Re: C100: Be happy!
 

What are you guys actually trying to proof? :) I can take my 1000 dollar gh3 out of the bag and have it ready for shooting on a paid job, without any accessories, it supports my workflow in that way but I"m sure that won't be the case for many other shooters who have other demands. All camera"s have their strengths and weaknesses, what is a weakness for one might not be for another depending on your needs so if the c100 works for you, then be happy :)

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

Well, it's always good to debate pros and cons, not to convince the other person, but so that someone who may just be lurking can see point and counterpoint in a way that may help them make a decision one way or the other.

Why does it bug you?

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

I"m not sure what this thread is actually about, is it to praise the c100 and that you don't need any other camera because the c100 still has it all or is it to discuss other possible options, beside the c100 and discuss what they can provide what the c100 can't? Or is it to discuss what's not good about other camera's? :) If anyone can explain what the purpose is I might be able to join in again.

So far, I think that Kevin McRoberts made some valid remarks.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

I think a thread that is all praise is simply boring, and if it provides a jumping off point for people to insert their own opinions about options that are the same price point or cheaper, ect. then that's a good thing.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

I started this thread in response to the hype from NAB - lots of new cameras, but when the cold hard light of day hits them, is there anything to make us ditch the C100, with all its faults?

C100 users and potential owners need to petition Canon so that they fix the faults in the C100 before they go off and make a new one. When they make a new one, they shouldn't assume they did well on the first one.

Black Magic took their Cinema and Production cameras, and made them into a 10Kg bear to meet the howls of protest we raised in forums such as these.

It would be really nice if Canon accepted that their PSF doesn't work very well, and they should do unto edit software what they did unto Atomos, and worked together for the common good. Whilst they're at it, they can bloody well fix the asinine and stupid way they do white balance ('let's look at the whole frame and assume that we're filling it with an engineering chart' rather than 'find something that peaks close to equal in R, G & B, and if not, is there anything that looks like skin tone, in the centre 15-30% area'). Whilst they're at it, they can fix the audio issue - we need one input and two levels sometimes - they can sort out the interlaced chroma and they should (though I now know they can't) have audio in the 'last shot playback' function. Sheesh, that's specifically to ensure we got the audio properly, and they don't even do it via headphones.

Oh look, I'm writing in crayon again. Sorry.

All the new cameras sub-$10k will bring with them new issues, new problems, new challenges, new bugs. C100 is a stable platform, but it's still got issues. Let's stop trading 'old fashioned' insults at C100, get the bugs squashed, move on.

I fear Canon think we love the C100/C300 so much. No, we like it, but it does need fixing before Canon moves on. Canon should know this, I hope we can remind them.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

Nice one Matt.

The two things that bug me most are the PSF issue (surely everyone hates this - right?) and the fact I can only punch in to 2x. My eyes are getting older and I'd love to go to 5x and 10x like I can on the DSLRs (which I hate using now).

Of course, Canon's next models should have 50p/60p as well as fixing the PSF. Please, pretty please Canon.

I just shot some stuff about a guy running marathons and I really could have done with 60p in order to get 'better' progressive slo-mo. Oh well.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

Glad to see others understand the great benefit of critical reviews for both other readers and for manufacturers to improve products.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

Nicely put Matt. I also fear this and that they don't listen to users anyway.

I'm not sure we'll see many more improvements in terms of firmware for the C100 at this stage. I hope I'm wrong.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

It doesn't bother me terribly as a shooter, but I am seeing *a lot* of C100 footage recently that has been deinterlaced and not had it's pulldown removed like it should have been, and thus looks extremely soft. This leads to a lot of negative opinion about the C100's image quality (which should look closer to the level of detail found in 1080p sourced from 4-5K Red footage...if you're not seeing that, then you're not doing it right). When I deliver to clients, I am either shooting with the 24p option (native 24p in AVCHD), or 30p and using ClipWrap on the files to automatically add the pulldown flags like are supposed to be there, or using the Atomos NInja-2/Blade and having it record 24p/30p native with the pulldown already applied.

You won't get 1080p60 from any in the current lineup (save for the C500 which has the option to bypass the Digic DV III processor), but there is no reason why Canon can't give us 720p60 in the C100. I think at this point it's not going to really cannibalize any sales of the C300 and would only make C100 owners *very* happy. It's not going to be substantially better looking than deinterlacing 60i for the slowmo, but it does make post easier.

I think we have one more C100 firmware update left before Canon fully switches over to C200 development (which I expect will be out in about a year and a half). Hopefully they will make all native 24p, 25p, 30p framerates, add 720p60, and let you move the Dual Pixel AF targeting box. I don't expect a dual audio record from a single channel option, mostly because that's probably something they will (hopefully) do in the next iteration, and none of their previous XF camera series (new 205 notwithstanding) does it either.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

As much as i would like to hope that they would listen, It's hard to see canon as listening to anyone but their own analysis and data. I mean, the 'big' firmware update that we got that did add the very needed movable focus assist, also included the 80,000iso option. my first thought was: "who the heck was asking them for better iso than it already has?"

As always as consumers, it's the safest bet to say that our requests to camera-makers isn't very likely to get taken into consideration because they are of course businesses, and they quite reasonably are catering to the hundreds if not thousands or hundreds of thousands of buyers/users of any particular camera/line of cameras, so a few dozen folks submitting feature requests/etc... aren't likely to have a big impact on them.

It took the ridiculous success of the 5D2 to lead to the development of C series (my opinion, debatable fact)
and whatever they're working on now im sure is taking into consideration a metric ton of research and data which maybe, just maybe, includes a tiny fraction of what they hear from folks like us.

As always, buy a camera for what it is, not what you want it to be, and you'll be as this thread title suggests. I'm with Matt; post NAB i've yet to see something that i'd like to replace my C100 with.

Re: C100: Be happy!
 

Native frame rates would be good.