BrunoLandMedia

Picked up one for $2400 from a production company. Totally still the top of my budget at the moment, but it will hang on the credit card for a month till I can make it up with an extra job. 
I have seen some great footage online from the mark 2's. I am a pretty good editor and know my way around the canon DSLR's so I hope the learning curve isn't that steep. 
I also am going to try out the 24-105 Mark II.  I know the original 24-105 is a workhorse but the world is sort of split on it's results. Half say it works, half say it's to dark. So I picked up a 24-105 Mark ii yesterday during eBays %15 off sale ($100 off) I'll either keep to replace my 24-70 f/4, or resell if it doesn't work. I have used my 18-135 a lot, but I know the quality is just not that great. 
I did a test a while ago on 80d of the 18-135, my current 24-70 f/4 and at the time, a Canon Refurb Purchased 24-105 Mark ii. The L's were so much sharper, even at iso 100 that it was hard to even justify having the 18-135, but before my 6d2, I really needed something for the range, so returned the 24-105 and kept switching between the 35 f/2 and 18-135 when I needed it. 
Now, with a 6d2, and the c100ii I have use for a 24-105. I'm hoping that the new 24-105mkii, while not "blow you away good" will be much closer to f/4 and with the better low light on c100 compared to my 80d tests, won't make it suffer. I know the IS is much better than the original. Of course I'll use 35 f/2 for a lot of B-roll, but I'm hoping the 24-105 will cover way better than the 18-135. Also, c100 is only 1.5 crop instead of 1.6, so that might help the wide end of the 24 a little bit. I have my 16-35 f/4 or even 10-18 stm if I need wider. I've also seen a lot of people using 24 primes on c100's so it can't be that bad of a focal length. 
No matter what my desire for primes or my 70-200 f/2.8 offers me, I still need that run and gun zoom lens so I'm not missing shots in and out of classrooms and other places in my school. 
Can't wait to start using it! Thanks for all the advice.

Picked up one for $2400 from a production company. Totally still the top of my budget at the moment, but it will hang on the credit card for a month till I can make it up with an extra job. 
I have seen some great footage online from the mark 2's. I am a pretty good editor and know my way around the canon DSLR's so I hope the learning curve isn't that steep. 
I also am going to try out the 24-105 Mark II.  I know the original 24-105 is a workhorse but the world is sort of split on it's results. Half say it works, half say it's to dark. So I picked up a 24-105 Mark ii yesterday during eBays %15 off sale ($100 off) I'll either keep to replace my 24-70 f/4, or resell if it doesn't work. I have used my 18-135 a lot, but I know the quality is just not that great. 
I did a test a while ago on 80d of the 18-135, my current 24-70 f/4 and at the time, a Canon Refurb Purchased 24-105 Mark ii. The L's were so much sharper, even at iso 100 that it was hard to even justify having the 18-135, but before my 6d2, I really needed something for the range, so returned the 24-105 and kept switching between the 35 f/2 and 18-135 when I needed it. 
Now, with a 6d2, and the c100ii I have use for a 24-105. I'm hoping that the new 24-105mkii, while not "blow you away good" will be much closer to f/4 and with the better low light on c100 compared to my 80d tests, won't make it suffer. I know the IS is much better than the original. Of course I'll use 35 f/2 for a lot of B-roll, but I'm hoping the 24-105 will cover way better than the 18-135. Also, c100 is only 1.5 crop instead of 1.6, so that might help the wide end of the 24 a little bit. I have my 16-35 f/4 or even 10-18 stm if I need wider. I've also seen a lot of people using 24 primes on c100's so it can't be that bad of a focal length. 
No matter what my desire for primes or my 70-200 f/2.8 offers me, I still need that run and gun zoom lens so I'm not missing shots in and out of classrooms and other places in my school. 
Can't wait to start using it! Thanks for all the advice.

Picked up one for $2400 from a production company. Totally still the top of my budget at the moment, but it will hang on the credit card for a month till I can make it up with an extra job. 
I have seen some great footage online from the mark 2's. I am a pretty good editor and know my way around the canon DSLR's so I hope the learning curve isn't that steep. 
I also am going to try out the 24-105 Mark II.  I know the original 24-105 is a workhorse but the world is sort of split on it's results. Half say it works, half say it's to dark. So I picked up a 24-105 Mark ii yesterday during eBays %15 off sale ($100 off) I'll either keep to replace my 24-70 f/4, or resell if it doesn't work. I have used my 18-135 a lot, but I know the quality is just not that great. 
I did a test a while ago on 80d of the 18-135, my current 24-70 f/4 and at the time, a Canon Refurb Purchased 24-105 Mark ii. The L's were so much sharper, even at iso 100 that it was hard to even justify having the 18-135, but before my 6d2, I really needed something for the range, so returned the 24-105 and kept switching between the 35 f/2 and 18-135 when I needed it. 
Now, with a 6d2, and the c100ii I have use for a 24-105. I'm hoping that the new 24-105mkii, while not "blow you away good" will be much closer to f/4 and with the better low light on c100 compared to my 80d tests, won't make it suffer. I know the IS is much better than the original. Of course I'll use 35 f/2 for a lot of B-roll, but I'm hoping the 24-105 will cover way better than the 18-135. Also, c100 is only 1.5 crop instead of 1.6, so that might help the wide end of the 24 a little bit. I have my 16-35 f/4 or even 10-18 stm if I need wider. I've also seen a lot of people using 24 primes on c100's so it can't be that bad of a focal length. 
No matter what my desire for primes or my 70-200 f/2.8 offers me, I still need that run and gun zoom lens so I'm not missing shots in and out of classrooms and other places in my school. 
Can't wait to start using it! Thanks for all the advice.

Yeah, after reading and re-reading the advice here and after seeing things head into the M4/3 conversation, it only makes me feel more like moving towards a c100 mkii. Since everyone's shooting situation is different and people hear have thoughtfully commented on mine, it seems the big signs point that way. c100 mkii offers me;
- 60p for my slow mo
- Native lens support and DPAF
- ND's Built in (which helps a guy running around outside at a school, weddings sometimes, etc.)
- No Time Limit recording
- I also believe that current USED price point (around $2500-2800) is going to be my best bet for a Cinima camera. mk3 would be out of my price range if one came out and who knows what the future holds. I actually almost pulled the trigger on one for $2480 2 weeks ago, but ended up being too scared, and now I'm kinda kicking myself, that was a good price I believe. 
Once again, thanks everyone for your thoughts and advice.  I think I am going to wait for a good price and start worrying about my shooting, not my gear. 
Cheers, Chris
 

Yeah, after reading and re-reading the advice here and after seeing things head into the M4/3 conversation, it only makes me feel more like moving towards a c100 mkii. Since everyone's shooting situation is different and people hear have thoughtfully commented on mine, it seems the big signs point that way. c100 mkii offers me;
- 60p for my slow mo
- Native lens support and DPAF
- ND's Built in (which helps a guy running around outside at a school, weddings sometimes, etc.)
- No Time Limit recording
- I also believe that current USED price point (around $2500-2800) is going to be my best bet for a Cinima camera. mk3 would be out of my price range if one came out and who knows what the future holds. I actually almost pulled the trigger on one for $2480 2 weeks ago, but ended up being too scared, and now I'm kinda kicking myself, that was a good price I believe. 
Once again, thanks everyone for your thoughts and advice.  I think I am going to wait for a good price and start worrying about my shooting, not my gear. 
Cheers, Chris
 

Yeah, after reading and re-reading the advice here and after seeing things head into the M4/3 conversation, it only makes me feel more like moving towards a c100 mkii. Since everyone's shooting situation is different and people hear have thoughtfully commented on mine, it seems the big signs point that way. c100 mkii offers me;
- 60p for my slow mo
- Native lens support and DPAF
- ND's Built in (which helps a guy running around outside at a school, weddings sometimes, etc.)
- No Time Limit recording
- I also believe that current USED price point (around $2500-2800) is going to be my best bet for a Cinima camera. mk3 would be out of my price range if one came out and who knows what the future holds. I actually almost pulled the trigger on one for $2480 2 weeks ago, but ended up being too scared, and now I'm kinda kicking myself, that was a good price I believe. 
Once again, thanks everyone for your thoughts and advice.  I think I am going to wait for a good price and start worrying about my shooting, not my gear. 
Cheers, Chris
 

Wow, Thanks everyone for your thoughts. 
I should have been more clear about absolute needs and workflow. 
When I arrived at this job, all I had was the XA10 camcorder and two 720 handycams. I did the best I could. I started bringing my 70d in to do all the run and gun stuff, and finally after a while convinced THEM to buy me an 80d with the 18-135. That was the max budget I could get out of them. I couldn't just "save" that 1000 so I went ahead got the 80d. I personally have always had DSLR for my family, music, and travel and the 6dmk2 clicks my boxes there so then I was a 2 DSLR show and the old XA10. Now with a little more money and possible selling the 80d, I am looking for real video. 
1. No 4k needed, and not wanted really. I do things like Go to Kindergarten while the paint pumpkins. Take real quick B-roll of all the actions, cute shots of them together. Super tight, super wide shots, mostly on mono pod (Gimbal in future) head up to my office and turn around a quick 1-2 min video in an hour. 4k would crush that workflow. And I do this all the time, a few times a week along with all these other videos I'm doing. 
2. Need a "no time limit" camera. This is why mirrorless won't work for this camera. Maybe one day, I'll dump the 6d for canon's new mirrorless or something else, but that's not the question right now. 
3. Much better picture in low light, mostly situations where I don't have ANY control of the light. Better than 80d or 6dmk2.
4. Oh, I also need to stream 1080p HDMI out which I know both c100's do. 
I feel like the mk1 could keep me with the 80d/6d for the 60p and run and gun work and maybe that is just stupid. Just go for the mk2 and use it for everything. Then I wouldn't have to worry about changing cameras all the time, just adding cameras for performances. 
Cheers

Wow, Thanks everyone for your thoughts. 
I should have been more clear about absolute needs and workflow. 
When I arrived at this job, all I had was the XA10 camcorder and two 720 handycams. I did the best I could. I started bringing my 70d in to do all the run and gun stuff, and finally after a while convinced THEM to buy me an 80d with the 18-135. That was the max budget I could get out of them. I couldn't just "save" that 1000 so I went ahead got the 80d. I personally have always had DSLR for my family, music, and travel and the 6dmk2 clicks my boxes there so then I was a 2 DSLR show and the old XA10. Now with a little more money and possible selling the 80d, I am looking for real video. 
1. No 4k needed, and not wanted really. I do things like Go to Kindergarten while the paint pumpkins. Take real quick B-roll of all the actions, cute shots of them together. Super tight, super wide shots, mostly on mono pod (Gimbal in future) head up to my office and turn around a quick 1-2 min video in an hour. 4k would crush that workflow. And I do this all the time, a few times a week along with all these other videos I'm doing. 
2. Need a "no time limit" camera. This is why mirrorless won't work for this camera. Maybe one day, I'll dump the 6d for canon's new mirrorless or something else, but that's not the question right now. 
3. Much better picture in low light, mostly situations where I don't have ANY control of the light. Better than 80d or 6dmk2.
4. Oh, I also need to stream 1080p HDMI out which I know both c100's do. 
I feel like the mk1 could keep me with the 80d/6d for the 60p and run and gun work and maybe that is just stupid. Just go for the mk2 and use it for everything. Then I wouldn't have to worry about changing cameras all the time, just adding cameras for performances. 
Cheers