Andrew Reid

Indeed 4K add-on and universal mount and I am there. But they'd never undercut the C300 like that. Not for $8k. Not a chance in hell. And I don't blame them to be honest. C100 is going to sell brilliantly. FS700 has the legs on specs but not the mass market appeal and ergonomics.

"[i][color=#444444][font=sans-serif][size=3]Many may be taken aback with the idea of spending $7,999 on this camera at first. [/size][/font][/color][color=#008000][font=sans-serif][size=3]But if you stop to think about what you WON’T NEED TO BUY – it can actually start to look like a wise investment.[/size][/font][/color][color=#444444][font=sans-serif][size=3] This camera comes ready to shoot. The ergonomics are great so you don’t HAVE to have a cage. You don’t need to buy an external audio recorder and synching software – this has XLR inputs (and stereo headphone jack as well as levels) with the handle. You don’t necessarily need rods, a matte box, and Neutral density filters – ND filters are built in. That alone is a savings of $1,000-$4,000 in that type of setup alone (but you can of course choose to buy a good variable ND filter for a few hundred dollars as opposed to rods and matte boxes and rod support.) You don’t need to buy and EVF and a way to mount it to your HDSLR. Same goes for an LCD – although both the Canon LCD and EVF leave a lot to be desired when compared to the Zacuto EVF and external Marshall monitors."[/size][/font][/color][/i] This is a good point from Vincent. In many cases though, people moving up to the C100 already have these accessories. Do they sell them and get the C100, or do they keep the versatility and ability to pass the rig amongst several cameras? If for example an A99 came out and gave the most stunning full frame video possible, and all for $3000, it might make C100 owners feel a bit sick about putting all their eggs in that basket, and throwing some of their existing eggs in the bin. I'll tell you why I'm not yet ready to pre-order it... - Photokina is 1 month away. GH3, A99, NEX VG-90 - now that is some prospect - Blackmagic is likely better in good light, under ISO 800 and I love the film-like look of 12bit raw - EF mount on C100 is enough of a pain on the Blackmagic, I can't sell my FS100 for C100 and lose all that adaptability. Invested too much in mirrorless glass! (This won't apply to a lot of people) - The FS700 is 4K ready and I love the super slow mo stuff. Beautiful. It isn't a gimmick if used appropriately. - I have too many cameras as it is.

Well said JG. Perfectly positioned and set to fly as the C100 is, in some ways it just is not good enough or interesting or unique enough in 2012. It should have come out a year after the 5D Mark II. Don't look to actual manufacturing costs as any guide - the mark up on these cinema cameras and prices people are readily prepared to pay for them are hideous relative to actual unit costs, even when all the R&D is factored in. Canon are a business though and I would do the same in their shoes. I wish I could bang on some XLR jacks from Maplin, add an MPEG2 chipset from the XF and call it $15,000. But pros don't care do they? To them it is a bargain and all that matters is - can they make their investment back on one? To many the answer is a yes.

[quote name='jgharding' timestamp='1346247212' post='16808'] It's just so much bloody money! I love the 550D with Magic Lantern, cheap enough to own and chuck about, great for promo projects that only really have 720p delivery. I love the RX100 as a B-cam: sharp as anything, 50/60p, the same AVCHD rate as this and so well stabilised you can do away with tripod and just screw a handle into it. But the C100 will hire for about 100 quid a day I think, so though I'm sure I'll hire them occasionally (my favorite hire guy pre-ordered one today) I won't buy it myself. The BMD looks great as a buy though because my vanity projects are likely to be films, so I'll want quality rather than turnaround speed. It's nice to see things hotting up so much. [/quote] I hear you. It is a lot of money for me too, I don't need an FS100 AND a C100, AND a GH3, AND a BMD. It is getting silly. The investment is better off on the screen. Although the C100 is getting much warmer for me, and has addressed a heap of concerns I had about Canon recently, I cannot see myself selling my FS100 for it purely because of the lens mount and the fact I can use the Blackmagic for optimal resolution and workflow in good light. FS100 is my low light tool and for when S35 sensor size is important. BMD for when dynamic range, skin tones, resolution is key. C100 would be nicer than both to handle, and a lovely cam for sure but it cannot replace either of them until it has a universal mount and raw codec. That is asking a lot. FS100 and BMD both have better unique selling points for me personally. I know the majority might be better off with a C100 for commercial work though. It is going to FLY off the shelves because it is well priced and very practical. Not quite exciting enough in the specs department though. No 240fps, no raw, no 12bit colour, no full frame. Sony and Blackmagic have all that covered under $8k.

[quote name='Philip Lipetz' timestamp='1346247420' post='16809'] Why choose over BMCC? To avoid costs of SSDs, graphic cards for post, rig, monitor, audio xlr rig, and HUGE storge costs. The BMCC has ver very limited low light and is not suited for event or doc work, and that is according to them. Also, the C100 has XLRs I handle, allowing for a much more compact setup than a c300. Have to see of color banding is an issue with the AVCHD codec. [/quote] It is hard to tell so early especially without having shot with both cameras but I speculate that the BMD will have quite the edge on image quality in good light. I am able to get more out of the highs and lows of the sample cinema DNG raw files than I am out of my OM-D E-M5 raw stills. For a $3k video camera this is new territory and if anything it is almost Alexa territory. I only have doubts about the sensor size and low light. Handling maybe. We'll see. Wooden Camera cage is superb. The BMD's large screen is nice to have too, saves having the bulk of a monitor for a lot of stuff. Should get my final retail unit next week. For sure the C100 has a more 'practical' form factor. I prefer the way it looks, and having handled the C300 I don't doubt it will be superb for handheld work with minimal rigging.

[quote name='riccardocovino' timestamp='1346242292' post='16794']But in terms of specs the comparison with the FS700 is embarassing: for the same price we have 240fps, 4k-capable body and universal mount.[/quote] Although the FS700 + 4K will likely be double what a C100 costs, it is certainly a massive factor. The universal mount too, massive factor for me. Not for everyone but I need that LOMO, PL, Canon FD, Leica M lens mount and I already have full EF support with the Metabones adapter on FS100. I'd be clicking 'pre-order' today on C100 if it had an EOS M mount instead of EF.

Yes Micro Four Thirds mount, 110% sure. Otherwise it would not be a GH3. It would be separate line of products altogether. The lenses are important - more margin on those, and the camera body helps shift them. No body, no lens sales.

Some quotes I picked up from Laforet's blog today. Nice guy. But not sure I agree with him. "[color=#444444][font=sans-serif][size=3]If this camera is available in the $6-7K range on the street one day – it could really question the need to shoot on HDSLRs anymore"[/size][/font][/color] Why didn't he say this about the Sony FS100? That has been out on the shelves, well under $6k for over a year now and still we have a lot of DSLR shooters. True the C100 has a more DSLR form factor, but the FS100 is also very compact and modular for a video camera. The ergonomics are not as sleek, but I rarely have issues with handling it. The image is in my opinion 90% as good as the C300 especially via uncompressed HDMI, for a fraction of the price. I got mine $4200 used. The internal codec is superb given the low bitrate. [color=#444444][font=sans-serif][size=3]"I think this camera will likely put a noticeable dent in the use of mid- to upper- range HDSLRs for video production such as the Canon 5D MKIII and Canon EOS 1DX given that the C100 meets a lot of the ergonomic needs of filmmakers that HDSLRS lack (EVF, LCD, Built in ND)"[/size][/font][/color] Well the 5D mark III and 1DX don't help themselves - that's true, but they lack MUCH MORE than just built in NDs. It isn't about the EVF, LCD or NDs. What Vincent seems to be implying here is that Canon gave up on DSLR video, putting all their eggs into the Cinema EOS basket. Well I certainly agree with that. Their mirrorless doesn't even have an EVF, their 1D X doesn't have peaking, someone conservative high up chose not to push and innovate. So whilst the 5D Mark III is dead for video, a Sony A99 or full frame camera with all that innovation (and yes - peaking even!) will be alive and kicking vs the smaller chip C100. The full frame still holds an appeal for many over Super 35mm. Bloom especially seems to like that large sensor aesthetic a lot, even vs the C300 which he uses a hell of a lot. Indeed, Vincent came from a stills background and I am surprised he doesn't mention the stills functionality of these cameras - in the case of the 1D X it is world leading for that. Video production more and more relies on stills functionality - timelapse, BTS, poster images, video journalism, mixed media, news reportage, freelancer offering both stills and video on small budget, the list goes on. Convergence is still going to happen even if it has taken a backseat for now. As for video pros - well in my opinion DSLRs have been out of the spotlight of many pros since the first large chip video cameras came along so I don't think we'll be seeing much of a change here. However, and I can only gauge my own view of interest in DSLR video here - the visitor numbers to EOSHD have doubled in the last 6 months, and were already high before that. So interest in DSLR video has never been higher, with more choice out there on the shelves. The future isn't murky for these cameras, in fact it is very promising. Not so much in the Canon camp, but others are (and will) innovate. With the extra horsepower to fix scaling, oversampling from 20MP+ to 2K or 4K is always going to look better than a native 2K or 4K sensor. That is one advantage of a photographic sensor. If you oversample dedicated R, G and B photosites like the C300 does from 4K to 1080p for example, you get as close to true 1080p as it is possible to get. A DSLR could do video like that in the very near future. The pixel design of CMOS sensors goes forward very quickly in the consumer market. Some of the biggest R&D projects go into consumer hardware before it goes into pro stuff. The other innovation is uncompressed HDMI - or a direct sensor tap. Raw over an HD output on a DSLR is a distinct possibility. 4K too, because of pent up consumer demand for 4K displays - TVs - the PS4 as well are all on the way. 4K on consumer cameras is the future and inevitable. So DSLRs will move up with the rest of them. I don't see a murky future at all. Just more choices for more affordable C100-style offerings. Good for us. Here's what Vincent says in full [url="http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2012/08/29/canon-c100-leads-to-murky-future-for-mid-to-upper-range-video-hdslrs"]http://blog.vincentl...ge-video-hdslrs[/url]

If you notice design of ND filter switch, they have still 'cut the cloth' differently to the more expensive camera but they have done so in such a nice way I don't really mind. Build remains solid. Magnesium alloy not plastic chassis. To have the articulated screen on the back as well as 15% smaller body is great. If the image stands up I'll prefer it to the FS100. But Vs a FS700 a tougher choice. What Sony need to do is make their full frame cameras as good as possible, no funny business, then copy Canon's form factor and make a 4K camera for $10k.

Comes with C LOG. They didn't take a lot out. They need to compete with Sony. Overall image quality still a question-mark though. MPEG on C300 had a very fine grain and film like texture. AVCHD is good but tends to be smoother and more compressed looking.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/canon-c100-cinema-eos.jpg[/img] Canon today launched the much speculated Canon C100, the budget version of the C300. Priced at $8K to compete with the Sony FS700, the camera is double the price of a FS100 but features built-in ND filters and the same sensor as the C300. The design and handling looks fantastic, it is even smaller than the C300 (by some 15%) but the major compromise is the codec which is now AVCHD at 24Mbit 4-2-0. However HDMI is uncompressed so for effectively another $300 you can record broadcast standard material to a Blackmagic HyperDeck Shuttle in ProRes. I really like the C100 at first glance. But will it be enough to compete with the FS700?

[quote name='nickname' timestamp='1346174725' post='16737'] i hope with the bmcc we don´t need the gh3/7d/60d/5d/d700/d800/a77/a99 anymore for video. [/quote] You will still need the GH3/A99 by my reckoning. And D800 takes great stills too.

I have nothing against Shane. Nice guy. Not sure if he really thinks the 5D2 beats film, not seen the context. He is a Canon Explorer of Light, and as I said before (controversially) I prefer not to see DPs involve themselves so closely with manufacturers if they are reviewing and blogging. Manufacturer links are incredibly important, and there's no way in hell any reviewer will speak as negatively as I do about poor products if they were trying to maintain a cordial atmosphere with a sponsor. This is why Shane's blog is so positive, and occasionally I can have a huge rant. I am free to do that, to him, it wouldn't be considered professional.

No that is correct, intra stores every frame 'as is' and inter makes up a sequence of B and P frames in-between real I frames.

Did he really say that? In what context? If true - Oh dear.

Of course you can sharpen 600 lines to look like 890, but I have never known for a chart test to include post work before. You shouldn't muddy the water (no pun intended!) with a sharpening filter in post. A resolution line count doesn't tell you how clean that detail is, or if it is jagged and haloed. It would be interesting to see the affect on a line count that various levels of sharpening in Premiere has - by seeing before and after tests on all cameras not just the 5D3. I.e. which cameras stand to gain most from a bit of work in post. Certainly the 5D3 does more so than say a T2i. Maybe you can do that, I for one would be interesting in publishing the results. Cheers

No it doesn't all come down to just frame compression, it is how the compression is allocated within a frame, how motion in between i-frames in a long GOP codec is predicted with B and P frames, the quality of those 'synthetic' frames and a lot more very technical stuff. If you look at the ALL-I frame compression, the 5D Mark III has less compression per frame than the FS100, but still the lows are gone. See what I mean? [img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/5d3-vs-fs100-lows-660x312.jpg[/img]

Your reasons are entirely valid. My aim is not to shove a project out of the door with maximum efficiency and I am very lucky to have time on my side, without clients demanding to gimp at the footage or set unrealistic deadlines. I'm self funded and an artist, so the Blackmagic is perfect for me.

As I said before these are demo units, I am not sure what the stipulation is about putting footage out or full reviews from the pre-prod models. Also, a bit more patience would help. Philip Bloom isn't even home yet. Seb's shoot looks nice, just be patient and let them do it justice. A new camera always takes longer to get to grips with.

OK next person to mention the GH3 wins a prize.

Mirrorkisser, disagree with me on cameras please, not over my administration of my own god damn site.

Yes indeed not all intra-frame high bitrate codecs are created equally, especially encoder chips. A lot of the mosquito noise on the 5D Mark III come from low contrast areas where the codec hasn't allocated enough data, or allocated it in the correct way. Sony NEX is already better in that regard, with cleaner shadows too and the FS100 especially so. They are not even ALL-I 80Mbit but the engine and sophistication on display is vastly higher.

[quote name='cpc' timestamp='1346156462' post='16704'] There are some tests on BMCuser that indicate (at least some) s16 lenses may actually work pretty well in terms of coverage. Problems with wide mount side lens diameter may prevent mounting though. [/quote] Yes this is indeed the main issue. I have an OCT19 mount adapter for Canon, this is also a positive lock mount, basically a Russian copy of PL. The rear of the lens hits the mount because it is too shallow and not wide enough. Out of 10 lenses I only have 2 that physically fit, and one of those doesn't focus to infinity because the rear of the lens moves back further the closer you get to infinity. The register distance of PL is actually very long but the rear element of the lens sits at a very variable distance depending on the lens, zero standardisation in the Soviet days.

Photodiode enlargement sounds like a fancy name for gapless micro lenses. It will be intriguing to see what new technology there is under the hood since Sony seem to be pushing so hard on CMOS at the moment, patent after new patent. What is 'light concentration' technology? I thought the lens did that ;) True very little info about the video specs, bitrates, frame rates, etc. Hopefully it will have uncompressed HDMI too.

Most PL mount S16 lenses won't fit the Canon mount anyway. Perhaps Illya at Hot Rod Cameras can provide an extensive mount mod in future though. Then, some S16 lenses will likely cover the sensor but some will vignette because like as John correctly says above the sensor is larger. [img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/blackmagic-cinema-camera-sensor-size-660x462.jpg[/img] I have tried a lot of S16 lenses on the GH2 (which is larger again). The primes like 25,50,75mm don't vignette. The wide angle stuff (10,12,20mm, etc.) vignette wildly as do the zooms. This is a shame as there is a beautiful Zeiss Distagon S16 lens on eBay right now for £500 which is 8mm T2.1. I think on the next BMD camera the sensor should run in three modes: Standard 16:9 as now Anamorphic 4:3 Super 16mm crop mode And the mount should be interchangeable. A custom bayonet with 18mm flange to get that EF tube out of the equation then official adapters provided by Blackmagic for EF, Nikon F, PL, c-mount and Micro Four Thirds. rather than relying only on Hong Kong ones. Alternatively if the M43rd's mount can be licensed from Panasonic even better. To have electrical contacts to use lenses like the 12-35mm F2.8, Olympus 12mm F2 would be ideal. Non-electrical and you can still adapter every other mount and use Micro Four Thirds lenses such as the Voigtlander Nokton 25mm F0.95 and 17.5mm F0.95. I also want to use Leica M mount lenses, but until then you can use Leica R lenses with the EF mount no problem. I know Blackmagic got some flack for their use of the EOS mount but it certainly makes a good starting point. There are a LOT of people out there with big investments in L glass for instance, and they will be happy to be able to use them with full aperture support on the Blackmagic. One question I have until I get my camera - does IS work too?