Guest Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 As the C100 drops in price it becomes more and more attractive (a used C100 Mk1 should be the same price as a new 5D3 by the time the Mk2 comes out I think). I love the image it produces and can live without 50p. I'd just really rather not use a Z-Finder. Has anyone here used the EVF for pro work? Is it passable with a customised eyecup on it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Do you remember the viewfinders on 2005-ish HDV handycams? They're better. It's TINY, and I mean really really tiny, and the resolution is very poor, which makes it impossible to set focus using it, perhaps if you have a 6/6 vision and have excellent focusing skills you can get away with peaking turned on, but I couldn't and I have a fairly perfect vision. It can only be used for approximate framing in broad daylight in my opinion, for which it works fine if you only need the evf for that. The rest of the camera is excellent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Ah, ok. That really does sound bad. Thanks Ebrahim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zach Ashcraft Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Yes, really worthless in about %95 percent of shooting scenarios. occasionaly in run and gun type situations at weddings, after I already had exposure and focus nailed using the LCD screen, I could use the EVF just for framing and to help with stabilizing a shot. In daylight though, forget it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 How much could one get a C100 mk I now or let's say about January 2015 where the MK II will have been out and shooting. Any numbers or expectations? I am seriously considering a new FS100 for the dirt cheap price if 2499$ new. If I could find a used C100 by January at that price point (2500-3000) it will be very attractive... Canon cameras hold very strong resale value though, so I expect it can be around 4K used or so! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Yes unfortunately it is horrible. The LCD has a lot of options for brightness and so on though, and can be used in bright light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 If it's the same LCD (and I guess it is) as in the Canon XF100 it really is unusable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captou Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 If it's the same LCD (and I guess it is) as in the Canon XF100 it really is unusable. The XF100, now that's a terrible camera! Handy yes but I've used it side by side with a 600D in the exact same situation, and the image is really not very nice compared to the DSLR. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the C100, just wanted to get that out there.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 The XF100, now that's a terrible camera! Handy yes but I've used it side by side with a 600D in the exact same situation, and the image is really not very nice compared to the DSLR. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the C100, just wanted to get that out there.... That's why most people started using DSLR's in the first place. When the 5d came around it was a revelation because people were used to an even shittier image than the XF100. And you know how long people defended those shitty 1/3" professional cameras? A long time, until companies started releasing s35mm cameras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captou Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 That's why most people started using DSLR's in the first place. When the 5d came around it was a revelation because people were used to an even shittier image than the XF100. And you know how long people defended those shitty 1/3" professional cameras? A long time, until companies started releasing s35mm cameras. That puts things into perspective. I couldn't recommend this camera less, can't believe someone would spend $2000+ on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Hey I absolutely love the XF100! :D It's not to be compared to a 600D, they are different tools fro different genres of video shooting, just because your kind of shooting is not suited for a small-sensor camcorder doesn't mean it's bad or unfit in the market. Compared to the 600D the XF100 is far far sharper and shows signifcantly more detail and colour information, the image has no aliasing or moire or non of these issues, it has a broadcast approved 50mbps 4:2:2 codec MPEG which is loved by broadcasters. The 600D is better for shallow depth of field and for lowlight (though the XF100 is no slough in lowlight). Compared to the 600D it has XLRs with proper audio controls, NDs, external buttons for gain, shutter, iris, WB, and various cuatomizable ones, it has an EVF, has a better screen with peaking/zebras/waveform/histogram and all the video camera functions ones needs. It has an enormous zoom range to cover all shooting situation with smooth transition, and a great AF system that works, dual CF slots, batteries run for hours, etc If you're shooting for broadcast work or events or any type od shooting that doesn't require shallow depth of field / beauty shots (as in shorts, feature, dramas, music videos) this kind of camera is far more suitable for you than any DSLR or stills camera with a large sensor, you want a big zoom range with zoom servo control, internal great audio, instant Autofocus, long recordin times to dual media, etc. Try covering an event with a 5D and good luck! It's just different cameras for different jobs. The XF100/300 are the number 1 in the broadcast field in the third world, everyone is using them for a reason, they're great to use and deliver good images. I've always said that if Canon put a large sensor inside an XF series camera it will create the perfect camera, the C line comes close to that but far too highly priced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captou Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Hey I absolutely love the XF100! :D It's not to be compared to a 600D, they are different tools fro different genres of video shooting, just because your kind of shooting is not suited for a small-sensor camcorder doesn't mean it's bad or unfit in the market. Compared to the 600D the XF100 is far far sharper and shows signifcantly more detail and colour information, the image has no aliasing or moire or non of these issues, it has a broadcast approved 50mbps 4:2:2 codec MPEG which is loved by broadcasters. The 600D is better for shallow depth of field and for lowlight (though the XF100 is no slough in lowlight). Compared to the 600D it has XLRs with proper audio controls, NDs, external buttons for gain, shutter, iris, WB, and various cuatomizable ones, it has an EVF, has a better screen with peaking/zebras/waveform/histogram and all the video camera functions ones needs. It has an enormous zoom range to cover all shooting situation with smooth transition, and a great AF system that works, dual CF slots, batteries run for hours, etc If you're shooting for broadcast work or events or any type od shooting that doesn't require shallow depth of field / beauty shots (as in shorts, feature, dramas, music videos) this kind of camera is far more suitable for you than any DSLR or stills camera with a large sensor, you want a big zoom range with zoom servo control, internal great audio, instant Autofocus, long recordin times to dual media, etc. Try covering an event with a 5D and good luck! It's just different cameras for different jobs. The XF100/300 are the number 1 in the broadcast field in the third world, everyone is using them for a reason, they're great to use and deliver good images. I've always said that if Canon put a large sensor inside an XF series camera it will create the perfect camera, the C line comes close to that but far too highly priced. I agree with all of that - I can definitely see how it's super useful in these situation. It's a complete little package. But if you're looking for the 'beauty shot', it's tough. And that's what I battle with. But that's the camera I've got (it belongs to the company I work for). I'd have spent that money differently. I also battle with the terrible moire issues on the 600D and it's poor sharpness though (or rather, I despair at times). Magic Lantern adds a lot of nice features to it and if it wasn't for the moire and sharpness, I'd be really quite happy with it for my current purposes. I'm just a moaner! And apologies for hijacking the original topic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.