Jump to content

Canon announces C100 Mark 2


Zach Ashcraft
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

No Matt. No nobody was given the mk II yet. There are no C100 mk IIs yet even to hold and the first one in the US will be shown at some expo this month I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. A feature - shot using lights and graded to who-knows-what degree - then uploaded to youtube. Not the best situation for assessing image quality. You could tell us this was shot with a GH2 and we'd hardly be able to dispute it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also have the 2013 Cannes films festival winner that was shot with the C300 . Many still think that if a camera does not have x,y,z  features, then it is not good enough. Today, the camera is no more the limiting factor, it is the man behind the camera. As much as it pains me about Canon dslr camera strategy, this C100 will sell like hot cakes. It is a good 8/10 on all the features of a video camera, good to very good in DR. lowlight, rolling shutter, colour science, ergonomics etc. Today if you don't have geek headline grabbing features like 4k or cannot shoot clean + 10 000 ISO etc, then your camera is just good for the bin. While most of these headline grabbing camera have one or more big weaknesses like colour science or ISO etc.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe I forgot BitWC was shot on C300's!

 

Far from being a limiting factor the C300 was in fact integral to the film's success. All those walking scenes looking directly into Adele Whatshername's rather bewitching face; the 1000's of takes the cast and crew were forced to do; the completely independent vision of the director (low-cost shoot, so unrestricted by big studio).

 

You could argue the film depended on the C100. And the image is everything in this film. Its pure cinema - cinema in its most base form. If you can do that with a C300 then for me the argument is over. Sure Malick might need film or Fincher a RED, but BitWC is pure cinema as far as I'm concerned, and not only did it loose nothing from being shot on the Canon, it gained something very special.

 

What an amazing film it is: far too long; ethically very dubious (treatment of its young stars); gratuitously compelling sex scenes; depressing as hell. But challenging in a way far too little cinema is (I was shaken for days after seeing it). I can't say I liked it, but it affected me in a way very few films ever have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

So C300 on Blue Is The Warmest Colour is the new hype machine on the EOSHD forums I see. Well here's Roger Deakins view on it... he found it "disappointing" http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2691

 

As for image quality, it really has very little to do with the C300, more about the £25,000 Angenieux zooms they had on the front. And of course, the million pound post production budget and talented crew of many people, plus the lighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So C300 on Blue Is The Warmest Colour is the new hype machine on the EOSHD forums I see. 

 

Huh? You'll have to explain that one to me Andrew. You have a lot more experience with hype than I do.

 

 

 

... here's Roger Deakins view on it... he found it "disappointing" http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2691

 

And what's Andrew Reid's view on it? 

 

 

As for image quality, it really has very little to do with the C300, more about the £25,000 Angenieux zooms they had on the front. 

 

My whole point was that a camera isn't all about pixel-peeping image quality (or even the lens for that matter) when it comes to good images. It's also about how you get them.

 

 

And of course, the million pound post production budget and talented crew of many people, plus the lighting.

 

Well that kind of rules out talking about cameras used on 99% of all feature films doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So C300 on Blue Is The Warmest Colour is the new hype machine on the EOSHD forums I see. Well here's Roger Deakins view on it... he found it "disappointing" http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2691

 

As for image quality, it really has very little to do with the C300, more about the £25,000 Angenieux zooms they had on the front. And of course, the million pound post production budget and talented crew of many people, plus the lighting.

 

I think that if you put a Nikon D90 or Canon T2i behind the Angenieux zoom you won't have this image quality. On the other extreme if you put an Alexa or another high end Sony or Red camera, for me the gain would have been incremental. What I mean is that between those two extremes, the C300/C100 would have been much closer to the high-end raw/prores camera that the low end dslr. The blue ruin one was done with Canon glass.

 

Another thing of note is that those two films, more so Blue ruin, is more like Indie film making, with very small crew and budget. Blue Is The Warmest Colour, was more like freedom from big studio which gave more liberty and time for the director, with smaller crew etc. The camera did give them that liberty in many ways and if you look at them (I am just basing my though on the trailer for Blue ruin), they look much more naturalistic camera on the shoulder, not the overly complex lit and graded Hollywood style movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been fooling around with using DNxHD 220x with Ninja 2 attached to C100 MK 1, and for C-log it's pretty incredible how much of a difference it makes. You gain a ton of detail (yeah even more!) and colour separation, secondaries work incredibly well... you basically gain a stop or so of usable dynamic range as you don't lose all the detail in the darks. it's quite brilliant.

 

The price of C100 MK 1 and Ninja 2 are both dropping so in combination it's gonna be really good for indie film making, just jack the audio into the camera too! I don't mind using the AVCHD for reporting and that kind of thing, but the DNxHD has ten-times the data and whips it into touch if you want to do post. IT ain't 4K, but it'll look damn good.

 

For promos and slow motion stuff though the FS7 is a much better bet, but it'll cost you twice as much. OR you can hire it for 150 a day. It seems it maintains the Sony cool, Kodak-y look, which is certainly a look. It's one i like, though it's not as friendly as Canon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So C300 on Blue Is The Warmest Colour is the new hype machine on the EOSHD forums I see. Well here's Roger Deakins view on it... he found it "disappointing" http://www.rogerdeakins.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2691

 

? I don't really get what your saying here. Deakins didn't say anything about the quality of the C300 and isn't it the EOSHD motto to not talk about artistic stuff?

 

You now hate Canon so much that even someone praising a film that was shot on a Canon camera will draw your ire.  Like one person talked positive about a film and it's now the worst thing ever.

 

You talk about how the A7s is so close to 5d raw that it's not worth the trouble in post but don't see how that analogy also works for the C300 / Alexa with RAW.

 

Alexa with raw is even harder in post than 5d with raw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like C cameras have displaced 5D and 7D as indie festival cameras of choice after all, especially for films that don't require extensive post production. I'm actually surprised they are bothering with a 1DC follow-up...unless they unlock the EOSRAW internal codec on it...what could it possibly offer now? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

1DC mk II? 


Please focus peaking & Zebras & waveform monitor + punch-in while recording
Articulating LCD
allow the 4K to be output through HDMI with Audio
S16 mode that looks like s35 mode
60p that looks as good as 24p
Dual digic 6 processors (better downscaling/lowlight/aiasing performace)
A more compressed 4K codec (perhaps a MJPEG Lite version that's 200mpbs-ish)

Things that would be cool yet unlikely with Canon
-Internal 14-bit raw like ML
-SSD slot
-Detachable high quality EVF
-Remove the 7000$ pro stills camera stuck to it make it smaller and much cheaper. 

They have a lot of room for improving the 1DC mk II!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would anyone get the C100 Mk II when for less than £2k more you can get an FS7?

 

FS7 UK price - http://cvp.com/index.php?t=product/sony_pxw-fs7

 

C100 Mk II - http://cvp.com/index.php?t=product/canon_eos-c100-mark-ii

 

Because they want a small, easy to use camera with the best color science and overall quality for the price and no need to use potentially unreliable adapters for Canon glass. While we enjoyed having the extra features of the FS700, especially slomo, ultimately native Canon EF glass support and superior color science are more valuable in most cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Well it's 50% more money for starters Andrew! :D

When Somy sells the FS7 for 5K then it will hurt the C100 sales, and even then many people will prefer the C100 for the lighter/smaller body, higher build quality and ergonomics for handheld (not shoulder), superior viewfinder and monitors that articulates, much cheaper media and power, better lowlight performance (C300 vs f5 - and the mk II is said to be even better), better colours without struggling in post (C300 vs F5), native EF lens support (FS7 doesn't work with EF adapters as of now, who knows when if at all), a state-of-the-art Autofocus system with facial tracking, better and easier UI, I can go on.

The C100 mk II is the best complete package for 5K, unless you work with heavy CGI raw jobs or work in a 4K market, then you'll have to make compromises of either losing a lot of usability and image advantages to get a cheaper 4K/raw camera or 50% more money to get an FS7 (and also lose the above).

I am shooting a commercial for a huge Car manufacfurer to be shown on national TV and you know what? It will be delivered in SD. I can't imagine anyone even knowing what 4K means in my market. We (I say more than 85% of the world population) is still years from supporting full HD, and 4K is a next decade plan.

If you work in a 4K market, and you NEED to deliver 4K or NEED to reframe in post, then buy a 4K camera. This is not one. You can only shoot 4K with a 4K camera :D while the C100 will make one of the most complete 1080p cameras for the next at least 3-4 in most of the world, for HD television, wedding videography, docemtary filmmaking, corporate jobs, and films that don't require heavy CGI.

When you stop looking at specs and evaluate the actual footage and usability the story is hugely different than what we do here on forums, where the GH4 makes a better camera vs a C300 according to specs, or where a C100 is similar to a t2i in 1080p 4:2:0 8 bit, it's not the case, look at the darn images.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the price of C100MK2 one could get a much better Cine kit with:

 

Sony A7S Body $2,499

Metabones EF Adapter $399

DJI Ronin Stabilizer $2,999

 

This setup will significantly minimize rolling shutter, lights investment and provide a better post experience with a 4K upgrade option for the future. Plus, you can swap out the body for A8S or 5D4 when it comes out for example. Much more modular. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...