dafreaking Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 For the price of C100MK2 one could get a much better Cine kit with: Sony A7S Body $2,499 Metabones EF Adapter $399 DJI Ronin Stabilizer $2,999 This setup will significantly minimize rolling shutter, lights investment and provide a better post experience with a 4K upgrade option for the future. Plus, you can swap out the body for A8S or 5D4 when it comes out for example. Much more modular. You'd sacrifice battery life, audio, video auto-focus. Both camera's have their strengths and weaknesses. Maybe the C100mkII's auto focus ends up being a game changer. We'll just have to wait for both cameras to be released. The arguing over specs never leads to anything but more arguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Daniel Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 If I had to guess, I think Andrew is always slating Canon because he loves his gear and the technology - and Canon have held back when everyone else hasn't. Because his site is named EOSHD and he owns lots of Canon lenses, he is frustrated with the company who were a great influence in starting this blog (I might be so wrong). The C100 MkII seems awesome for it's purpose. Anything more and you are looking at an FS7 (much more suited to my type of work). Cameras like the A7S and the GH4 are not 'alternatives' or 'better' than the C100 MkII because they have more impressive specs. The C100 MkII is a totally different tool for a people who need it's features and nothing more. I still make a living from my GH3. Nobody ever asks what camera I'm shooting on. They comment on the ideas. Just make stuff and use the most appropriate and helpful tools you can get your hands on. :D Jimbo and johnnymossville 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtheory Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 You'd sacrifice battery life, audio, video auto-focus. Both camera's have their strengths and weaknesses. Maybe the C100mkII's auto focus ends up being a game changer. We'll just have to wait for both cameras to be released. The arguing over specs never leads to anything but more arguing. It's the best camera for broadcast HD work, period. For filmmaking in 2014, with younger and smaller firms like Blackmagic and Kinefinity rolling out 4K and RAW, it's disappointing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenstreets Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 It's the best camera for broadcast HD work, period. So one of my concerns with this camera is the AVCHD codec at 8bit 420. Are people actually using it for broadcast work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 3, 2014 Administrators Share Posted November 3, 2014 If I had to guess, I think Andrew is always slating Canon because he loves his gear and the technology - and Canon have held back when everyone else hasn't. Because his site is named EOSHD and he owns lots of Canon lenses, he is frustrated with the company who were a great influence in starting this blog (I might be so wrong). Yeah you're wrong I'm sorry! Right from the start of the blog I was more of a Panasonic user because the GH1 at the time did video properly, and it was more accessible / much cheaper than the 5D Mark II. Canon slipped ass backward into DSLR video, and whilst proclaiming to be great supporters of independent filmmaking and creative consumers with higher than average knowledge, took DSLR video out of our hands and decided to start charging $15,000 for it. And indeed, when I haven't got an axe to grind, there's not much point covering their newest releases because they're so boring anyway. Not just in terms of video but stills to. Let's discuss the G1X Mk II vs LX100 shall we? The G1X Mk II is such an awkward, ugly, minimal effort by comparison... it's almost like they don't care. IronFilm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gelaxstudio Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 You'd sacrifice battery life, audio, video auto-focus. Both camera's have their strengths and weaknesses. Maybe the C100mkII's auto focus ends up being a game changer. We'll just have to wait for both cameras to be released. The arguing over specs never leads to anything but more arguing. The auto focus sytem on the C100 is a game changer? You remind me that FS700 already have fast AF sytem by using laea-2 adapter before C100 come up with DPAF ,no one care about the AF on FS700,why should one care about the af on C100? BTW,the af sytem on C100 is limiting compositions of your videos,and not to mention that only the center of the image get focus? <_< That is horrible and stupid,even a smatphone does a better job !. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gelaxstudio Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 When Somy sells the FS7 for 5K then it will hurt the C100 sales, and even then many people will prefer the C100 for the lighter/smaller body, higher build quality and ergonomics for handheld (not shoulder), superior viewfinder and monitors that articulates, much cheaper media and power, better lowlight performance (C300 vs f5 - and the mk II is said to be even better), better colours without struggling in post (C300 vs F5), native EF lens support (FS7 doesn't work with EF adapters as of now, who knows when if at all), a state-of-the-art Autofocus system with facial tracking, better and easier UI, I can go on. Oh,dude,are you really sure many people will like the out-of-date techs on the C100M2? Firstly,the non-OLED type EVF on the C100M2 is only 1.23M dots,lower than the one on a $600 rx10 , which has a OLED type evf with 1.44 dots,not to mention the cheap sony A7 has a better one with 2.36M dots! Secondly,bitrate is still low,also lower than a FW updated RX10,while fs7 offer a max 222M bitrate mode and gh4 offer a 100M in HD mode ,What a shame for c100M2~ Thirdly, canon is not for everyone,but sony E-mount does ! If you have PL-mount lens ,nikon lens,fuji lens,or even some old film cameras lens,they all can be used,which you can make a unique-look image.while canon is only for canon~ Finally ,that AF system is simply a joke~AF with facial tracking?Many camera does! RX10 and A7S can do even more, like detecting the shape changes of their tracking object,and their AF cover 100% of the image,while C100M2 cover only the center area,20% of all ,maybe? So C100M2 just updated some old techs ,I REALLY do not know why anyone will be excited about it,or you guys never do cameras comparisons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Oh,dude,are you really sure many people will like the out-of-date techs on the C100M2? Firstly,the non-OLED type EVF on the C100M2 is only 1.23M dots,lower than the one on a $600 rx10 , which has a OLED type evf with 1.44 dots,not to mention the cheap sony A7 has a better one with 2.36M dots! Secondly,bitrate is still low,also lower than a FW updated RX10,while fs7 offer a max 222M bitrate mode and gh4 offer a 100M in HD mode ,What a shame for c100M2~ Thirdly, canon is not for everyone,but sony E-mount does ! If you have PL-mount lens ,nikon lens,fuji lens,or even some old film cameras lens,they all can be used,which you can make a unique-look image.while canon is only for canon~ Finally ,that AF system is simply a joke~AF with facial tracking?Many camera does! RX10 and A7S can do even more, like detecting the shape changes of their tracking object,and their AF cover 100% of the image,while C100M2 cover only the center area,20% of all ,maybe? So C100M2 just updated some old techs ,I REALLY do not know why anyone will be excited about it,or you guys never do cameras comparisons? You have just listed all of the reasons the C100 gets underestimated by people who only look at cameras on paper. There is more to the C100 (Mk 1 and 2) than its specifications suggest. Also, of course you can put Nikon lenses on the C100! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafreaking Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 The auto focus sytem on the C100 is a game changer? You remind me that FS700 already have fast AF sytem by using laea-2 adapter before C100 come up with DPAF ,no one care about the AF on FS700,why should one care about the af on C100? BTW,the af sytem on C100 is limiting compositions of your videos,and not to mention that only the center of the image get focus? <_< That is horrible and stupid,even a smatphone does a better job !. I said MAYBE! Of course if it still focuses only in the center of the frame like the AF upgrade for the original one does then it will suck. (ze autofocus) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gelaxstudio Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 You have just listed all of the reasons the C100 gets underestimated by people who only look at cameras on paper. There is more to the C100 (Mk 1 and 2) than its specifications suggest. If there is more to the C100 (Mk 1 and 2) than its specifications suggest,So great that specification won‘t be matter anymore. Then why canon bothered to updated it? And maybe Canon could say: we make a miracles of the industry that no need to update real new techs,just look inside our camera and you will be satisfied ! Seriously？ LOL I know C100 produce nice image，but C100M1 and C100M2 both use the same CMOS,which mean there is no image differences between the tow ï¼ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Oh,dude,are you really sure many people will like the out-of-date techs on the C100M2? Firstly,the non-OLED type EVF on the C100M2 is only 1.23M dots,lower than the one on a $600 rx10 , which has a OLED type evf with 1.44 dots,not to mention the cheap sony A7 has a better one with 2.36M dots! You do know that you can't just count the dots told by manufacturers right? They usually count R+G+B pixels separately and some of them have "white leds" that also are counted separately. Also listing just bitrate specs can be quite misleading as the RX10 (updated) and the RX100 have considerable amount of macroblocking on fast moving scenes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danyyyel Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I am far from a Canon fan, but really how come some people just resume a camera by it spec. When they go and market their job to their client, do they bring the spec sheet of their camera, or do their client care about the spec sheet. I see perhaps 1 out of 5, or 1 out of 10 videos of the A7s that is good. The rest the colours, more so with Slog is just ok to horrible. Just look at the amount of thread about how to .... try to get good colours out of the Sony's. For sure some can because they are good colourist but most are mediocre. Being a colourist is an art of its own. When you are more or less a one man band indie or freelance shooter, you have to be a shooter, an editor and now with Sony a good colourist. While Canon (I am a Nikon user) will provide you with a good image out of the box, just add a little contrast and saturation and you are good to go. No need to be an expert to at least get a good image to start with. For me since I got my D7100 (hopefully D750 in not too long), I thought that its the cameramen the limiting factor and no more the camera. If I cannot do beautiful image out of it, I won't with more expensive camera. The reasoning is simple if lesser camera like the gh2 have seen theatrical release, how can people devalue camera like the C100/C300 which are already much better. As shown here the C300 has been used in award winning Festival. One won the fucking biggest film festival in the world. So show us your masterpiece shot on your Sony A7s. dafreaking 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 3, 2014 Administrators Share Posted November 3, 2014 I am far from a Canon fan, but really how come some people just resume a camera by it spec. When they go and market their job to their client, do they bring the spec sheet of their camera, or do their client care about the spec sheet. I see perhaps 1 out of 5, or 1 out of 10 videos of the A7s that is good. The rest the colours, more so with Slog is just ok to horrible. Just look at the amount of thread about how to .... try to get good colours out of the Sony's. Not all the users of this forum are doing commercial work for clients. Some are doing creative personal work, some are shooting features, shorts, documentaries. Personally I'd rather try and push the envelope and get a more unique look - with anamorphic on a full frame camera, in low light and with S-LOG for a fraction of the price of the C100. Though I can fully see why you might not want to do this on a commercial for a bank. Feel free to setup a new topic about that. IronFilm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 3, 2014 Administrators Share Posted November 3, 2014 Check out Philip Bloom's initial look at the far superior Sony FS7 https://www.storehouse.co/stories/o5hd3-unboxing-the-sony-fs7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Hughes Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Not trying to turn this into an FS7 thread, but here's an actual hands-on review from Dan Chung at Newsshooter. He draws a lot of comparison to the C300, especially in terms of ergonomics which also applies to the C100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfilm Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 This was shot in 8bits on a canon c300 and has won awards, jgharding, mtheory and Julian 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 4, 2014 Administrators Share Posted November 4, 2014 That's the best thing I've ever seen from the C300.Must have been from one of those Award Winning filmmakers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lafilm Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 LOL This is much better Gotta love those Canon colors, what say you? ;) froess 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lafilm Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 This isn't bad either Same camera, the now 3 year old Canon C300 :o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Johnnie Behiri has a pre-production C100 MkII: I like the colours A LOT, but the price difference between this and the GH4 is indeed very hard to swallow ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.