jpfilmz

On February 19, 2017 at 0:20 PM, Brother said:

Will probably end up buying the GH5 but still, would be nice to know your thoughts on this.

If we ignore size, audio, release date, ergonomics, mount, sensor size and everything except the image coming out of the camera. What, ready to shoot minus lens, camera for around $3000 (new or used) will give the best image according to you? 

 

1. GH5
2. 5D3 RAW
3. BMPCC + Speedbooster + IR Cut Filter
4. BM Micro + Speedbooster + IR Cut Filter
5. BMCC + Anti Aliasing Filter + IR Cut Filter
6. C100mk 1
7. Sony a7s/a7s2/a7r2
8. GH4 + Speedbooster
9. 5DMK 4
10. XC10

Also to note: This list is just pure image quality via cameras I've had experience with (EDIT: except for the GH5).  Usability and workflow speed would totally change this list up.  The XC10 captures really good images in good light only. It's 4k is similar to a C300mk2 in well lite situations. The 5DMK4 is pretty good in 4k as well. You just need fast lenses(f/1.2-f/1.8) in low light and a Tokina 11-16 for anything wide.

6 hours ago, Gareth Watkins said:

Hi there
Thanks for a very interesting post. A nice side by side of the three cameras. However, I’m not totally in agreement with your summary of the models.

The reasons I still use the C100 are numerous and for shooters like myself, posting to the web, it is still a relevant camera.
You have based your assessment purely on image, (which is fair enough) and from that test I actually think they look pretty well matched. But there are other factors to take into consideration.

The C300, your winner, (as it would be mine), is 4.8 times the price of my C100 new (6x more than I paid for an as new, used model with DPAF) so I damn well hope it is a better camera. The same can be said of the 1D C at double the price. (B&H prices).

Ok the AVCHD codec is not great, but I think it actually stands up pretty well for web-based content. If you need a stronger, better codec then a Ninja can provide that.

Sharpness… on the shots in your test that were actually in focus, the sharpness seemed comparable. Again the external recording on a Ninja is fractionally sharper on the C100. The DPAF is brilliant for fast moving stuff…
But compared to the 1D C, whose images I actually find the most pleasing in your test, the C100 has a far better form factor. The DSLR’s are horrible to use for video. I find built in ND’s, a proper handle, on-board audio, phantom power, peaking, wave form, Zebras etc leave any DSLR sadly lacking. These are to me far more important than a marginal picture quality improvement).
It would have been nice to see a properly exposed shot using the Wide DR shot on the C100, for which you give praise. As I’ve not used it much.

So would I swap the C100 for a 1DC … no, absolutely not !! My days of using DSLR’s for more than a B roll camera are over. Would I swap if for a C300. Hell yes, if someone would give me the ten grand extra over what I paid for a C100.
So while I agree with your results order for these cameras… I also feel the C100 boxes above its weight, the only current camera I would possibly we willing to fork out for is the FS5.. a better camera for sure, but I’d need to adapt my range of Canon glass and its AF is not as good. So until I absolutely need 4K I’ll quite happily stick with my aging design C100.
Cheers
Gareth

My assessment as well in regard to the C100.  It's not a done camera....especially the C100MK2.  It captures very sharp HD images that are very cinematic looking and upscale well to 4k.  I did enjoy this test though and I have my eye on picking up a 1DC.  I would love to see a comparison of the 4k from the XC10 on a day scene with the 4K from the C300MK2.  I bet they would be really close.

I'm still enjoying getting use out of mine.  

Close Up - C100MK2
Wide - XC10 HD
Band - 5DMK3 Regular HD

I didn't have enough card space to shoot in 4k at this even but the footage from the XC10 in hd turned out pretty good with no ghosting.

Thank you Luke for these files.  They are really nice.  With proper node work you can push these file around quite a bite in resolve.  

 

Pick up a C100, C100MK2 or a Sony FS5.

On 6/11/2015 at 2:52 PM, Peter Rzazewski said:

Hey all. Thank you for your comments. After much research and posts on multiple forums, I went with the OWC 16tb thunderbolt and configured it to raid5 using soft raid. It seems to be the best bang for your buck with good user ratings. So far, working on it a few weeks, it has been an absolutely god send. Editing is no longer a pain. No need for proxies, especially coupled w the iMac 5k + 32gb ram and internal SSD. NOW I can work uninterrupted!!!!!!

Good choice.  I went with the mini 4 bay SSD version but i'd like one of the 16tb versions because they are great bang for your buck.

54 minutes ago, hyalinejim said:

@jpfilmz What's the BM camera in your shot and how do you like the XC10 colour and gradability in comparison to it?

That's the Blackmagic Pocket Cam.  I really love both cams...XC10 has a feature and ergonomic usability advantage over the pocket.  The pocket has 10bit prores out of the box and RAW in a portable package.  I love both images but I feel the pocket is more cinematic with it's movement.  I will say this....IF i had to pick only one to shoot a feature on I would probably grab the XC10 before the pocket simply due to it's built in features...ND filters, 5 axis stabilization, auto focus, better scratch audio, slomotion, 4k, and wireless monitoring.  I would simply need to light my shots and I could get more done with less....wouldn't need a ronin to get stable shots, it's low profile, good battery performance, has a great adapter for shooting in the sun, can hand hold in a car and get stable shots etc. Even though I think the pocket's image is better....it's occasional moire, IR pollution, abysmal battery life, bad audio preamps and need for rigging make it a less compelling tool to shoot with in dynamic situations.  Also I think you to get the best image out of the pocket you NEED a speedbooster on it.

Modified EOS Standard
Sharpness +4
Contrast -4
Color Depth -4
ISO 1600

Lighting = Back light from tv and 1 z96 LED at about half power @ about 3 1/2 feet away.
I did the same shoot with CLOG and visible ghosting appeared.

I just ran another some test with the EOS Standard settings and there is definitely a reduction if near total elimination of ghosting at when in lower light situations. Out doors in good light or good overcast light you can shoot whatever you want.  Indoors if your not lighting or in low light I think EOS Standard with reduced contrast and color saturation is the way to go.  

GoPro shares halted after devastating quarterly results

The company’s stock trading was halted prior to releasing results that missed revenue expectations by 23 percent and nearly $75 million. When trading began again shares were down 22 percent. This means that in a matter of minutes the market cap of the company melted from $1.23 billion to $972 million — the spontaneous combustion of roughly $250 million in market value.

https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/03/gopro-trading-halted-as-company-misses-revenue-expectations-by-23/

I retested Pikachu with less light and was able to get alittle more ghosting to appear with Clog.  It happens with horizontal movement with hard pans.  Vertical only doesn't seem produce it but horizontal + vertical movement does. EOS Standard and Cinema EOS Standard have the least ghosting artifacts.  

*ISO is set to 6400 in these test.
Clog Ghosting Horizontal


Clog Ghosting Vertical


Cinema EOS Standard Ghosting Horizontal

Cinema EOS Standard Ghosting Vertical


With this level of lighting I would not be shooting with the XC10 anyway....but if i did i would not use clog.  Normal panning with Cinema EOS Standard was usable with very little ghosting.  Wide Dynamic range also had better performance than Clog.
 

30 minutes ago, hyalinejim said:

Thanks @jpfilmz for your test footage.

I can confirm that ghosting exists at ISO500 with everything switched off. Here's a CLog frame grab with contrast expanded:

Look at the curved handle on the RHS - there's a ghost image. This is affecting motion cadence at all ISOs.

@jpfilmz @Lintelfilm @mercer @HugoS316 and all other XC10 owners:

It's time to contact Canon! Send them your ghosting footage and/or  links to the threads here and ask them to resolve the issue.

I'll test again with less light and see what happens.

1 minute ago, mercer said:

Good test. Are you going to add a feature with every test to see if you can pinpoint the issue?

 

Yes.  I suspect the autofocus is the main culprit but I could be wrong. ISO in the video below was at 3200.

I just ran a series of test with the XC10.  First set I was getting slight ghosting.  Not as clean as tomsemiterrific's footage.  I then went into the camera and turned off everything...all image stabilization features, all auto focus features, including on the body of the camera, flicker reduction off, shockless WB off, rolling shutter reduction off and with those setting I was able to greatly eliminate ghosting affects in my footage.  EDIT I also tried with with rolling shutter reduction turned back on and had similar results.  Could someone else try with these setting off and see if that helps.  I'll try to post some of my footage.

I'm a heavy user of 5D Raw.  I use Komputerbay and Sandisk Extreme cards. I shoot using MLV Raw with the audio on and just about everything disabled except the overlays. You need them to see where the screen is actually cropping your footage.  I definitely cosign the RawMagic to Resolve workflow and the use of MLviewer to preview clips.  RawMagic can correct the vertical line issue and export to 14bit uncompressed or 12bit compressed DNG files which save a ton of space on storage.  I used to save my mlv files but not anymore...just drag and drop from the card to RawMagic and click convert and work on another task while the dngs are created.  It can take awhile depending on how much footage you shot BUT....I guarantee that you will always love what comes out on the other side.

1 hour ago, jasonmillard81 said:

I'm curious:

 

For those who think the c100 Mk II image isn't as great as I or others feel it is compared to some of the top level DSLR options out there could you point me to either comparison videos or stand alone videos of DSLR images that you think equal or surpass the C100 MK II image quality ?

 

Also, if I were to consider a top level DSLR to serve for both video and stills instead of one for each, what would be the smallest/simplest/cheapest way to capture audio?

On the Canon side.  5DMK3 Raw is "technically" speaking better image than the C100 image spec wise but requires more effort to procure.  It's raw so you need to manage it as with any other raw workflow.  You can grade it and correct it as you wish without breaking the image.  The DNGs just have more color and weight to them.  The C100 is very very close but has a "different" image to it since it's not full frame.  

5D3 Raw

Below... 
XC10 HD wide shot
C100MK2 front medium
5D3 RAW side shots
Excuse the audio and the poor grading on the XC10...I didn't have the XC10 matched to the other cameras.

Here is my breakdown of what I would rate over a C100 image in the under $4000 price range.
5DMK3 Raw > C100
5DMK4 4K > C100 *in descent light
Some ungraded neutral profile 5DMK4 4K frames.  When exposed correctly the 5D4 image is quite stunning. 

XC10 4K > C100 *in good light
I would even rate the XC10's 4K image over the C100 image...but again only in good lighting conditions.  My primary use for the C100 is ease of use when covering long form events, docs and to give me an image close enough to 5Draw in camera, save hard-drive space and for a quick workflow turnarounds when shooting in all lighting conditions. The 5DMK3,MK4 nor the XC10 can deliver on this like the C100 can.  

1 hour ago, Arikhan said:

Is here someone who could give me some some practical advice about the low light behaviour of the XC10? I am 16 years old and till now I shoot interviews, political events and sometimes corporate events. Till now I use a NX1 with Canon lenses (70-200/2.8 eg.) and the Samsung 45mm/1.8. For ENG and "quick to edit events" I use a Panasonic AG-AC8, but the AVCHD is not my dream cam. I will sell the camera within the next weeks...

Now I would like to buy a run & gun cam. From practical points of view and corresponding to my needs, I would like to buy a Sony PWX X70. 4:2:2-10 and a acceptable compression make this cam very interesting for me. But...I am a fan of Canon colour science. So, a XC10 could be a serious alternative and could be my first Canon film camera. C-Log is very nice (PXW X70 does NOT have a S-Log, but very nice images out of the box). The Sony is very usable in uncontrolled low light situations (I do NOT film in the dark) as unpredictable events, meetings, etc. (journalistic work). As I am scholar, my budget is quite tight, so I don't want to buy many cameras for testing (and reselling, if not acceptable for me). Is the XC10 (with its 1" sensor, similar to the PXW) the same quality in questionable/low light situations?

BTW: I am a "long time" guy wanting to invest in practicable solutions and consistent post workflows....

Thank you for advice!

It's not terrible in lowlight but that's not where this camera shines.  Daylight, cloudy, overcast, dusk, interiors that are lit or have lights on, night stage lighting at concerts = awesome footage.  I would shoot interior interviews with at least one z96 LED light on the subject.  I would not use the XC10  for wedding receptions or night exteriors without light. I would not shoot over 3200 iso.  It is my favorite run & gun cam.  I have a C100MK2 and a 5DMK3 but I enjoy shooting with the XC10 the most out of the group. Here is an example of a low lit interior with mixed stage lighting in 4K.
 

2 hours ago, Hanriverprod said:

shot only using touchscreen autofocus

I rented the 5D4 for a wedding shoot yesterday to go along with my other cams.  Used a 512gb sandisk SD card with gave it about 128 minutes or 4K shooting.  The lowlight is not as good as in full frame mode but it's not as terrible as everyone is making it out to be if you shoot with fast lenses.  

They have the 4k version up now.

Ordered. These picture profiles look fantastic.  Im running a CLOG comparison between the 5D3 h264, XC10 clog HD and 4K.  Later on I'll run it against 5D3 Raw and the C100MK2

UPDATE:
wow...these clog profiles are really good! The CLOG profile is pretty spot on by my estimation.  The first 4 images are of 5D3 h264 f/5.6 @ 3200 ISO, the next 2 are XC10 HD and the next 3 are XC10 4K...both set to f/4.0@ 2000ISO.  I have a wedding shoot this weekend and I'm definitely going to shoot with the CLOG profile over the neutral profile on the 5D3.  

6 hours ago, Eno said:

@Mattias Burling, I don't know what Gh4 or Sony cameras you've used, but my "special" Gh4 trashes any 5D mk 3 regarding video quality any day and XC-10 was the biggest joke Canon has ever made. :))

Yeah...no.  The GH4 has weak low light abilities without a speedbooster and it still has an un-cinematic 8bit image to it.  It's not a Full frame image...it's not even a better stills camera.  It does works great from event recordings though however....the image can't compare to a 14bit RAW 5D3 HD image.  The XC10 image is way underrated and I suspect the same will be the case with the 5D4.

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Really, it's that smooth with the 5-Axis? Sweet. Does it eat up the battery when using it?

Yes it's that smooth.  Not that i can tell, but if you use it in 4K it definitely uses more power and the exhaust vent is on more...but it's nothing noticeable.  Below is not my video but some good examples of hand held work.

18 minutes ago, mercer said:

One more quick question... how are you guys handling the mxf files in post? I know FCPX accepts them natively now, but do you convert them to ProRes, or comparable, beforehand with EditReady, or ClipWrap or something?

I import into resolve, grade and export out as prores.

23 minutes ago, mercer said:

Thanks a lot, but just to clarify, the 5-Axis only works in 1080p mode, correct? In 4K, you are limited to 3-Axis? How is the 3-Axis?

Correct.  5-Axis is only in 1080p.  The 4K stabilization good too. It gets rid of shaky hand footage, but you won't be able to walk and get gimbal like footage as from the 5 axis hd mode.  

2 hours ago, mercer said:

So, the c log in 1080p is comparable to the c log on the c100? How is the build quality? I am ready to press buy on this one, I just have a few questions. How much record time to you get on c fast cards and also 1080 c log on the SDXC cards?

Also 4K only records to the Cfast card and HD records to the SD card only.  The build quality of the XC10 is great.  The view finder works well in bright shooting environments and for RunnGun in good lighting it is my favorite camera to shoot with. The 5 axis + lens stabilization + clog + light weight + viewfinder + autofocus + 4k make it very fun to shoot with.  Low light interiors not so much...you will need to light but was recently improved via firmware update. I did just picke up a C100 MK2 to handle more challenging lighting situations, but any other time i i'll prefer to reach for the XC10.  CLOG is great too.  It seems soft when you look at it but load it into resolve and it sharpens/grades surprisingly well.  I'm betting the 4k high bitrate grades better than the CLOG for the C100.  If I get some time this weekend i'll do a comparison shoot with both.