How does a C100 Mark II or C300 OG hold up against modern 10 bit codecs

[Ty Harper]

1 hour ago, Django said:

I'll stay it again,  the C100 is small considering it has: built-in NDs, an EVF, large display, fan system, all-day battery, XLRs.

I mean the R5C is a cinema camera and has all those things if you include the ND adapter and Tascam shoe mount. But I agree, 'small' is subjective. Personally I appreciate the R5C for giving you the option to build it up to about the size/weight of a 1DX line cam or strip it down to essentially an R5.

[Django]

2 hours ago, Ty Harper said:

I mean the R5C is a cinema camera and has all those things if you include the ND adapter and Tascam shoe mount. But I agree, 'small' is subjective. Personally I appreciate the R5C for giving you the option to build it up to about the size/weight of a 1DX line cam or strip it down to essentially an R5.

Sure you can rig up any cam, but you've also got to factor in the added cost.

An R5C + ND adapter + Tascam is already a whopping 6K€.

As a strictly all-in one cine body C100 is a pretty compact (and affordable) considering its a decade old! 

The R5C, FX3, FX30 are really a new kind of compact hybrid mirrorless camera though.

I like FX3/FX30 fairly better concerning form factor as they are more compact, have mounting options, a native top handle and XLR as well as IBIS equipped and decent battery life:

VS

 

For all day battery life though you are also going to need a big source of external power for R5C (imo its biggest con) adding on to weight and bulk. And pretty quickly you're in a situation that makes 1DX3 feel light and tiny..

[TomTheDP]

I think the MK II would be a good way to go. I see one on eBay right now for $800. 

You get HD 60fps and dual pixel AF. It is center focus only but still reliable and useful. 

The C100 body is bulky but it is actually a great form factor. Pretty easy to mount on a gimbal without the top handle. It is really just a pick up and use camera. 

If you only need HD capture its a good option. Dynamic range isn't there but if you can get around that you'll be fine. 

[Ty Harper]

1 hour ago, Django said:

Sure you can rig up any cam, but you've also got to factor in the added cost.

Of course $$ plays into this and yes you can rig up any cam - but no amount of $$ saved or spent on a C100 or similar sized cam will allow it to be stripped down to the size of an R5. Point just being that there is something to be said about starting small vs starting mid - but at the end of the day it boils down to what works for the shooter. Personally I can't go back to that form factor - and this is coming from someone who until summer was set on getting a C300 MKII and calling it a day.

[Django]

5 minutes ago, Ty Harper said:

Of course $$ plays into this and yes you can rig up any cam - but no amount of $$ saved or spent on a C100 or similar sized cam will allow it to be stripped down to the size of an R5. Point just being that there is something to be said about starting small vs starting mid - but at the end of the day it boils down to what works for the shooter. Personally I can't go back to that form factor - and this is coming from someone who until summer was set on getting a C300 MKII and calling it a day.

Hey whatever works best for you. R5C vs C100 is an uneven comp on so many levels. That said I maintain that to get all day battery life, NDs and XLRs on R5C, you're looking at a rig and investment far away from what the C100 gives you from the get go.. and no I'm not going back there either but for under $800 if you're ok shooting FHD, still a fantastic option imo..

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, Ty Harper said:

I mean the R5C is a cinema camera and has all those things if you include the ND adapter and Tascam shoe mount.

If you include all that, then the R5C is creeping  up in size to not be too radically different overall in size to a Canon C100. 

 

[kye]

13 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

The C100 body is bulky but it is actually a great form factor. 

Hey - you've got to be careful saying crazy things like that around here...  I'm reliably informed that the C100 is practically microscopic!

[MurtlandPhoto]

17 hours ago, Django said:

but for under $800 if you're ok shooting FHD, still a fantastic option imo..

It's definitely in impulse-buy territory now. I never would have imagined that happening 6 years ago when I was shooting with it daily. Coincidentally, Adorama had a good condition C100Mii in their ebay store for $999 two days ago that I foolishly didn't jump on. 

[Django]

5 hours ago, kye said:

Hey - you've got to be careful saying crazy things like that around here...  I'm reliably informed that the C100 is practically microscopic!

Just out of curiosity and please answer honestly: have you ever actually shot with a C100 & C300 camera? Because you lumped them both in the same "large" category.

[IronFilm]

15 hours ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

It's definitely in impulse-buy territory now. I never would have imagined that happening 6 years ago when I was shooting with it daily. Coincidentally, Adorama had a good condition C100Mii in their ebay store for $999 two days ago that I foolishly didn't jump on. 

No way would I ever spend that much on the C100! That's waaaay too much for a very old very entry level "cinema" camera. 

Not when I could get a Sony FS5 for only a few hundred dollars more. 

Or buy a Canon C300mk1 for even less! 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/334445672275

[kye]

19 hours ago, Django said:

Just out of curiosity and please answer honestly: have you ever actually shot with a C100 & C300 camera? Because you lumped them both in the same "large" category.

No.

I looked at a bunch of pictures online that showed both the C100 as well as various other DSLR bodies and saw that the C100 was around the same size as other cameras that I knew to be large through my own experience.

I know everything is relative, but if someone says "I drive a large sedan and I'm looking at the Tesla truck" replying with "the Tesla truck is tiny!" because the Tesla truck is a truck and you're now comparing it to a triple road train then it's still not really in context.

[Django]

1 hour ago, kye said:

No.

I looked at a bunch of pictures online that showed both the C100 as well as various other DSLR bodies and saw that the C100 was around the same size as other cameras that I knew to be large through my own experience.

I know everything is relative, but if someone says "I drive a large sedan and I'm looking at the Tesla truck" replying with "the Tesla truck is tiny!" because the Tesla truck is a truck and you're now comparing it to a triple road train then it's still not really in context.

OK so once again armchair expertise. You tend to make a lot of strong assumptions and present opinions as facts on subjects you really have zero experience with. Googling photos, watching a video on YT.. then arguing online against people with actual hands-on experience on the subject matter. Its a recurring theme I've noticed..

Again you lumped the C100 & C300 in the same category. Anybody that has used those two cams knows they are day & night in form factor, weight, operation despite them looking similar on internet pictures.

As for context, OP uses a Z6 plus an Atomos. Fully rigged that's already bulkier and heavier than a stripped down C100. To use your analogy its more like a sedan.. with a camping trailer attached to its rear!

..and again the C100 has built-in NDs, fan, all day battery life, WFM assist tools etc. even when stripped down.

Rigging the equivalent on a large sensor mirrorless will not be smaller or lighter, hence my point withstands. 

[MurtlandPhoto]

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

No way would I ever spend that much on the C100! That's waaaay too much for a very old very entry level "cinema" camera. 

Not when I could get a Sony FS5 for only a few hundred dollars more. 

Or buy a Canon C300mk1 for even less! 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/334445672275

$999 for a C100 M2 is a very good price. For livestreams and convention circuit work it is an incredible value for that money. FS5 comes with its own headaches. To each their own.,

[newfoundmass]

I guess I can see why some people might feel like the C100 is too big, if they've primarily shot with mirrorless cameras, but it is, in my opinion, the perfect size and was very comfortable to hold. I would trade the mirrorless camera ergonomics for that kind of body any day.

[Kisaha]

2 hours ago, Django said:

OK so once again armchair expertise. You tend to make a lot of strong assumptions and present opinions as facts on subjects you really have zero experience with. Googling photos, watching a video on YT.. then arguing online against people with actual hands-on experience on the subject matter. Its a recurring theme I've noticed..

Again you lumped the C100 & C300 in the same category. Anybody that has used those two cams knows they are day & night in form factor, weight, operation despite them looking similar on internet pictures.

As for context, OP uses a Z6 plus an Atomos. Fully rigged that's already bulkier and heavier than a stripped down C100. To use your analogy its more like a sedan.. with a camping trailer attached to its rear!

..and again the C100 has built-in NDs, fan, all day battery life, WFM assist tools etc. even when stripped down.

Rigging the equivalent on a large sensor mirrorless will not be smaller or lighter, hence my point withstands. 

..and for exactly those reasons (form factor, weight, operation) a C100mkII is a better option than a C300 these days!

The C100mkII is absolutely my favorite camera for run and gun video work. I have done literally hundreds of travel and music doc episodes good enough for Greek TV and corporate and others. My previous favorite was, sadly(!yes, it was a Sony, do not judge me!), an EX1, another workhorse of that previous era.

If you want a super easy system to shoot most of your "basic" stuff with super fast turn around times and you do not mind the "weak" codec, even now is an excellent option..For extremely fast run and gun the 18-135 was ace, if you had more time one could use the whole EF selection. My ultra fast and portable kit was the 18-135, an 70-200mm 4f and a nifty-fifty used for some interviews. My most enjoyable set up of all time..great times!

..I didn't like the C300 (and C200) ergonomics, but they were also standard on most of my business back then.

oh my.. I want one now..

[TomTheDP]

@kyedoes a lot of travel so I can definitely see how a GH5 with vari ND and a small lens is a better setup for that usage. You could probably pocket that if you have the right Jacket where as you'll never be able to pocket a C100. 

Also for situations where you want to film and not be noticed a GH5 or other camera just looks more like you are doing casual photography. C100 not as much. But if you rig out a DSLR it stops looking like a stills camera and you stop looking like a hobbyist. 


I did a video using the ARRI Alexa, C100, and GH5. The C100 was my favorite out of the box look. It was a lower dynamic range scene but the colors were just really pretty. 

 

[Django]

I'm not saying C100 is the most compact or discrete camera out there. I'm just saying compared to a rigged up mirrorless offering similar run & gun options its quite comparable, more balanced, all-in-one alternative. 

And yeah C100 SOOC look using Wide DR has a special mojo. Canon had some kind of special sauce back then, the internal processing was 444. 

Speaking of it kinda makes me miss it to be honest ! 

[IronFilm]

15 hours ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

For livestreams and convention circuit work it is an incredible value for that money.

For that stuff I'll happily use a FS5! 

Shooting a convention tomorrow with my F3 & FS7, would also be happy with 2x FS5 instead in the context of this particular type of shoot. 

[kye]

23 hours ago, Django said:

OK so once again armchair expertise. You tend to make a lot of strong assumptions and present opinions as facts on subjects you really have zero experience with. Googling photos, watching a video on YT.. then arguing online against people with actual hands-on experience on the subject matter. Its a recurring theme I've noticed..

Again you lumped the C100 & C300 in the same category. Anybody that has used those two cams knows they are day & night in form factor, weight, operation despite them looking similar on internet pictures.

As for context, OP uses a Z6 plus an Atomos. Fully rigged that's already bulkier and heavier than a stripped down C100. To use your analogy its more like a sedan.. with a camping trailer attached to its rear!

..and again the C100 has built-in NDs, fan, all day battery life, WFM assist tools etc. even when stripped down.

Rigging the equivalent on a large sensor mirrorless will not be smaller or lighter, hence my point withstands. 

Do you have trouble comparing objects in photographs?

I would have thought it was pretty straight forwards, but maybe not for everyone.  

......but maybe those photos are somehow lying!

Let's see, the C100 is ~1020g, and:

• Approx 135 x 170 x 129mm (thumbrest attached); => this is about 3L in volume

• Approx 182 x 170 x 129mm (grip attached); => this is about 4L in volume

My 700D is ~580g, and:

• 133.1 x 99.8 x 78.8 mm => this is about 1L in volume

So, the C100 with thumb rest is:

• Almost identical in width
• 1.7x taller
• 1.63x deeper
• about 3x as large in volume (however the C100 is quite curved, so this is much more subjective than the other measures)

In terms of my 700D, I shot with it for years, and it is quite similar in size to my GH5 and XC10 once setup.  I have shot many thousands of clips and tens of thousands of photographs across dozens of countries across many continents with those setups.  Those cameras are not small.  

and yet, I am expected to believe that a camera 1.7x taller and 1.63x deeper is somehow TINY.

Please....

20 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

@kyedoes a lot of travel so I can definitely see how a GH5 with vari ND and a small lens is a better setup for that usage. You could probably pocket that if you have the right Jacket where as you'll never be able to pocket a C100. 

Also for situations where you want to film and not be noticed a GH5 or other camera just looks more like you are doing casual photography. C100 not as much. But if you rig out a DSLR it stops looking like a stills camera and you stop looking like a hobbyist. 

I did a video using the ARRI Alexa, C100, and GH5. The C100 was my favorite out of the box look. It was a lower dynamic range scene but the colors were just really pretty. 

Well said, however you have perhaps underestimated the attention that you get when you have a camera even the size of a GH5.  Remember that a 5D is universally recognised practically the world over as being as professional a camera as you can get, and it's not so much larger than a GH5.

Of course, the discussion wasn't about what was palatable in public, it was on camera size, and when I made a simple remark about an absolute statement, for some reason instead of clarifying, our friend just doubled down on an absolute statement, and then tried to make it personal.

[FHDcrew]

This is hilarious. I intended this to be about how the C100/C300 codec holds up in 2022. We are talking about something SO DIFFERENT now