Made the decision to go cinema camera after several years with the XF300…a great camera…needed better low light and wanted to use the collection of glass I have from DSLRs. (Eric at Pro Video and Tape made the transaction a piece of cake!)
Did a shoot the second day out of the box and gotta say how impressed I am with the image. Shoot was outdoors (bright sun with sparse clouds) and the subject was in the shade. Needed to get everything exposed correctly and the DR of the C100 made life easy! Did another shoot today at an airport catching landings. 70-200 f2.8 II on the front and the footage looks like it belongs on the big screen! Colors are amazing and absolutely kills the 5D mk3 and 1Dx resolution-wise. The built in ND's are SO nice!! All this and I really haven't played with my Ninja 2 yet! Looking forward to my first green screen shoot next week. Should be a breeze! What a camera!!

It has not been done to death... not by a long shot! Thanks Robert,

I'll add a little C100 love:

Have been shooting with C300 recently, and I'm very frustrated. C100 does so many things SO MUCH BETTER. Interface: C100 rocks - joystick wiggling gets you instant access to shutter, gain and WB, plus the rotary dial does the iris. C300 makes you reach for little nipples on the back.

C300's viewfinder and LCD panel are sublime compared with the C100, but the C100 with an Atomos Samurai Blade and H2S converter is pretty nifty, gives you the same flexibility in monitoring, and the same quality in recording. A Ninja 2 is great if you prefer handheld flexibility.

WDR is SO MUCH BETTER on the C100. Not sure why, but I can't seem to make WDR on the C300 do the same sort of stuff.

The Canon 18-135 lens is an odd bit of glass. When it came out, I loved it. Then I worked with it and it was awful. Somehow, something happened, and now it's a must-have lens again. AF, zoom and focusing are all so much better than when I properly tried it first. On a 9 day shoot, my C100 wore the 18-135 for about 60% of the time.

So, whilst the C300 has lots of really useful features, the C100 wins for the single operator event videographer, although Canon need to revise their game regarding the EVF - GH4 is on the way...

Interface: C100 rocks - joystick wiggling gets you instant access to shutter, gain and WB, plus the rotary dial does the iris. C300 makes you reach for little nipples on the back.

Matt - Not quite right regarding the C300. The Function button on the camera toggles through all of the main camera settings (WB, ISO/Gain, Shutter Angle/Speed) and you can use the joystick (on the grip or on the body) to select any setting within them. It's very quick.

Similarly, you can set the aperture at any time on the C300 via the dial on the grip or via the control dial on the camera body.

Given your comments I'm wondering if the C300 you were using didn't have the grip fully plugged in?

I have both the C300 and the C100. Overall I prefer to shoot with the C300. The screen and viewfinder are the main reason. With the C100 I have to shoot with a Zacuto loupe, both for steadiness and critical focusing. The problem is this limits you to only shooting eye level because it is not easy to remove. (Don't get me started with how Zacuto could have made a much better viewfinder) With the C300 I can instantly put it up to my eye with the viewfinder or hold it above my head with the LCD, or get a low angle on the floor with the LCD. I can do a crane shot or a steady walking shot. And I can maintain critical focus in all those situations. The C100 is harder to make these instant changes.

But you're partly correct. The button layout on the C300 sucks - though the handgrip is the same on both. I've gotten used to it mostly, changing almost all the default settings I can. But I think its another case of Canon not knowing who their market is. They thought they were going after high-end fictional hollywood productions - people who have a lot of time to make camera adjustments. So they designed the camera around their needs. But Canon has not made much of a dent in this market that still prefers Alexa's. The real market for the C300 is documentary, reality, corporate and high-end journalism - and a lot of one-man band shooters. Basically people who need to make fast adjustments. The buttons are not laid out well for this type of shooting.

I haven't upgraded to the new firmware. I'm planning to use the WideDR when I do. I thought the two should be a dead-on match. No? I also agree with Matt on the 18-135 lens. It's under-valued. I dislike that there is no manual focus override without switching to MF on the lens. My absolute favorite lens is the 15-85mm. Better image, better focusing, better zooming and love the wide. I'd say that's my 60% lens. with the 24-105mm for interviews and the 70-200mm for telephoto. My C100 kit lenses are the 15-85mm, 18-135mm and the 50-250mm. My C300 kit lenses are the 15-85mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm - then I'll throw in either the 11-18mm or the 18-135mm depending on what I'm shooting.

Some more observations from more shooting…
Yes, ergonomics of the fully kitted C100/Ninja 2 are not great even on a tripod. BUT the quality really trumps the minor inconvenience considering I'm still half the price of the C300.

Bummed in a big way that my super-tele lenses (300mm f2.8L II and 500mm f4L II) don't autofocus on the C100. Hopefully this will be fixed in the update. I do a lot of aviation work and it would be nice!

Anyone have suggestions on how to get a follow focus to work with a 50mm f1.4? I have a Red Rock FF and I can't get the rails close enough to the lens with the strange nub at the bottom of the C100.

Matt, what made you change your mind about the 18-135 stm lens? I saw your review of it on vimeo and it seemed to have issues with exposure. Now you say you have used it 60% of the tine on an event shoot.

Yes, a bit of a turnaround.

I need to retrace my steps, but I think it was Peripheral Illumination Correction? There was something fundamental and I don't think that was it. Zoom Iris Correct! That was it. Those two seemed to switch the lens on.

However, the main benefit was being able to zoom in to various corners of the screen to focus.

But if I may point out that it was on this job only that the lens got used for 60% of the shooting time. The Sony EX1 was doing a lot of accumulation-shutter timelapses.

But with due respect to the 18-135, it got me shots as I wandered around an exhibition build. I'd have liked longer reach (28-280 would have been perfect).

The lens was still an arse to focus, and I'm hoping it will be a dream when the new AF mode is realised by sending my camera in. May even invest in the 18-200 lens.

It's all okay. Not exceptional, just okay. Sigma and Samyang lenses are still the most important lenses for my interviews.

here's hoping that nab sees the release of a ninja-2 alternative with a better screen and a loupe ;)

Hi Matt,
you´ve lost me a bit here. I s this something you did to the lens?

May even invest in the 18-200 lens.

Don't. This lens sucks. Impossible to manual focus because the throw is too short. Maybe if you used auto-focus exclusively. Optics leave a lot to be desired. 18-135 is a MUCH better lens.

Hi Matt, you´ve lost me a bit here. Is this something you did to the lens?

No, it's in the camera. Zoom Iris Correct is in Camera Setup --> Iris --> Zoom Iris Correct, page 59 of the manual if my PDF is up to date. It does transform the lens into a 'really quite usable' status. Will have to update the movie on Vimeo...

BTW, Peripheral Illumination is also in th Camera Setup menu - stops those dark corners (vignetting), and there's an 'EF-S' lens setting in there too, which enlarges the image slightly - this does affect image quality. I'm pretty sure that I've got that one switched off but that it comes on automatically when the Peripheral Illumination Correction is switched on. It's all on page 31 of the manual.

Don't. This lens sucks. Impossible to manual focus because the throw is too short. Maybe if you used auto-focus exclusively. Optics leave a lot to be desired. 18-135 is a MUCH better lens.

Thanks for the heads-up, Brett. I'll stick with the 18-135 and hopefully enjoy the new AF mode soon.

The lens was still an arse to focus, and I'm hoping it will be a dream when the new AF mode is realised by sending my camera in.
.

I'm shopping for a C100, used. Matt's comment brings up an issue about how "current" a camera is. Is there a firmware number or other value I should be checking on a prospective camera?

Is the "new AF mode" a one-off adjustment or part of a full firmware update?

Thanks!
-Ralph

As of February 2014, you're looking for version 1.0.2.1.00 for the C100 - best keep an eye and an ear out for further updates:

Canon U.S.A. : Professional Imaging Products : EOS C100 (http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#DriversAndSoftware)

To date, the software update procedure is pretty easy and painless - unlike, say, the Sony EX1 where getting the wrong update for a given current state of a camera could brick it.

The 'new AF mode' is an optional modification to the camera, not a simple firmware update. There is a cost associated with it, and you'll have to judge whether it makes financial sense to do it or not. If you don't have STM lenses or have any real need for AF on paying jobs, you might take a rain check. Will it improve the S/H value of a C100? Not known yet. ;-)