right now the mk1 and mk2 are pretty good deals in many places. 

So, mk1, mk2, wait for a new release or something else? Here are my paths and thoughts. 

C100 Mk1: If I can get this around $1500-$1700 (with DPAF) I would still end up using my 80d as my main run and gun with the 35 f/2, maybe get a 24 f/2.8 STM as well.  It has the touch screen, DPAF, 60fps for slow (not amazing) motion. Then use the c100 for longer shoots, interviews, all performances etc. where I don’t need the mk2 upgrades. 

C100 MK2: If I got this, it would turn into my main camera for everything I think. From what I am reading, it can mount on a Ronin-S gimbal for run and gun, 60fps to shoot for slow mo, ND for outside, and main camera for all events etc. Then I would supplement with the 6d2 as my B cam and use the XA10 still as a third camera and safe shot. I know matching color isn’t going to be the easiest between the 3, but that isn’t usually a huge problem for where I work. Private client things might be an issue, but not sure. 

OPTION 3: Future C100 MK3? 5d4? Something Else?  I know I won’t have the budget for a c100 mk3 if it ever exists or comes out, but am I missing something? Should I just stick with my 80d? I’ve read that the c100 blows it away but will I missing the touch screen focus or other options?

BUDGET: Top of my budget is around $1800ish and that would get me a c100, or if I sold my 80d, could be a stretch to get the mk2, but I feel 1 extra job will pay for the rest. 

Thanks for thoughts and advice in advance. Cheers!

[webrunner5]

Just wait. We have no clue what Canon will bring out, but they Will bring out something. Might be gimped, might be great.

DPAF in the C100 cameras are not like say a 80D. The C100 is in a small box and you can't move it on the original, The C100  mkII it is still in a small box, but you can move that box around with the touch screen. So we are not talking like the whole sensor is covered with AF points like a lot of newer cameras are now. It is kind of limiting.

[IronFilm]

If you can live without 4K / 10bit / 60fps / TC / SDI / etc (which it sounds like maybe you can) then get the C100mk1 DPAF for dirt dirt cheap secondhand, "if" something else better comes along in the future you can sell the camera without much of a loss.

[webrunner5]

4 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

If you can live without 4K / 10bit / 60fps / TC / SDI / etc (which it sounds like maybe you can) then get the C100mk1 DPAF for dirt dirt cheap secondhand, "if" something else better comes along in the future you can sell the camera without much of a loss.

They are Not dirt cheap here anymore for some reason with the DPAF. They run 1800 dollars or more. You can buy a brand new one from B&H for 1999 dollars. Stupid. I am not too sure an original one is worth 2 grand. Not with the GH5, GH5s and the Sony A7 mk III the same money or less. Heck you have the Fuji, Olympus EM1 mk II, on and on. This new Nikon, nah.

[jonpais]

$2,000 does not sound dirt cheap to me either considering what that money buys today.

[BrunoLandMedia]

Thanks, I feel like with the price of used Mk2's out there, the mk1 would just be a waste. I won't use 4k in my job for a long time, so that is NOT the issue for me. Just a camera that can do the things an 80d and 6dmk2 can't and look great. I'm hopeing in 2018 something will work for me that isn't $7k.

[Kisaha]

1 minute ago, BrunoLandMedia said:

Thanks, I feel like with the price of used Mk2's out there, the mk1 would just be a waste. I won't use 4k in my job for a long time, so that is NOT the issue for me. Just a camera that can do the things an 80d and 6dmk2 can't and look great. 

C100mkII. It doesn't have a touch screen though that someone mentioned above but it is still a great camera.

For most jobs I do, I prefer it to the C200 even.

Its great to hear someone really knows what he wants and doesn't spend most of his life in front of spec sheets.

[mercer]

6 minutes ago, jonpais said:

$2,000 does not sound dirt cheap to me either considering what that money buys today.

$2000 for a cinema camera that has XLR, cLog, DPAF, internal NDs, with a really clean 1080p image downscaled in camera from 4K... that cost $6000 new only a few years ago... yeah that’s dirt cheap.

[HockeyFan12]

I love the C100 Mk 1 and think it's a bargain, but...

Codec is too thin for tv. (usually not a problem for web but some clients may want a better codec if you're shooting for tv, better to get C300 or FS7)

No timecode sync. Deal killer for some.

No 60fps.

Terrible evf. LCD is not great, either.

No 4k (not a big deal for me but some clients demand it).

Highlight dynamic range worse than other cinema cameras (but as good as the best mirrorless cameras). On par with Red MX. Worse than F55 or Alexa or Varicam or Dragon.

I love the look and the 1080p is the sharpest I've seen (sharper in my experience than downsampled Red MX or Alexa!) and the ergonomics are great. I think the mk 1 is a steal. Definitely prefer the footage to AS7 and by a lot, though the A7S technically has a bit more DR and much better low light and 4k of course.

But as you can see from the responses here, not everyone who's used it loves it as much as I do. (I had low expectations but was very very impressed; others it seem weren't when they tried it.) So I'd rent and try it first since YMMV...

Personally I'm looking at the C200. Slow motion, 4k, 1 stop better highlight detail, better codec, etc. Waiting on a price drop but it might be a while... But seems worse for doc use in some ways. C300 Mk II seems like documentary king, or FS7 (or Amira if you're very rich).

I wouldn't get one used. I'd get the Mk 1 with DPAF new or save up for something else. The lack of 60p might be a real problem, and the Mk II doesn't seem like a great deal, so I wouldn't buy one without trying it out first (just imo).

But imo it's perfect for your needs if you don't need slow motion. 

[webrunner5]

Oh they have a great look no doubt. But the viewfinder, LCD, first gen DPAF, it, well it is just old and outdated. It is like the PMW F3, AF100, sure they are, well were great cameras at the time but their time is gone now, with heck mirrorless cameras that are 500% better overall.

I know he has a ton of Canon lenses but what can't the Sony A7 mk III do, and he can adapt all them on a Metabones SB I would guess, and 50 things more than the C100 other than built in ND filters. How often do you really have to use them. And they sell variable ones, or singles if you do need them. This is 2018. We have new stuff with IBIS and great AF that fit in your coat pocket. Why buy some clunky big outdated cameras for the same or more money. I don't see the reasoning. Heck this new Nikon may be ground breaking. Same with the new Canon ones. It just seems like a step backward in a day of magical cameras we never dreamed of.

The OP to seems to need a camera that is the jack of all trades. And the Sony A7 mk III is that camera. Now if he wants it to look pro get a rig from hell for it LoL.

[mercer]

For one... he wants to stay with Canon... so why even bring up the a7iii? Two and three... built in NDs and XLRs. Four... Canon color. Five, six, seven, etc... he wants to stay with Canon.

@webrunner5

Not to mention, two weeks ago you were seriously thinking about buying a C100 Mark I... 

[webrunner5]

He can Adapt all of his Canon lenses to it. Canon is sort of proving to be a sinking ship on the video front also. Not my idea of something I want to sink tons of money into down the road. And not one lens he has is really great at any sort of MF. All fly by wire stuff. I mean most of us are in the same boat, but to Have to depend on AF, well I don't know about that. You can't adopt much of anything to the C100. You can put Anything on the A7 mk III.

Sony Sells a gizmo that goes on the hot shoe that does XLR's.

[mercer]

21 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

He can Adapt all of his Canon lenses to it. Canon is sort of proving to be a sinking ship on the video front also. Not my idea of something I want to sink tons of money into down the road. And not one lens he has is really great at any sort of MF. All fly by wire stuff. I mean most of us are in the same boat, but to Have to depend on AF, well I don't know about that. You can't adopt much of anything to the C100. You can put Anything on the A7 mk III.

Sony Sells a gizmo that goes on the hot shoe that does XLR's.

Adapting lenses sucks on mirrorless cameras. Canon lenses aren’t that small and then you add another two inches to their length and they don’t work nearly as well as on a Canon body plus then you need an electronic adapter which adds more money. Doesn’t make sense. 

But another two reasons why he would choose the C100 over an a7iii is the 30 min recording limit... for the performances and weddings he shoots, that may be one of the most important features. And then the inevitable overheating with the Sony... even at 30 minutes, the a7iii would probably start melting.

[Mako Sports]

Yeah the XLR K2M 

[mercer]

Oh yeah... and he said he wants a Canon and never mentioned the a7iii. 

[Mako Sports]

Just now, mercer said:

Oh yeah... and he said he wants a Canon and never mentioned the C100.

Okay you've said that like 6 or 7 times now..

[jonpais]

2 minutes ago, mercer said:

Oh yeah... and he said he wants a Canon and never mentioned the C100.

Really? Look again...

[mercer]

Derr... that’s the point. This happens way too often on this site. People ask opinion between A and B camera and somebody goes off on some G option.

Just now, jonpais said:

Really? Look again...

Yeah, typing too quick. 

[Mako Sports]

It helps to have options though, something you never even considered might be a fantastic choice for your described uses. 

[mercer]

11 minutes ago, Mako Sports said:

It helps to have options though, something you never even considered might be a fantastic choice for your described uses. 

That’s true, I’m just grumpy today and need a nap. Plus there aren’t too many positive Canon posts around here and me being a Canon shooter... they’re nice to see once in a while.