Review of C100 - after having it a while

Lico Francisco · January 23rd, 2014, 06:53 PM

For me to have the mic fit. I just wrap some piece of paper on the MIC. So far that works without any problem.

Nicholas de Kock · January 24th, 2014, 12:50 AM

A thin rubber strip also works great for holding the mic.

Richard Jacobs · January 27th, 2014, 07:26 PM

A couple of Rubber O-rings (or square rubber washers) from ace hardware, rolled on to the mic, work great for increasing the diameter to fit in the holder.

Les Wilson · January 27th, 2014, 10:28 PM

What does shooting brightly lit objects at night show? Tons of cameras can make that look good. I was disappointed with the chalky skin tone and blah looking skies of the daytime shots. How does it hold up to grading?

Simon Thewlis · January 28th, 2014, 05:34 AM

Sanken have a packet of 10 O-rings that work perfectly with shotguns to give a snug fit. $20 extremely well spent.

Mikon Haaksman · January 30th, 2014, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

What does shooting brightly lit objects at night show? Tons of cameras can make that look good. I was disappointed with the chalky skin tone and blah looking skies of the daytime shots. How does it hold up to grading?

Well, for me, I've shot a lot of nighttime video and always see a good amount of noise in the blacks. This camera produced some of the cleanest imagery in low light that I've seen.

I'm not sure what video you're referencing with regards to chalky skin tones and blah skies. That could be attributed to a number of factors including how it was shot, color correction, etc.

As for grading, I've been able to get away with a nominal amount with little issue, but of course recording to an external recorder will provide you with a better image to work with.

Les Wilson · January 30th, 2014, 01:29 PM

I've read many reviews of this camera that all end up with the same conclusion: It's overpriced but awesome if you can capture footage the way you want it or close to it.

I think this camera would fly off the shelf if it had a up to date CODEC. Instead, Canon has to share the buyers with GoPro, Black Magic, Panasonic and whatever percentage of them the Canon DSLR Division can snag; And I don't think lowering the price is the right thing. They should add the function and keep the price high. I think they'll get all the business going to competitors and snag a big chunk of the FS100 market. I would have returned to Canon and bought a C100 long ago if it had a better CODEC. YMMV

Pavel Sedlak · January 30th, 2014, 09:19 PM

C100 has the three advantages for me:

- small size with a very good ergonomic (you can use this cam for handheld shooting without rig)
- you get a very good images without aliasing and moire on the fine details and these images are a very sharp (you have an advantage of choosing lenses, you can use really wide lens or you can use the best speed lens for wonderful result in lowlight or to get the small DOF)
- you are able to get these images with a very good dynamic range with acceptable level of noise after some learning time (I use cine1 gamma or WDR, the log gamma with the quick WB menu option for better colors with less green pictures for an easy grading, denoiser for the less visible noise).

WDR gamma is more noisier then cine1 gamma (but there is the denoiser option with the acceptable levels from 2 to 6), cine1 gamma gets warmer colors at evening under tungsten light (wdr is cooler but has more noise), wdr gamma and log gamma have the better dynamic range with more nicer gradient to highlights. Cine1 under tungsten light at evening needs color correction or you can use WDR gama, but you must use speed glass and you need to learn the denoiser levels.

For the best result you must use lights.

Yes, there are the better cameras, but in this price point you get the option of choosing the lens, make some quick shooting from the hand, you get the really sharp images with very good colors. It is nice.

I wish to have the better A/D converter (digic DVIII has several types of A/D converters and there can be some differences between C300 and C100 models) and the option for the DNxHD (422 10bit) or ProResHQ recording (as paid upgrade for the current C100 owners .-) ).

From the C300 and the C500 models should Canon made one model "C600", with 12bit raw and 4K option (stop crippling of the C100 with LCD, EVF, A/Dc, 8bit recording).

Les Wilson · January 30th, 2014, 10:06 PM

I think it's simple actually. At the end of the day it's a $5000 camera and given the cameras that are on the market for large sensor acquisition, a $5000 camera has to produce a quality image. The market segment who will pay that amount of money for a large sensor camera can get a better image plus plenty of quality glass in the current raft of DSLRs all for about $1000 less money. After $5000 for a C100, your VF and LCD are as bad as a DSLR. The price is right. The CODEC is wrong. Pity that's the main thing.

Mikon Haaksman · January 31st, 2014, 01:03 AM

For me the main argument is that the DSLR's require so much to actually work well as video cameras - particularly in an interview situation. H.264 is also an 8bit 4:2:0 codec so I don't see why your view of AVCHD is so terrible. Sure, you can shoot raw on a 5D III for example but you have more limitations - again. Short record time, no audio, lot of work in post.

And I do think the avchd built into the C100 is much better than earlier iterations of the codec I've witnessed. When I have a job to do, I need to get it done and the fewer hassles my equipment gives me, the more I can spend on getting the shots I need without worry.

Les Wilson · January 31st, 2014, 05:43 AM

Trust me, it's very entertaining to see all the guys who rushed to DSLRs to make blurry video and who panned the criticisms of their ergonomics as "old think" are now justifying the C100 by talking about what a pain DSLRs are to shoot with like it's new news. It's VERY entertaining, especially the surprise at how wonderful built-in ND filters are. No more "all you need is to screw on a vari-ND what are you stupid?" guff.

It's not a choice of AVCHD vs RAW. As I understand AVCHD, there are other parts to the AVCHD spec that would provide a higher data rate (better to work with in post) but are not implemented in the C100. Also, there are other formats recorded by DSLRs such as the 70D, GH3 and others that are higher data rate, very good, clean and hold up well in post. Those cameras also offer the option to record in file formats supporting a wider variety of NLEs. The CODEC is the weakest point of the C100 and a high price point. I contend that limits it's potential market and only a miniscule part (perhaps none) of that market would more than double it's budget to a C300. Rather, it goes to competitors and Canon DSLRs. Ergo the "crippled-ness" of the C100 to "protect" the C300 doesn't actually do that at all (IMHO). More like protecting the XF300 price point. Then there's that Japanese culture thing of being too big of a success that the runaway success of the 5DM2 got them in trouble with.

January 23rd, 2014, 06:53 PM	#16
Lico Francisco Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 109	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while For me to have the mic fit. I just wrap some piece of paper on the MIC. So far that works without any problem. __________________ Learning to become a better videographer.

January 24th, 2014, 12:50 AM	#17
Nicholas de Kock Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: KLD, South Africa Posts: 983	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while A thin rubber strip also works great for holding the mic.

January 27th, 2014, 07:26 PM	#18
Richard Jacobs New Boot Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Madison WI USA Posts: 16	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while A couple of Rubber O-rings (or square rubber washers) from ace hardware, rolled on to the mic, work great for increasing the diameter to fit in the holder.

January 27th, 2014, 10:28 PM	#19
Les Wilson Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boca Raton, FL Posts: 3,014	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while What does shooting brightly lit objects at night show? Tons of cameras can make that look good. I was disappointed with the chalky skin tone and blah looking skies of the daytime shots. How does it hold up to grading?

January 28th, 2014, 05:34 AM	#20
Simon Thewlis New Boot Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Australia Posts: 19	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while Sanken have a packet of 10 O-rings that work perfectly with shotguns to give a snug fit. $20 extremely well spent.

January 30th, 2014, 01:29 PM	#22
Les Wilson Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boca Raton, FL Posts: 3,014	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while I've read many reviews of this camera that all end up with the same conclusion: It's overpriced but awesome if you can capture footage the way you want it or close to it. I think this camera would fly off the shelf if it had a up to date CODEC. Instead, Canon has to share the buyers with GoPro, Black Magic, Panasonic and whatever percentage of them the Canon DSLR Division can snag; And I don't think lowering the price is the right thing. They should add the function and keep the price high. I think they'll get all the business going to competitors and snag a big chunk of the FS100 market. I would have returned to Canon and bought a C100 long ago if it had a better CODEC. YMMV Last edited by Les Wilson; January 30th, 2014 at 02:29 PM.

January 30th, 2014, 09:19 PM	#23
Pavel Sedlak Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Prague Czech Republic Posts: 263	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while C100 has the three advantages for me: - small size with a very good ergonomic (you can use this cam for handheld shooting without rig) - you get a very good images without aliasing and moire on the fine details and these images are a very sharp (you have an advantage of choosing lenses, you can use really wide lens or you can use the best speed lens for wonderful result in lowlight or to get the small DOF) - you are able to get these images with a very good dynamic range with acceptable level of noise after some learning time (I use cine1 gamma or WDR, the log gamma with the quick WB menu option for better colors with less green pictures for an easy grading, denoiser for the less visible noise). WDR gamma is more noisier then cine1 gamma (but there is the denoiser option with the acceptable levels from 2 to 6), cine1 gamma gets warmer colors at evening under tungsten light (wdr is cooler but has more noise), wdr gamma and log gamma have the better dynamic range with more nicer gradient to highlights. Cine1 under tungsten light at evening needs color correction or you can use WDR gama, but you must use speed glass and you need to learn the denoiser levels. For the best result you must use lights. Yes, there are the better cameras, but in this price point you get the option of choosing the lens, make some quick shooting from the hand, you get the really sharp images with very good colors. It is nice. I wish to have the better A/D converter (digic DVIII has several types of A/D converters and there can be some differences between C300 and C100 models) and the option for the DNxHD (422 10bit) or ProResHQ recording (as paid upgrade for the current C100 owners .-) ). From the C300 and the C500 models should Canon made one model "C600", with 12bit raw and 4K option (stop crippling of the C100 with LCD, EVF, A/Dc, 8bit recording).

January 30th, 2014, 10:06 PM	#24
Les Wilson Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boca Raton, FL Posts: 3,014	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while I think it's simple actually. At the end of the day it's a $5000 camera and given the cameras that are on the market for large sensor acquisition, a $5000 camera has to produce a quality image. The market segment who will pay that amount of money for a large sensor camera can get a better image plus plenty of quality glass in the current raft of DSLRs all for about $1000 less money. After $5000 for a C100, your VF and LCD are as bad as a DSLR. The price is right. The CODEC is wrong. Pity that's the main thing.

January 31st, 2014, 01:03 AM	#25
Mikon Haaksman Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 42	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while For me the main argument is that the DSLR's require so much to actually work well as video cameras - particularly in an interview situation. H.264 is also an 8bit 4:2:0 codec so I don't see why your view of AVCHD is so terrible. Sure, you can shoot raw on a 5D III for example but you have more limitations - again. Short record time, no audio, lot of work in post. And I do think the avchd built into the C100 is much better than earlier iterations of the codec I've witnessed. When I have a job to do, I need to get it done and the fewer hassles my equipment gives me, the more I can spend on getting the shots I need without worry.

January 31st, 2014, 05:43 AM	#26
Les Wilson Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boca Raton, FL Posts: 3,014	Re: Review of C100 - after having it a while Trust me, it's very entertaining to see all the guys who rushed to DSLRs to make blurry video and who panned the criticisms of their ergonomics as "old think" are now justifying the C100 by talking about what a pain DSLRs are to shoot with like it's new news. It's VERY entertaining, especially the surprise at how wonderful built-in ND filters are. No more "all you need is to screw on a vari-ND what are you stupid?" guff. It's not a choice of AVCHD vs RAW. As I understand AVCHD, there are other parts to the AVCHD spec that would provide a higher data rate (better to work with in post) but are not implemented in the C100. Also, there are other formats recorded by DSLRs such as the 70D, GH3 and others that are higher data rate, very good, clean and hold up well in post. Those cameras also offer the option to record in file formats supporting a wider variety of NLEs. The CODEC is the weakest point of the C100 and a high price point. I contend that limits it's potential market and only a miniscule part (perhaps none) of that market would more than double it's budget to a C300. Rather, it goes to competitors and Canon DSLRs. Ergo the "crippled-ness" of the C100 to "protect" the C300 doesn't actually do that at all (IMHO). More like protecting the XF300 price point. Then there's that Japanese culture thing of being too big of a success that the runaway success of the 5DM2 got them in trouble with.