jpfilmz

I own both cameras as well and definitely think the 5D3RAW image is more impressive looking.  I think the C100mk2 looks sharper overall due to it not being a full frame camera and not having a filter on it like the 5D3 has which needs post sharpening.  Below are some 5D Raw dng files with a graded versions.  



 

I own both cameras as well and definitely think the 5D3RAW image is more impressive looking.  I think the C100mk2 looks sharper overall due to it not being a full frame camera and not having a filter on it like the 5D3 has which needs post sharpening.  Below are some 5D Raw dng files with a graded versions.  



 

Was this originally shot in 4K or HD.  I decided to upload some more footage from mine.  I'm still happy with it's performance and I don't shot clog anymore with it.
 
 

And dont forget the 5D III RAW is 14bit, as I like to shoot in some crazy lighting scenarios. I get banding with every other camera I ever owned other then a 5DIII. The colors are just great, bright red key light, no problem. (I shot something similar with the A7S II, and the colors were so ugly that I had to use a "black and white" grade. )

I own both cameras as well and definitely think the 5D3RAW image is more impressive looking.  I think the C100mk2 looks sharper overall due to it not being a full frame camera and not having a filter on it like the 5D3 has which needs post sharpening.  Below are some 5D Raw dng files with a graded versions.  



 

Yeah if the ML team has the inclination, and it's possible, the 77D could be a great option for low cost, handheld ML Raw. 
The software based IS in the XC10 is the best IS I have ever used. It's better than the IBIS in the a6500 and the GX85... no question. 
Other than a strap I was pulling taut, there was no other physical stabilization. During this shot(s) I walked forward backward and shuffled sideways... try and do that with a Panny...
 

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.

Motion blur - what do you expect when you wave a camera about with a 50th sec shutter

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.

Got a proper chance to play about with the files... Thanks for the upload.... There is a clear difference with the 10bit/4:2:2  and 8bit/4:2:0 files. The 10 bit can be quite heavily pushed about. Really impressed.

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!!!!!!

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.

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 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.
 

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.

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.

Got my XC10 this morning. Still playing with it when I really should be working! As promised I slapped an Isco pre36 on it to see if it's usable. Shots below are at 24mm, 80, 240 and 80.



There's slight vignetting at 80mm, which turns to pronounced white vignetting when pointed at a light source. Nevertheless, it's nice to have the option of a stabilised 80-240 anamorphic, even if it is at 5.6 on a 1" sensor.

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.
 
 

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.  

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.
 
 

Just received my new XC15 with XLR attachments. Just threw this up after a hard day's work in the shop---so you can sample the quality of the audio.
I also used the new Production Camera custom profile that is also in the Canon C300 M2.  But this is just a sample of the audio for talking head stuff: