Hi all,

Very excited to dive into the C100 family. I am new to this level of filming and have a lot to learn. I film underground music scenes around the world. Noisey, crazy. It's fun!

I'll be running around with this camera in cramped, low-light situations. Busy venues.

Let me get right to it. I am wondering if there are any "one-stop shop" plates or additions I need to make this rig work. the idea is ease and speed. Here's what I'm working with.

C100 w/ 24-105 L f4.
XF100
Zoom H6 w/ Shure KSM141 mics (XY) + stereo bar.

That's it. I was thinking what would be best is a combo of a Libec RS-250RM Tripod + a Manfrotoo 561BDHV Monopod.

My idea would be to use both pod solutions with each camera, depending on the situation. Whatever camera is on the tripod in the back of the room, I would like to set up my H6 + Stereo bar to that piece. Then I would run around with the monopod + a mic on top of whatever camera I'm using on there.

Is that feasible? I don't have a store where I can go in and say "help me get the pieces of connect this all", so it's tough for me.

Are there any catch-all clamps of pieces I need to connect all of this stuff together?

Is there anything I direly need with this setup?

Wanting to back up this footage anyway, would you advise the NINJA? Working in FCP 7 and really sick of re-encoding footage to work with it.

Thanks for looking. Really looking forward to diving into this thing.

This is still for sale as a backup in the field solution:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/private-classifieds/517452-nexto-di-nd2700-400gb-backup-cf-sdhc.html#post1802416

Hi all,

Very excited to dive into the C100 family. I am new to this level of filming and have a lot to learn. I film underground music scenes around the world. Noisey, crazy. It's fun!

C100 w/ 24-105 L f4.
XF100
Zoom H6 w/ Shure KSM141 mics (XY) + stereo bar.

Thanks for looking. Really looking forward to diving into this thing.

Are you sure the 24-105 is going to be wide enough? My understanding is that given the crop factor on the C100 that will give the full frame equivalent field of view of a 38-168 zoom...all depends on your shooting situations.

Are you sure the 24-105 is going to be wide enough? My understanding is that given the crop factor on the C100 that will give the full frame equivalent field of view of a 38-168 zoom...all depends on your shooting situations.

Arrrghhh. I really, really wish that new wide-angle IS L lens was out, but I leave in 12 days. Think they'll launch it in time? Ha.

I shouldn't buy another L, but I think I'll kick myself for not having a good wise-angle for those 20% moments. Yes. You're right.

I'm considering the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8.

All this hub-bub about the wide angle L lenses, I keep jumping between 2....would like IS, but would the L's really out-gun the TOKINA completely, for the C100? Mind you, I will be filming raucous performances and am used XF100 quality low light! :)

It'll be more than enough for a start. This is soooo much more camera than I'm even remotely closed to used to, it'll be a kick just to bring it across China, South Korea, and Japan.

Again, I was amazed at the XF100, so this even with the 24-105, is gonna be way more machine than I have ever remotely used.

Stoked!

If you travel a lot, you should maybe look at a MeFoto globetrotter tripod. Super small, solid, and it also converts to a monopod...

While that seems cool, for my purposes, this Manfrotoo 561BDHV seems to be a must for me with that great head and all.

Tripod, I may just wait on, or get a 1-200$ cheapy just to hold my XF100 up in the back of the room w/ my Zoom H6 on top of it. I can always ghetto-rig my XF100 and put my mics on a spare mic stand or something.

Trying to maximize on all fronts, obviously.

I'll wait until my first lens gets here, but I have a feeling I'm definitely going to want that Tokina. Especially considering I have a 60D i could always rig somewhere crazy on stage, too. :D

This is going to get real cool!!!

My understanding is that given the crop factor on the C100 that will give the full frame equivalent field of view of a 38-168 zoom...all depends on your shooting situations.

Hey David, how wide do you find 24mm on your 5D Mark II/III?

All this hub-bub about the wide angle L lenses, I keep jumping between 2....would like IS, but would the L's really out-gun the TOKINA completely, for the C100? Mind you, I will be filming raucous performances and am used XF100 quality low light! :)

I found the Tokina was more than wide enough at 16mm, never really shot with it lower than that on the APS-C sensors, because it got, in my opinion, ridiculously wide.

Have you considered the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8? It's only 1mm difference and it will fully work with Dual Pixel AF and has IS on it.

Gary, if you were talking to me, I don't have a 5D, just a 60D, which has the same crop as the C100.

John, Adorama (via Ebay) has this deal currently on the Tokina:

Tokina 11 16mm F 2 8 ATX Pro DX II Lens for Digital SLR Cameras | eBay (http://www.ebay.com/itm/371082112844)

I also have a 60D although I don't use it much for video. With it I have the Canon 15-85 - a 24-135 equivalent. Although it's only 3.5-5.6, it has excellent stabilization and I use it all the time wide open. I find its 24mm equivalence at the wide end plenty wide for my needs.

Then there's the 17-55 (27-88) which costs more but is a constant 2.8. I wish Canon would make an L lens that's 15-70 2.8 or something.

I also have the 70-200 L f4 IS - I'll bet that's a beauty on the C100.

Anyway, good luck with your project. You're going to have a ball doing it.

I also have a 60D although I don't use it much for video. With it I have the Canon 15-85 - a 24-135 equivalent. Although it's only 3.5-5.6, it has excellent stabilization and I use it all the time wide open. I find its 24mm equivalence at the wide end plenty wide for my needs.

So neither the op nor yourself have a photographic full frame in your experience, and yet you felt that you needed to point out the crop difference. Why is that? If you feel that 24mm on the 60D is wide enough for your needs, then why be negative about the crop? The only place that has a legitimate reference is if the OP was coming from a 5D or other photographic full frame camera.

What?

I think you have to take the crop into consideration. If the OP is expecting 24 mm to be very wide on a C100 he's going to be disappointed. To get the equivalent of a 24 mm wide-angle look, on my 60D I have to use a 15 mm lens.

He may not need something that wide but I was just pointing out that factor for consideration.

I make no apology for the 35mm SLR equivalent reference. The first 20 years I did photography was with film SLR's so that is still my standard. For example, I don't know what a 20 mm lens would look like on a micro 4/3 camera, but give me the "35mm equivalent" (as B&H photo does on all non-interchangeable lens cameras and camcorders) and I know exactly what to expect.

And it sounded like John understood what I meant.

I'm definitely with you.

It may not be wide enough, but with a 60D in my kit (coupled with the fact that I've never taken the 24-105 kit lens off of it, a crying shame) I think getting a ultra-wide is a no-brainer. Then I can run around with the C100 + 60D, swap the lenses, etc. With the XF100 in the mix sitting in the back of the venue with an H6, it turns the whole package into a crazy good bundle.

Now, back to the original question! Ha. What is the easiest way to mount all of those things together? I'm new to this, and have no store here, so any sort of catch-all plates or things I can order blindly would be good. I'd love the XF100 in the back of the room to have the H6 w/ the Shure KSM141's on a stereo bar. the 60D i'll have in a side-bag, ready to grab in between shots from the C100 on the Manfrotto mono-pod.

Cheers, guys!

The Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 II is a must for the C100. It produces absolutely gorgeous footage as long as you stop it down.

24-105 is absolutely not wide enough on APS-C sensor and is not as easy to focus as the 17-55. Go with the 24-105 if you bought the bundle then add the 11-16 Tokina. The alternative is to go with a 17-55 but then you don't have anything on the long end. I have all three lenses and use the 24-105 the least.

I have all three lenses and use the 24-105 the least.

The 24-105 is on my camera nearly 90% of the time. I had a Tokina and sold it. Have the 17-55 as well, and use it about as much as I stick a prime on there, given how little reach it has compared to the 24-105.

Ha, this thread is divided! Hot damn. I know I will love the Tokina. It'll help ten-fold. Like I said, I've rode on a kit lens with my 60D! Insane.

Attachment kit recs?!

Thanks, internet.

For example, I don't know what a 20 mm lens would look like on a micro 4/3 camera, but give me the "35mm equivalent" (as B&H photo does on all non-interchangeable lens cameras and camcorders) and I know exactly what to expect.

So when you are shooting on your 60D, you're constantly adding a 1.6x crop to all the focal lengths you think of?

"Well, I have an 50mm on here, but that's the equivalent of 77mm in photographic full frame."

You seriously do that in 2014?

So when you are shooting on your 60D, you're constantly adding a 1.6x crop to all the focal lengths you think of?

"Well, I have an 50mm on here, but that's the equivalent of 77mm in photographic full frame."

You seriously do that in 2014?

Nope, only when I'm purchasing a camera or lens. As in the example I gave earlier, if I were to buy a Panasonic GH4 for videoing certain kinds of subjects, I'd need to know the crop factor in order to make an educated choice on which lenses would provide the field of view ranges I wanted. If I bought a 20mm lens for it, is that a wide angle? Who knows? Sounds pretty darn wide to me. Well, if I knew the crop factor, then I *would* know. Luckily, B&H agrees with me and provides in the specs: Camera Format: "Micro Four Thirds (2X Crop Factor)." So that 20mm lens is really only as wide as a 35mm equiv. 40mm lens - not really wide at all.

Doesn't everyone do this? To me the alternative is to just buy lenses blindly and hope they are wide or long enough for your needs. I want more information in advance than that. Others can do as they like.

I just looked up the Sony AX100 4K camera on B&H. They don't even give the actual zoom range at all - they *only* give the 35mm equivalent. I'm fine with that. I don't really care what the crop factor is. They list the "35mm Equivalent Focal Length" to be 29-348. I know what that means and can make an informed decision on whether it will meet my needs.

Happy shooting!

One other question I had (aside from the original) is on the Ninja 2 :

I leave for China, South Korea, and Japan in 11 days. Part of me really thinks I should get a monitor for such an epic endeavor. I'd love to get ProRes from a Ninja 2 for workflow as well.

The hectic, bumpy run and gun environments I'll be in...though..I'm not sure if it'd be worth the hassle / risk of it keeping disconnecting. Seems like theres a 50/50 split for using it as a monitor.

Thoughts?

Nope, only when I'm purchasing a camera or lens. As in the example I gave earlier, if I were to buy a Panasonic GH4 for videoing certain kinds of subjects, I'd need to know the crop factor in order to make an educated choice on which lenses would provide the field of view ranges I wanted. I

We are not talking about a 2x crop factor, we are talking about a 1.56x crop factor. Something you stated you don't do on your 60D.

I even think constantly talking about the crop factor on m4/3 is silly. Why is there this need to constantly compare to photographic full frame by people who don't use it to people who don't use it.

So, again, I find that I never used a Tokina at wider than 16mm on my 60D/C100 because wider than that was just ridiculously wide. The Canon EF-S 17-55mm gives me that ultra wide angle close enough to the Tokina, while having more reach and giving me IS and full Dual Pixel AF support, which I tend to use more often than I thought I would, especially in awkward angles while outside when you can't see the LCD screen very well and can't get your eye to the EVF.

See there? A functional description of lenses on the camera in question with zero references to crop factors that have no meaning in this context.

Part of me really thinks I should get a monitor for such an epic endeavor. I'd love to get ProRes from a Ninja 2 for workflow as well.

The monitor on the Ninja-2 is rather poor, even though it works great as a recorder. It's clearly intended to be a recorder primarily because you have to specifically engage it into monitor mode. The Ninja Blade, while slightly larger, doesn't feel any heavier, but does add some bulk to the overall package. I have run and gun with it, but I don't know if I would want to do it for lengthy extended periods with no break or ability to mount to a tripod or monopod.

However, the Blade is a very good external monitor, and is clearly meant to be one because you cannot turn off the monitor mode at all. Additionally, you get goodies like scopes. Just be sure to get the Atomos hood for it if you go this route. Makes it much easier to see in daylight.

Now, if you decide it's too big for your intended use, then I would look at the Ninja Star with the Atomos branded CFast cards. That would give you ProRes with something that could easily be mounted on the shoe of the handle and give you very little additional bulk to the C100.

The hectic, bumpy run and gun environments I'll be in...though..I'm not sure if it'd be worth the hassle / risk of it keeping disconnecting. Seems like theres a 50/50 split for using it as a monitor.

I have never had the Ninja-2 or the Ninja Blade disconnect on me. You have to purchase the right HDMI cables, not just some random one you grab at Wal-Mart. Monoprice has some good ones that have very small heads, and I am using those with zero problems. Perfect Path is also good, and has a locking mechanism in the head. Zacuto is pricey, but has a cable with articulating heads on each end, which is also great. Ideally, no shorter than 3'. I have a 1.5' and it's just too short to use on the C100 with the Blade. 3' has been the perfect length for me, giving me enough wiggle room to mount the monitor where I need it to, without having too much slack.

...Doesn't everyone do this? To me the alternative is to just buy lenses blindly and hope they are wide or long enough for your needs. I want more information in advance than that. Others can do as they like.

...I know what that means and can make an informed decision on whether it will meet my needs.

Happy shooting!
Yes, so far as I know, everyone does this. There are internet resources devoted to it that include field of view demos for various focal length and crop factors for those who aren't quite as practiced with it.

Why? Because that full frame is the standard for angle of view comparisons. I know that for my style of work I need to get down to at least 24mm FF equivalent to get the wide angles I want for interior work. Sometimes I'm on full frame, some on crop. It's simple to run the numbers to find out what FL I need... of course part of this is that I use several different cams on a regular basis.

OTOH, if you're locked in to Canon APS-C and you get familiar with the looks of the various focal lengths, maybe you'll never need to consider 35mm equivalents.

Somewhere here on DVi I pencilled out my chart of uses of FLs for typical photo/video uses, (http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-crop-sensor-hd/510702-best-wide-angle-lens-video-canon-7d.html) ranging from "effects" Super Wide Angles, through accepted WA, normals, moderate telephotos for portrait, etc. The only thing that makes it possible to have this discussion is understanding of crop factor and standarizing on full frame.

The reasons are historical of course... but that's where standards come from.

Specing, buying or renting lenses... or doing multicamera shoots, or having meaningful discussions online... IMO the more people that understand the common language and terminology the better.

Seth, thanks for explaining my thoughts better than I could have done it myself!

But whether you want to consider crop factors or 35mm equiv. or not, my original point was that 24mm on a C100 is not very wide. I think the OP is going to need something wider. And, I would agree with Gary that I'd rather have a zoom that starts wider than that rather than a second lens that is an ultra-wide zoom.

I went ahead with the Tokina.

There just aren't many lenses that fit my needs, have IS, that much larger of a wide angle, and have the reach, that would negate the $600 I spent on that lens.

Couple in my 60D needing something other than a kit lens, and it's really a no-brainer for me.

...my original point was that 24mm on a C100 is not very wide. I think the OP is going to need something wider. And, I would agree with Gary that I'd rather have a zoom that starts wider than that rather than a second lens that is an ultra-wide zoom.
Quite right for my uses as well. The 24-105 is a great lens, but it doesn't go wide enough for many uses when you can't keep backing up (interiors).

The 17-55mm offers f2.8, and goes reasonably wide. I could wish that it went a little longer than 55 (88 equiv), but the wide looks are very usable for me.

I use the Tokina 11-16mm mentioned above, it is well accepted among the folks I work with as a very valuable superwide on crop sensor.

The Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 OS rounds out my zooms.

Coming from traditional video cams with 10:1 or even 20:1 zooms, these short zoom ratios seem pathetic on first glance, but that's the price we pay for the big sensor...

It's a bit late now, but going to the OP question:

Well done on the Tokina 11-16 - a great lens. Almost a special effect lens, but hey - 2.8, super wide, it gets the job done and the pictures look nice.

Canon 17-55 2.8 was another lens to look at. With the DPAF option, it's even more interesting. As a 'nightclub' do-it-all lens, it works well. Not much reach for someone on stage, but if you can get in close, you can get a head shot.

You may want to check out the prosumer 18-135 lens. 24-105 is for well-lit situations, but interestingly, if you can put up with the noise for the extra gain needed for a 24-105 you can get away with the 18-135. Not exciting shallow depth of field or sublime 50mm or 85mm at f1.4 low light shots, but if you can bash the C100's menus into shape and let it control the lens properly, I do find this to be an absolute corker of a lens. Be very sure that when I first got it, I hated it with an acidic passion. However, if you're willing to throw in some gain and let the camera do a lot of the work, this is a very useful lens.

Quite frankly, I travel with the Tokina 11-16, Canon 17-55, Canon 70-200 f4, Sigma 50 f1.4, Samyang 85 f1.4 and Canon Macro 100 f2.8, because... I'm a lens slut. And I usually have the 24-105 with me too. But the deep dark nasty secret is that I use the 18-135 (which is usually on my T2i) for an awful lot of stuff when you have no idea of what's going to happen next.

Final random bit of info: f2.8 on an EX1 1/2" chip camera is f8-11 on your C100. F4-f5.6 is not to be feared, quite frankly.

Like Matt I have found the 18-135 pretty useful until things get really dark. It covers a lot and zoomed in you still get a lot of dof if you want it.
Matt, how far do you push the ISO/gain when using the 18-135?

how far do you push the ISO/gain when using the 18-135?

I don't like to go beyond +12dB at the moment. If +6dB is one stop, and doubling the ISO is one stop, then if the base ISO can be agreed upon as being 500ISO, that means I don't like to go above 2000 ISO - which probably wriggles around to be above 3200 ISO.

Having said that, when things get dark and when you have the time and access to Neat Video, the truly excellent de-noise plug-in, we can play up to about 18dB, but it's a compromise.

Thanks, guys.

I was wondering. When I plug my RODE videomic into the mic outlet, is there any way to also get the onboard mic and/or XLR at the same time? The point being a backup. I assume I change the knobs on the leveler. .....but will it be pieced out separately in the files? How do I separate, and can I pick which one links to my footage? Will it be both? Cheers.

Yes, so far as I know, everyone does this. There are internet resources devoted to it that include field of view demos for various focal length and crop factors for those who aren't quite as practiced with it.

Why? Because that full frame is the standard for angle of view comparisons. I know that for my style of work I need to get down to at least 24mm FF equivalent to get the wide angles I want for interior work. Sometimes I'm on full frame, some on crop. It's simple to run the numbers to find out what FL I need... of course part of this is that I use several different cams on a regular basis.

OTOH, if you're locked in to Canon APS-C and you get familiar with the looks of the various focal lengths, maybe you'll never need to consider 35mm equivalents.

Somewhere here on DVi I pencilled out my chart of uses of FLs for typical photo/video uses, (http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-crop-sensor-hd/510702-best-wide-angle-lens-video-canon-7d.html) ranging from "effects" Super Wide Angles, through accepted WA, normals, moderate telephotos for portrait, etc. The only thing that makes it possible to have this discussion is understanding of crop factor and standarizing on full frame.

The reasons are historical of course... but that's where standards come from.

Specing, buying or renting lenses... or doing multicamera shoots, or having meaningful discussions online... IMO the more people that understand the common language and terminology the better.

Nope. Not everyone does it, despite statements to the contrary. I have never shot
DSLRs in my life and haven't a clue what a 24mm or a 50mm looks like on a FF
camera. I have shot a ton on Super 35 cameras, Red, C300, F3, FS100, and FS700.
I know what 17mm, 24mm or 50mm look like on Super 35 sensor so I buy lenses based
on that knowledge. I worked as AC on set and never once did any of the DPs refer in
any way, shape or form to FF or 35mm equivalents. All these DPs have a common
knowledge, language, and terminology based on familiarity with Super 35 motion
shooting, they don't care that a 50mm on Super 35 is closer to a 35mm on FF. They know what
a 50mm looks like on Super 35 so they just ask me to put the 50mm on the Epic.

The 24-105 is super for a great share of event/wedding needs.
That, and a 30/35mm prime for lowlight when needed (I have the Zeiss 35 Distagon and love it!)

All that said, the new 24-70L II is a superb, sharp lens and great in pretty low light. I confess that I sold my 17-55, giving up the wider end, to put $ toward the 24-70 just because the new lens is that nice.

Nope. Not everyone does it, despite statements to the contrary. I have never shot
DSLRs in my life and haven't a clue what a 24mm or a 50mm looks like on a FF
camera. I have shot a ton on Super 35 cameras, Red, C300, F3, FS100, and FS700.
I know what 17mm, 24mm or 50mm look like on Super 35 sensor so I buy lenses based
on that knowledge. I worked as AC on set and never once did any of the DPs refer in
any way, shape or form to FF or 35mm equivalents. All these DPs have a common
knowledge, language, and terminology based on familiarity with Super 35 motion
shooting, they don't care that a 50mm on Super 35 is closer to a 35mm on FF. They know what
a 50mm looks like on Super 35 so they just ask me to put the 50mm on the Epic.

Well, all I meant was that *everyone* takes field of view into consideration when purchasing lenses or non-interchangeable lens cameras, not that the standard has to necessarily be 35mm equivalence. But, where it applies, B&H Photo gives 35mm equivalence as a spec, and nothing else. Just for kicks, I even looked up the FS700 on Sony's pro website, and if you buy the camera with a lens, the spec for 35mm equivalence of that lens is also listed.

So, a lot of companies and customers evidently do consider it the most widely useful standard. I want that info, it's fine if others do not.

Well when you put it that way...I'd tend to agree. FF is probably the 'most widely used
standard' because still photogs outnumber us motion shooters 100-1. I was just
saying that some of us motion shooters 'think of the world of lenses in Super 35mm
terms' and are not doing any 'crop mathematics' in our head. So it makes sense to
offer 35mm equivalents on B&H because chances are, the person looking to buy a lens
from them is a FF still photographer. But I and many others don't have to perform
complicated crop conversions in our head as we 'see the world through Super 35
FOV'. In fact I'd venture a guess that most experienced big DPs also do as Super 35
is as much a standard in motion shooting as FF is in stills shooting. I blame the 5D for
confusing the issue, because now many still photogs are trying to move to motion
shooting. :)

...I was just saying that some of us motion shooters 'think of the world of lenses in Super 35mm terms' and are not doing any 'crop mathematics' in our head... But I and many others don't have to perform complicated crop conversions in our head as we 'see the world through Super 35
FOV'...
Yes, fair enough. I hadn't quite put two and two together on the prevalence of Super 35 / APS-C sized sensors in some markets. I stand corrected.
...I blame the 5D for confusing the issue, because now many still photogs are trying to move to motion shooting. :)
OTOH, even the standardization of Super 35 in your markets is bound to change...

One other question I had (aside from the original) is on the Ninja 2 :

I leave for China, South Korea, and Japan in 11 days. Part of me really thinks I should get a monitor for such an epic endeavor. I'd love to get ProRes from a Ninja 2 for workflow as well.

The hectic, bumpy run and gun environments I'll be in...though..I'm not sure if it'd be worth the hassle / risk of it keeping disconnecting. Seems like theres a 50/50 split for using it as a monitor.

Thoughts?

I'd love to hear what you ended up using and the results. I have a C100 & Ninja 2. It's a great combo, but the Ninja 2's screen is terrible. You can't judge anything related to image quality. I saw the Ninja Blade at NAB and it has a very nice screen - comparable to a SmallHD monitor.

Using the Ninja would give you ProRes and a backup recording - two very good reasons to use it. Since the screen sucks, you may want to mount it in a way that makes it easier to handle and rely on the built in C100 screen.

Then there's the Ninja Star, but CFast cards are expensive.

Then there's the Ninja Star, but CFast cards are expensive.

I think the Star uses the CFast 1 cards, which are a lot cheaper. More to the point, Jeromy from Atomos showed Atomos branded CFast 1 cards that were 'fit for purpose' at about $160 for a 64GB card and $238 for a 128 GB card:

CineGear - Atomos Ninja Star and Cheap CFast Cards & Reader on Vimeo

Hmm. Well, yes, not exactly cheap compared to SDHC... but compared to, say, CF?

I've been using the Ninja 2 on my C100 when shooting for broadcast clients and the product has suited their needs. I ordered a Ninja Star on Monday and it will be here later today along with three 64GB CFast cards. The size seems perfect for run and gun shooting.

For sound, I generally use the Audio Technica 1800 dual channel wireless receiver.

...For sound, I generally use the Audio Technica 1800 dual channel wireless receiver.
Doug, how are you mounting that receiver? I like everything about it, but mounting options seem almost non-existent.

Seth:

I use the BEC wireless receiver holder mount that attaches to either the AB battery mount, the Redrock Micro C100 cage or a vertical shoe adapter. It's felt-lined and protects the receiver.

The holder costs $75 from B&H and other sources.

Doug