c100 users enlighten me from the 60d - Page 3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon Cinema EOS Camera Systems

Canon Cinema EOS Camera Systems
For all Canon Cinema EOS models: C700 / C300 Mk. II / C200 / C100 Mk II and EF / PL lenses.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 13th, 2013, 02:52 PM   #31
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 160
Re: c100 users enlighten me from the 60d

As I believe Edgar's comparison illustrates, the C100 has better video quality than the crop-sensor Canon DSLRs. But as the cost is roughly 10 times more than the DSLRs, shouldn't the question be: is the C100's picture 10 times better? Certainly not. They look pretty similar to the layman, and I think up until ISO 400, they inter-cut very well.

Once you get to the 6D or the 5D3, the high-iso quality is certainly competitive with the C100.

Now, as stated, the C100 has a lot of professional features that DSLRs lack (dual slot recording, built-in ND, peaking, waveform, etc). Are THOSE worth an extra $5000? Maybe. I think they are to me.
Bob Drummond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2013, 03:58 PM   #32
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 1,562
Re: c100 users enlighten me from the 60d

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Drummond View Post
as the cost is roughly 10 times more than the DSLRs, shouldn't the question be: is the C100's picture 10 times better?
BOGGLE!

Now, I have a T2i/550D which is, truth be told, a tenth of the cost NOW of the C100. But in its $450 state, it's unable to do sound, it can't really do proper focus without a Z-Finder or other substitute, and has all the multitude of DSLR defects that stack up so quickly.

So please - hang on a moment. The C100 image may or may not be 10x better for 10x the cost of the raw unit, but let us temper justice with mercy. Add a good loupe/magnifier, some hardware to make it usable, the cost of an audio solution. 10x? Not any more.

And actually, my clients (okay, they're agencies) DO see a difference. Thank goodness. Even this morning I had a client emphasise that they don't want a DSLR shooter, they want better than that. Like the difference between a Z1 shooter and an EX1 shooter. LOL!

My biggest issue is with multi-camera - DSLR shooters are bringing 3 bodies to a 1 camera job. They crop the two unmanned cameras, or accept their problems with being unmanned. I think the results - whilst dynamic - are amateurish, with out of focus cutaways, bad framing and so on. But the perception from the client is 'value'. 3 not-quite-in-focus shots with low resolution and peculiar framing, vs shooting one really nice shot, and a sequence of cutaways and noddies. The agencies are pushing 'value' rather than 'quality' - 'twas ever thus.
__________________
Director/Editor - MDMA Ltd: Write, Shoot, Edit, Publish - mattdavis.pro
EX1 x2, C100 --> FCPX & PPro6
Matt Davis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13th, 2013, 04:40 PM   #33
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Posts: 863
Re: c100 users enlighten me from the 60d

Are you planning on mixing with DSLR footage?

If so then the 5x cost for a 2x image improvement becomes an even worse ratio as you will need to downgrade your c100 footage to match your DSLR.

I personally feel it's better to keep your entire fleet of cameras at the same level to keep your footage consistent than trying to mix and match.

Your investment could be moot and give you no better footage to show off. But hey, no more overheating or 12 minute limit.
Danny O'Neill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14th, 2013, 01:57 PM   #34
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 160
Re: c100 users enlighten me from the 60d

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Davis View Post
BOGGLE!

Now, I have a T2i/550D which is, truth be told, a tenth of the cost NOW of the C100. But in its $450 state, it's unable to do sound, it can't really do proper focus without a Z-Finder or other substitute, and has all the multitude of DSLR defects that stack up so quickly.

So please - hang on a moment. The C100 image may or may not be 10x better for 10x the cost of the raw unit, but let us temper justice with mercy. Add a good loupe/magnifier, some hardware to make it usable, the cost of an audio solution. 10x? Not any more.

And actually, my clients (okay, they're agencies) DO see a difference. Thank goodness. Even this morning I had a client emphasise that they don't want a DSLR shooter, they want better than that. Like the difference between a Z1 shooter and an EX1 shooter. LOL!

My biggest issue is with multi-camera - DSLR shooters are bringing 3 bodies to a 1 camera job. They crop the two unmanned cameras, or accept their problems with being unmanned. I think the results - whilst dynamic - are amateurish, with out of focus cutaways, bad framing and so on. But the perception from the client is 'value'. 3 not-quite-in-focus shots with low resolution and peculiar framing, vs shooting one really nice shot, and a sequence of cutaways and noddies. The agencies are pushing 'value' rather than 'quality' - 'twas ever thus.
I believe you're making my point for me, Matt. As I said, yes, the C100 is "better" than a DSLR, as it should be at 10x the cost. Is the picture alone worth the 10x more cost? No. All things considered, including the professional features that DSLR's lack, is it still worth 10x more? Maybe. YMMV.
Bob Drummond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2013, 08:58 AM   #35
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 288
Re: c100 users enlighten me from the 60d

Of course this is a matter of opinion, but for me and perhaps many of those who own the C-100, the picture quality is absolutely worth the cost of the camera. A good smart phone will get you 50% to 75% of what you want in terms of 1080p image quality from a DSLR or the C-100. There is not a linear relationship between cost and image quality in this context. You are always going to pay a premium for increasingly smaller increments in image quality as you advance up the camera food chain.

Having said that, the footage shot with my DSLRs does not come close, in my opinion, to that of the C-100. Whether it is it worth it for an individual shooter really depends on their requirements.

Is the image quality of the $80K Sony F900R a 100 times better than a DSLR? I don't think this is a reasonable way to frame a comparison.
Pat Reddy is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon Cinema EOS Camera Systems

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:44 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network