Jump to content

c100 II/80D Combo Lens choices


jasonmillard81

Recommended Posts

Hi all!  I am 85% of the way ready to purchase a c100 II but wanted to make the best decision with regards to options and lenses.  I don't own any Canon glass anymore and have the GH4 system which I will most likely sell to get a B-cam for my C100II.  

I could also keep the GH4 as a b-cam to the C100 II.  Is there any strong reasons to sell my GH4 for an 80D?  My C100 II will be my A-cam for video and my GH4 or 80D will be my B-cam for video and main stills camera.  I'd like to take stills to print large sizes for print.  So I could theoretically keep my GH4 for stills and have a decent b-cam with 4K video but no DPAF.  The 80D would give me the DPAF but not 4K video.  Any thoughts on what to use as a b-cam and stills camera to print images?

As far as C100 II options

1. Body Only:  $3999

2. Body & 24-105 4L:  $4499

I'm not sure if it is better to start with just the body and get a different "kit" lens or get the body and 24-105 for 500 more which would save me 400-500 on the actual lens.

I think it seems best to have an all-around zoom lens and 1 or 2 lenses that are much sharper for up-close interviews etc since the C100 II could use a bit more help in the resolution department.

 

Sorry if that seemed stream of conscious. 

 

Thanks in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how everyone hated on the c100ii and is now moving to it. The camera really is so nice, I guess the price drop really sealed the deal. 

The 24-105 is amazing. That would probably be the first lens I would buy for that camera. I would sell the GH4 and buy the 80d or maybe the 5dmkiii. The Canon color/stills is much much better than the GH4. The next lens I would buy would probably the be the 30mm F2 IS or the Sigma 18-35 1.8. If you need something longer, maybe go for the 70-200 somewhere down the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 24-105 F4 and IMO is an average lens plus on the 100 II is not even that wide. I'm sure that with the introduction of the new one 24-105 II they will become even cheaper on the used market so is not really a super investment for 500$. I think I used only once for video on the 1Dx II, it is not particularly wide nor sharp nor fast. On full frame is a convenient range and with IS but this is it.

There are tons of people that use it with the C100/C300 because is convenient but just don't expect magic out of it. On a 80D is even less wide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

I have the 24-105 F4 and IMO is an average lens plus on the 100 II is not even that wide. I'm sure that with the introduction of the new one 24-105 II they will become even cheaper on the used market so is not really a super investment for 500$. I think I used only once for video on the 1Dx II, it is not particularly wide nor sharp nor fast. On full frame is a convenient range and with IS but this is it.

There are tons of people that use it with the C100/C300 because is convenient but just don't expect magic out of it. On a 80D is even less wide.

Canon glass holds in price pretty amazingly. I don't see that lens being worth less than 350, even after years of use. So yeah, it pays for itself in one shoot. 

IS is huge. It goes from needing a monopod/tripod to being able to shoot handheld. Yes, if you're shooting on a slider, ronin, or locked off, it's not the right lens. A great DOC run and gun lens though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here the 24-105 goes around 350 usd used right now and the new one is not yet available and view that it is a kit lens on the 5D there are tons available. The story that they old is only true until the new model comes around.. I paid 2100 USD for the 16-35 II and now it goes around 700 USD.... 500 F4 IS was 7200 USD now they go around 4500 USD... so not really amazing in my wallet, for sure they loose way less value than a camera.

But the real question is if it is better the 17-55 2.8 or 18-135 that both have IS and both are wider and one is 1 stop faster? You can find them pretty cheap on the used market.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

I paid 2100 USD for the 16-35 II and now it goes around 700 USD....

We're talking about a pretty low priced lens, the price is unlikely to really fall more than it has. Ebay is tell all anyway, and yeah its around 450. 

The 17-55 is better for certain stuff. For outdoor shooting, it's really nice to have that much longer focal length. The 18-35 is also amazing, but no IS.

 

24105.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
On October 19, 2016 at 2:19 PM, jasonmillard81 said:

Hi all!  I am 85% of the way ready to purchase a c100 II but wanted to make the best decision with regards to options and lenses.  I don't own any Canon glass anymore and have the GH4 system which I will most likely sell to get a B-cam for my C100II.  

I could also keep the GH4 as a b-cam to the C100 II.  Is there any strong reasons to sell my GH4 for an 80D?  My C100 II will be my A-cam for video and my GH4 or 80D will be my B-cam for video and main stills camera.  I'd like to take stills to print large sizes for print.  So I could theoretically keep my GH4 for stills and have a decent b-cam with 4K video but no DPAF.  The 80D would give me the DPAF but not 4K video.  Any thoughts on what to use as a b-cam and stills camera to print images?

As far as C100 II options

1. Body Only:  $3999

2. Body & 24-105 4L:  $4499

I'm not sure if it is better to start with just the body and get a different "kit" lens or get the body and 24-105 for 500 more which would save me 400-500 on the actual lens.

I think it seems best to have an all-around zoom lens and 1 or 2 lenses that are much sharper for up-close interviews etc since the C100 II could use a bit more help in the resolution department.

 

Sorry if that seemed stream of conscious. 

 

Thanks in advance!

Since there's all this talk about lenses for C100/80D I just thought I'd quickly say that I have a used 17-55 I want to sell and a Canon Refurbished 35mm f/2. I'll be taking some pictures and listing them in the sale section and on eBay next week. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had both 17-55 and 24-105 from the beginning and I'd say personally that the 24-105 is by far my most used lens. At it's wide end of 24 I don't find it to be particularly pleasing but a little further on and to 105 it's really good value for the prices it sells today. 17-55 is OK but I don't think it's as good as the praise people seem to be giving it lately, I don't consider it L level quality as some do. Personally I think a 24-105/ 16-35 combo is best (or the 17-40 IS if you need IS), then if you want to go really wide pick up one of the Tokina ultra wide zooms to fill the gap (I don't find them super pleasing either, but they do the job well enough for a good price). If you really want quality and light, shoot with primes (that's what I do if it's a requirement).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm running the C100 MkII and love it. Sure I wish the files had a little more heft but I for what I do I shoot - run and gun doc in difficult situations/ locations -  I'm happy to a decent balance between file sizes and image quality.

Hands down my favorite lens is the Sigma 18-35mm. Partner this with the 24-105mm and you are fairly well covered. Sure I wish the 18-35mm had IS, but given the combined weight of this lens and the C100, I find it a very stable combo if one can keep off the coffee.

Given that the 24-105mm is a full frame lens, and that the C100 is a super 35 sensor, the best part (centre) of the 24-105mm glass is used. I love the long end of this lens. I'm sure the 70-200mm would kill.

I picked up the 16-35mm f4 L for when I need wide IS... but still the Sigma gets more love.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I foolishly sold my 5d3 and bought a gh4. I do however have my tamron 17-50 2.8 VC sitting in my bag. 

 

Does that mean a 24-105 would be a better option? Then pickup a canon 50 1.8 and a rokinon 85 1.4?

 

would those fit an 80D and c100? Not sure I can invest in c100, 1dc, and quality glass. Still on the fence about 80D or 1dc for photography and some video when traveling. It would be nice to have dpaf and internal time lapse or is that easily achieved on 1dc

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AaronChicago said:

Attaching a SmallHD 501 on top would be ideal. Swivel plus peaking and scopes.

Yep, it certainly seems a requirement. But adding the audio recorder (plus wireless units) and you are moving towards a bit of a clunky rig... for my needs anyway. But there is no denying the image.

The C300 MkII will probably be where I head once the price drops.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, User said:

Yep, it certainly seems a requirement. But adding the audio recorder (plus wireless units) and you are moving towards a bit of a clunky rig... for my needs anyway. But there is no denying the image.

The C300 MkII will probably be where I head once the price drops.

When will it drop? Any clue on where the price point will fall?  Worth waiting instead of buying a c100 II now? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...