Jump to content

Canon 1D C - For...Stills?


jasonmillard81
 Share

Recommended Posts

Used 1D C bodies are popping up for sub-$3k and some just a little over $2K.  Considering the already touted video capabilities and final product one can attain on the 1D C 4K video side, what is the general consensus as it being a primary stills camera as well?

 

While my other post recently discussed selling the GH4 for an 80D to act as B-cam for the c100 II, I am wondering if the older 1D C body would offer equal, if not, better image quality in stills than an 80D or GH4.  If so, then it may be worth the extra $1K investment to have a better b-cam for video and an equal if not superior stills cam.

 

Thoughts on a 1D C for a stills camera over 80D/GH4 types?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Honestly, I think the 1DC would be the A cam to a C-100 B-Cam... But YMMV based upon how important DPAF is to your video work. They both have C-Log, so in that respect, they would work great together. As far as stills, I'm just starting to shoot them, but I believe other than the lack of DPAF, the 1DC would be a great stills cam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the 1dc essentially a 1dx that also shoots 4K?  Until recently that was the top of the line sports cam, the AF/tracking is ridiculously good. Imaging Resource and DPreview have image comparison tools to put your options side by side. 

Obviously it's much more to carry, beyond that it's a better camera in every way IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a 1Dx (for still 100% same as the 1Dc) since the introduction and I have taken more than 160'000 pictures with it. Until the 1Dx II it was simple the best sports/action camera on the market. 1Dx II has better dynamic range at < ISO 400 and a bit better AF and 2 more fps but you would have an hard time distinguish the photos between the two. I use both at the same time at the same events.

I had also a 70D and is the 1Dx is in another league. AF, High Iso quality you cannot even compare with the 80D or the GH4. The only disadvantage that is big and heavy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have owned multiple 1dx's and 1dc's.  The 1dc is exactly like the 1dx, plus adds:

4k 24p in MJPEG

S35 1080 mode (very good)

1080p60 (softer than 5d3 h264)

Canon Log with View assist

Now on the stills side, there were some updates the 1dx did get that the 1dc didn't.  Can't remember if it's more AF points @ F/8 or what, but there are subtle difference.

Other differences - the 1dc has to be upgraded at Canon while the 1dx can be user updated.  Also the 1dc counts as 20 CPS points/cinema.

It's a hell of a stills camera.  I prefer the new 1dxII with the PDAF, 4k30 and 4k60, the 4x faster CFast slot and the much deeper buffer.

 

Also someone said they would have it as the A cam with the C100 II as the B cam.  If you like a built in ND filter, central PDAF, smaller files,  XLR audio, EVF, better video ergonomics and a stunning 1080p image I'd go with the c100 mark II.  If you have time to setup and have other ways to knock back the light, have a way to pull focus, external audio source and can expose, then the 1dc is great.  c100 is just a hell of a lot better for ME.  Both will give you drop dead gorgous shots and the c100 will even allow for punch in while recording (and focus peaking, waveforms, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! Some interesting perspectives.  I'd like to make sense to some of the commentary and please correct me if I am wrong.

 

1. It seems that regarding stills the 1D C blows the 80D/GH4 out of the water, which isn't surprising due to the price differentials etc.

2. The biggest downside is lack of certain features (DPAF), large files, and it's heavy

3. The 1DX II may have more features than 1D C but is about 2-3k more in price

 

Questions:

A. I will most likely get a C100 II for video and separate cam for photography

B. I see some used 1D C and C100 II for sale both on Craigslist and (BH/Adorama)

      1. For 1D C I have seen sub 3K cameras being sold but with 65,000 actuations.  My question is is it worth paying $1K more for one that is sub 10,000 actuations?  I've read that Canon has rated the camera for 400,000 actuations. A camera with 65,000 does not seem that bad and seems like it would last me 5+ years with recreational possibly moderate use as a hobbyist/amateur.  What are your thoughts on buying used?  How should i interpret actuations?  My gut says pay $500+ more to buy from Adorama than Craigslist, am I delusional?

      2. For C100 II does it matter how many "hours of footage" have been shot on it similar to actuations on a camera?  Again, is it better to go new vs. used here and store front vs. craigslist?   I have no problem ordering a c100 II and used 1D C (65,000 actuations) tonight if it seems like a good deal both short and long-term

 

Thanks in advance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Shield3 said:

Now on the stills side, there were some updates the 1dx did get that the 1dc didn't.  Can't remember if it's more AF points @ F/8 or what, but there are subtle difference.

Right, if I remember correctly the firmware updates for the 1Dx added the F8 AF, the flashing square showing the AF point in low light (terrible, much better in the 1D IV and 1Dx II) and the exposure compensation in M mode while using auto iso. Not sure what was added to the 1Dc....

12 minutes ago, jasonmillard81 said:

B. I see some used 1D C and C100 II for sale both on Craigslist and (BH/Adorama)

      1. For 1D C I have seen sub 3K cameras being sold but with 65,000 actuations.  My question is is it worth paying $1K more for one that is sub 10,000 actuations?  I've read that Canon has rated the camera for 400,000 actuations. A camera with 65,000 does not seem that bad and seems like it would last me 5+ years with recreational possibly moderate use as a hobbyist/amateur.  What are your thoughts on buying used?  How should i interpret actuations?  My gut says pay $500+ more to buy from Adorama than Craigslist, am I delusional?

 

Assuming that both 1Dc are in identical condition one with 10k actuations and one with 65k for 1k less I would not hesitate 1 second to buy the 65k... Shutter is rated for 400k as you mention and the shutter replacement it should be <500 usd.

But there are other factors affecting the price like the overall condition of the camera body like scratches on lcd, chips on the paint etc.. or even worst scratches on the sensor itself ....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

65k is NOTHING on a 1d series body.  Plenty of people knock Canon for being lackluster in the spec department; they're like the Toyota of the camera world.  Rock solid and proven reliable.  The 1dx/1dxII/1dc/1div etc are cameras that could be taken into the jungle, desert, war zone, etc.  Heavy and solid as a tank.  I had a 1dIV with 225k clicks and the shots looked like a brand new one.  Anything can fail though, but in the last 7 years of shooting Canon I have only had 1 SD slot failure in a 5d3 that Canon had back to me fixed for free in about 10 days.

My Sony a7r went in the shop twice and took a month each time to get back to me.  It and many other Sony bodies had overheating, compatibility issues with AF adapters (even Metabones) in which the camera would shut off.  Obviously you're not asking about Sony a7x series cameras, but my point is there's a world of difference between 65k on a 1d series and a non-pro body.

Basically it comes down to this:

You can pick up a used 1dx II for about 5-5.3k and it will give you a ton of stuff over the 1dc.  PDAF with face tracking is really the shit, and the 4k60 is so good that I find myself doing frame grabs and shooting 4k60 all the time.  Yes the codec is a pain in the ass, but it's 8 bit 4:2:2 and looks fantastic.

I personally would rather have a C100 Mark II over the 1dc for video - the 1080p60 and all the other features far outweigh the 4k24/25 (there is no 30/60 4k on the 1dc).  In fairness there is no 4k on the c100 either, but it is a 4k sensor downscaled in camera to amazing 1080p.  It's a workhorse and a delight to use.

My advice?  If you have shot with a full frame Canon with a grip you'll pretty much know what to expect with the 1dc.  Go rent a c100 Mark II and you will flat out love using it.  I tend to shoot Cinema/C-log and expose about 1 stop to the right; it grades lovely and easily in post.  The built in microphone is amazing too.  i set the button on the right handle to toggle AF on and off, and the "nipple" you can quickly adjust shutter, ISO, F/Stop, WB without even moving your eye from the EVF.

Lastly, the c100 IMO when exposed correctly (and shot in C-log) looks 99% as good as the 5d3 raw with about 10,000 times the reliability as assistance factor.  With the heavier compressed codec you do have to pay attention to exposure though, so there is less leeway for error.

I shoot my son's travel baseball games.  I'll set the c100 up in the outfield with a long lens on a tripod and just let it record (no 30 minute time limit either) - I can record for like 3-4 hours with a 128GB SD card and the larger battery.  Then I can shoot stills and get 1080p120 shots with the 1dx II and the footage matches up nicely.  Canon colors are great.

Either way you can't go wrong.  All of these will provide stunning results.  Absolute image quality goes to the C-Log 4k 1dc if you have a planned shot and time to set everything up.  Going to shoot an event or need to quickly work?  C100 and it's not even close.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more thing Jason (I sent you a PM) - keep in mind the value of time.  There are a TON of "armchair" videographers that will tell you how amazing a camera footage is based solely on specs or being the "latest and greatest". "OMG 10 bit just crushes 8 bit" or "camera A is so much better than camera B because it shoots 4k".  Most people do not need 4k right now - it's a pain to store and work with (and deliver).  Just because something is even 8 bit 4:2:0 doesn't make it crap - the a7s II shoots an amazing looking image.  There are a ton of people that fork out extra money for external recorders that I can barely see the difference with if at all.

At the end of the day ease of use, turnaround time, FOCUS ability, tracking are all very important.  Yes that XYZ camera looks great if you can just get the ND filter dialed in right, have a separate audio source, spend hours syncing these two in post, down scaling your footage and hours grading S-Log or something else in post, converting RAW, etc. God forbid the talent moves.  FOCUS always beats ultimate image quality for me.  Hell the "ancient" FS700 looked pretty damn good IMO in good light, especially the slow-mo.  Would I carry around that beast as well as the Odyssey 7Q+ just for the added IQ?  Not me.  Some would.  People like to critique low bitrates and 4:2:0 color space, yet ignore flip out screens and easy use.

I realize I'm rambling.  I still look at GH2 unhacked footage I shot back in 2012 and it looks fantastic.  The hack (IMO) was more hype than anything else.  Only hack I really saw a difference for was the 5d3 raw. 

There is no perfect camera.

Micro four thirds - harder to get shallow DOF, video AF lousy, poor low light due to the small sensor.

Sony - questionable repair services, tougher to grade colors, frustrating menus, too many bodies being released, poor battery life, fiddly controls, poor ergonomics

Nikon - poor video AF, lenses not optimized for video use, unaware of any cinema Nikon cameras.

Canon - boring, holds back features reserved for Cinema line, can't use EF-S lenses on full frame bodies, moire/aliasing/soft 1080p image on many models.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did you find a 1dc for $3k ?! That is the Deal of the century !

13 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

It would kill the 80D and GH4 for stills. 

Check that, murder the 80D and GH4 for stills.

Scratch that, kidnap and torture, preform experiments and then make a 4K snuff film of the murder which it sends to the 80D and GH4s families.

Damn that's pretty serious ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members
4 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

Where did you find a 1dc for $3k ?! That is the Deal of the century !

Thats about what mine cost. Bought it on a photo forum. It was the oldest add there, zero interest for such things in Sweden.

When I sold it I had the same problem. So I switched the title from 1DC to 1DX/1DC. My phone almost exploded. Felt like every photographer in the world wanted a 1DX but none of them had ever heard of a 1DC.

So the camera now lives with a sports shooter. It will never capture a frame of video again. I told him it was a great video camera, he couldn't care less :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@experienced users of the 1DC

What about the AF of the 1DC for

  1. shooting sports stills (fast and precise enough?)
  2. shooting video - I know, it can NOT be compared with the fantastic DPAF, but in comparison with other currently used cameras,,,

What about accuracy of 1080p-shoots? As "mushy" and soft as usual 1080p-Canon-footage, or comparable with accuracy of C100-footage in 1080p?

Thank you for advice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Arikhan said:

@experienced users of the 1DC

What about the AF of the 1DC for

  1. shooting sports stills (fast and precise enough?)
  2. shooting video - I know, it can NOT be compared with the fantastic DPAF, but in comparison with other currently used cameras,,,

What about accuracy of 1080p-shoots? As "mushy" and soft as usual 1080p-Canon-footage, or comparable with accuracy of C100-footage in 1080p?

Thank you for advice!

Sport stills 1DC is one of the very best cameras.

Video AF is almost non-existent.

Image quality wise S35 1080p is sharp and clean, on par with C100/C300 1080p. I did a comparison between 1DX II and 1DC, you can take look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 0:12 PM, Arikhan said:

@experienced users of the 1DC

What about the AF of the 1DC for

  1. shooting sports stills (fast and precise enough?)
  2. shooting video - I know, it can NOT be compared with the fantastic DPAF, but in comparison with other currently used cameras,,,

What about accuracy of 1080p-shoots? As "mushy" and soft as usual 1080p-Canon-footage, or comparable with accuracy of C100-footage in 1080p?

Thank you for advice!

For sports stills AF s super I have shot (1dx) professional Ice Hockey, Trial Bike, Mountain bike, Ski world cup, professional car racing, atp tennis and it is fast and very consistent. 70% of the pro sport shooter use the 1dx so there is no issue here.

AF in video is not available only before you record you can AF and is painfully slow although very precise. 

Link to comment
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.

 Share

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...