Re: Replacement for C100
 

I'm heading up to Denver today to buy a used C100 with a Samuri blade.

My apologies to Jim Martin for not getting a new one from him...... perhaps next time! And of course there will be a next time

Re: Replacement for C100
 

I know what you mean, if Panasonic would raise their prices I"d be forced to buy a Canon against my will as well. Hope that will never happen.

Just kidding :) Great to see you found a c100, let us know (and see) what you your experience is with it, I"m most curious though to see if you find it easy to match it with your 5dIII.

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Actually, it is. It's 4K up-front that is downrezzed to 1080 for you. Considering that most of my 4K jobs involve the first post step of making ProResHQ 1080p files from Epic 4K/5K footage, the C300 gives you that look up front.

That would be the C500, actually. 10-bit 4K and 12-bit 2K.

Though I am curious...what does 10/12-bit get you right now that the C100/300 cannot do? I am looking for specifics, please.

Re: Replacement for C100
 

If the C100 stays at HD rather than 4K, I'm totally cool with that. 50/60p? Clients want that and so do I. Slomo and Intervalometer with slow shutter? Hell yes, that should have been there from the get-go. And not that half-witted thing with the C300 either - 2 frames per interval in PAL mode? Shame on you, Canon.

Now, 4K is upon us. 10 bit is the future of Rec 2020. Canon needs to bin 8 bit, especially because of the noise in IRE20-30. Ugly.

I'll take 4:2:2 10 bit HD over 4:2:0 8 bit 4K.

The Cinema EOS line gets their image quality by sampling at 4K and downsampling to HD. I don't really want to lose that mojo. I just want more bit depth, I want better colour representation, and whilst I don't shoot cinema, I shoot corporate event, which does involve dark nightclub environments, heavy red and blue lighting schemes, and big skews on colour balance - hey, Canon, your white balance workflow sucks rocks through straws and completely denies your cameras a chance at the event top table, so we all use manual Kelvin selection and work hard in post. This is bad. Canon engineers should try shooting with Sony cameras in this respect, and learn how WB should be done.

I really don't mind Long-GOP compression for acquisition. It's the little things that Canon have cheaped out on - WB, low IRE noise suppression and rear panel colour balance. OTOH, their audio input is awesome - EXCEPT they decided to hobble it with no way to record two separate levels from one XLR input. Awesome fail, Canon. Awesome fail.

Re: Replacement for C100
 

What do you mean specifically? How does Sony white balance operation differ from Canon's? Seems pretty similar to me, and I have used EX1/EX3, FS100/700.

That's been every single Canon with XLRs until the XF200 series. Hopefully, that is standard from here on out.

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Doooh!
It's fine.....other than you're off the Christmas list!

Enjoy!
Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

Re: Replacement for C100
 

You may be aware of this, but I'll pick up on that quote because it may mislead others.

Let's be absolutely clear that *if all else is equal* the quality from long-GOP will be superior to that from an I-frame only codec - and by "all else equal" that includes bitrate.

What may have given long-GOP an (incorrect) bad name is that comparisons were made between a lowbitrate long-GOP system and a high bitrate I-frame only system - such as HDV and DVCProHD. It wasn't anything to do with long-GOP/I-frame only that made DVCProHD superior - it was the fact it was 4x the bitrate!

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Hi David - the main reason I gave the Long-GOP a bill of health is because I do a lot of long records of people giving presentations.

I do get footage from around the world filmed on many formats that I must edit (and make look nice, and often do chromakey). I see a sort of pulsing - a sort of IBBP (BBP, BBP et al) pulsing - from long-GOP footage and this creates 'boil' in my chromakeys.

So if I seem pro-LongGOP it is with that in mind.

In general, a LongGOP format that is a third to a quarter of the bitrate of an iFrame codec is okay. That rough rule of thumb demonstrates that an AVCHD stream at 24 Mbps is like a 75-90 Mbps stream all-iFtame codec, but it still doesn't really wash for chromakey if you need to abolish the slight pulsing effect you will get by using a Long-GOP codec.

So I'd say yes, but a long-GOP codec gets an efficiency reducrtion of about 75% for being Long-GOP, so AVCHD scores on a 75 to 100 Mbps All Intra codec. Efficiencies of delta-compression and all that.

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Well, here she is! I can't sleep I'm so excited! Now, I have enough to be dangerous.

http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/...pse6ec7585.jpg

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Congratulations, Michael!

I hope you had a safe drive back to Santa Fe.

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Thanks Richard, Yea, it was a nice drive not too bad, last time I was in Denver was when I was 16. Ahaw, I just noticed you live there too!

I love this camera, I think I learned everything there is to operating it within a couple of hours.... shot some test footage and it looked great! Richard, thanks for talking me out of the GH4..... ha ha!

Re: Replacement for C100
 

It's here (already).

Please pick up the discussion at:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-...0-mark-ii.html

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Yea, so in post you'd still be working with 1080. Again, and to get back to the issue at hand -- "let's keep it going about wants/needs/desires" -- a prospective camera that would attract me would be a 12-bit 1DC. In fact, if the current 1DC had 10-bit, I'd already owned it. But to me a 8-bit 4k camera feels just like another case of canonitis disease:

CANONITIS
noun
- to never go the full step you really need to innovate and take over the market.

-- peer

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Beautiful rig! Congrats!

Re: Replacement for C100
 

Yep, and it actually reminds me a bit of my old old 5d2 rig:

-- peer