More Analysis of the C100

Status
Not open for further replies.
LetTheRightLensIn said:
Bob Howland said:
"...the major compromise is the codec which is now AVCHD at 24Mbit 4-2-0."

And the codec that they didn't use, presumably because it was too expensive, is used in the Canon XF100, which costs $3000 but does 4-2-2.

The Canon marketing people are trying to be a little too clever for their own good. Basically, the C100, C300 and C500 are all about double the price they should be. Doesn't Canon realize that they have competition?


They do realize they have competition. Sadly they think it all comes from various divisions within Canon only!
Look at how many little basics they crippled out of the 5D3. So instead of it continuing the revolution, getting mad praise, flying off the shelves like crazy to film people, and cementing themselves as the leaders in the market and making themselves hard to over thrown, they play stupid little games with internal market segmentation plus get greedy. What a waste.
+1
 
Upvote 0
Canon Rumors said:
<em>“Many may be taken aback with the idea of spending $7,999 on this camera at first. But if you stop to think about what you won’t NEED to buy – it can actually start to look like the C100 might just be a wiser investment long term. This camera comes ready to shoot. The ergonomics are great so you don’t HAVE to have a cage. You don’t need to buy an external audio recorder and synching software – this has XLR inputs (and stereo headphone jack as well as levels) with the handle.” <strong><a href=\"http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2012/08/29/canon-c100-leads-to-murky-future-for-mid-to-upper-range-video-hdslrs/\" target=\"_blank\">Visit VincentLaforet</a></strong></em></p>

I have to disagree with Vincent here. The only things I added to my kit for DSLR use were a LCD loupe and a Zoom H4n. Everything else (tripod, monopod, etc) I had already, and would need for any camcorder.

With the C100, you still need a shoulder rig if you want to shoot handheld. Such a rig would need to be better balanced (= heavier and more expensive) than for DSLR, due to the greater weight. And thanks to the LCD design you might still need a monitor or EVF also when working with a shoulder mount.

When shooting with larger lenses (such as a 70-200 or bigger) it's also likely you'll need rails and a lens support, becuase both the camera and the lens are too heavy for the lens mount. With DSLR's you can put heavy lenses directly on the tripod and the body can remain unsupported. With the C100, you're going to want that extra support gear.
 
Upvote 0
Axilrod said:
LetTheRightLensIn said:
They do realize they have competition. Sadly they think it all comes from various divisions within Canon only!
Look at how many little basics they crippled out of the 5D3. So instead of it continuing the revolution, getting mad praise, flying off the shelves like crazy to film people, and cementing themselves as the leaders in the market and making themselves hard to over thrown, they play stupid little games with internal market segmentation plus get greedy. What a waste.

The 5D3 upgrades on the stills side were huge. Canon didn't know the 5DII was going to be as successful in the film world as it was, and now it seems like they just trying to keep the two separate. Even the 5DII shot great video (at the time) in a lot of ways it just wasn't ideal for video at all. So why add killer video features to the 5DIII, a camera that was intended for stills? There is a huge segment of users that don't use the video features at all, so why make them pay for it?

They realized how much demand there was for a large-sensor video camera and acted accordingly. It makes a lot more sense for them to make a camera that addresses the video users needs (C100) and another for still users (5D3) instead of making one half-assed, dual-purpose camera. They would have had to make a lot of compromises with the 5D3 to make both segments happy, so instead of making them share one camera they gave them each their own.

How much money would adding zebras and some focusing aids during shooting and a crop mode cost? I'd bet any extra cost for a bit better codec would be made up better sales.

And if they didn't care about 5D3 video then why 22MP?

And the video feature on DSLRs actually is pretty popular.
 
Upvote 0
Hate to say this but the more i read about this camera the more i'm interested in it.

Sure it has AVCHD, only has HDMI out, 4.2.2 colour, only EF mount, 24,25,30fps and for some ungodly reason 60i.

It still makes me want to take it out and have a shoot with it. Sure i love my 60D and 5D2+3 but i would also like something that feels more like a video camera while ergonomically feels like a DSLR.

DSLR shooters currently don't have clean HDMI out (on Canon) so this camera has a welcome change.
Headphone monitoring (check), XLR inputs (check), reduced Moire and Aliasing (check), no more 12min limit on shooting (check). Theres 4 good reasons to buy one right there.

Sure its not as great as the C300 or C500 but then again its like comparing a 450D to a 1DX and complaining about the burst rate or lack of video.

Each camera has its place and this looks like it could make video in a DSLR a secondary feature, to the joy of sooooooooooooo many photographers on here that hate that the 5D2 shot video at all.

I cant wait to get my hands on one and see what it can do.
 
Upvote 0
AG said:
4.2.2 colour

I read it was only 4:2:0 and I also read it is 24Mbit/sec which is not that great.

For this price tag, I think it is a very strange thing for Canon to do.

Personally I would take the XF 300 or 305 which are both cheaper than US$ 8,000 (or some other brand like JVC, Sony, Panasonic which have some nice pro level cameras coming out soon).
 
Upvote 0
Some sites say 4.2.2 some say 4.2.0 we will have to wait and see.

As for the 24Mbit thats still faster than the Reds 24Mbyte.

Plus uncompressed HDMI out so thats kinda a mute point.

Remember the 1DC was first announced as costing $15k, and can now be found for $9999. Lets hope the same thing happens with this camera, that may change people opinion slightly.
 
Upvote 0
The only thing that's certain with regard to the color space is that AVCHD only accepts 4:2:0 color space. So the internal recording is definitely only 4:2:0, which is about the only reason you'd want a C300 instead.

The question under vigorous scrutiny right now is whether the HDMI output has 4:2:2 color or the half-resolution 4:2:0 color. If it cripples away 4:2:2 output to external recorders, I vote against this camera and Canon Cinema as a whole. If it allows 4:2:2, then there is no remaining resaon to shoot with a C300...you can get one of these, rent any add-ons you like and get back to the craft. If it doesn't offer 4:2:2 even externally, this camera is DOA in my view. EOS, as in End Of Story.
 
Upvote 0
B

Babarous

Guest
HurtinMinorKey said:
Because the fs700 is a completely different readout (It doesn't address rolling shutter like the c100 sensor does) and looks like junk in all the samples out there. It's got one trick: high fps.

Does FS700 looks junk in this clip?

http://vimeo.com/groups/fs700/videos/46275632

Hello no ...

And lets not forget FS700 is "4K ready" with future firmware and recorder
 
Upvote 0
Babarous said:
Does FS700 looks junk in this clip?

http://vimeo.com/groups/fs700/videos/46275632

Hello no ...

And lets not forget FS700 is "4K ready" with future firmware and recorder

I have to say you missed the point he was making. You counter a comment that says all the FS700 is good at is slow-mo with a slow-mo clip.

Plus the 4K ready will more than likely involve buying a Sony proprietary external recorder. So you could be looking at another $5-8K on top of the cost of the camera.

Suddenly putting it out of the ballpark for the people that would buy this C100 in the first place.
 
Upvote 0
P

paul13walnut5

Guest
I don't shoot or display 4k.

I shoot stuff for TV and so most of the time don't even need 1080p.

For the folk who really do shoot and display 4k then they'll want a better camera. You wouldn't buy a ferrari for a wee runabout in town.

I don't do compositing (alpha layer graphics from AE at most) and so this camera looks perfect for me!

Adult audio, fixed sensor glitches, nice layout and handling.

Blackmagic... forget it, I'll use my 2/3rds ENG instead.

RED... forget it. A) I don't want to be on a waiting list for B) an incomplete camera that C) will give me nothing but hassle when I get it.

C500 is overkill, was seriously considering the C300, but will take the C100, it does everything I need, it'll work out the box, will have decent support, and thats really all I need.

It will force my hand in switching finally from FCP7 to Premiere though. A good thing, ultimately.

DSLRs spoiled us with expectations, but folks have forgotton the law of diminishing returns. And folk who think this money is too exepensive for a camera have never priced a real tripod or professional microphone.

As a package the C100 looks perfectly pitched for owner operators who want large sensor shooting without the myriad DSLR caveats.
 
Upvote 0
For me, it all comes down to the price and how this camera's value stacks up against an FS100, which has almost all of the positives that the C100 does, except built-in ND and a built-in EF mount. I already have ND filters for use in DSLR video and a metabones adapter can be had for $500 - plus the FS100 has 50p/60p.

If the C100 has the same image quality as the C300, then it will beat out the FS100 at the same price (including adapter) in my eyes and might even justify a premium over FS100+adapter. But if the street price is USD8000, then I'll probably go with an FS100. Or, if I talk myself into spending USD8k, then the FS700 might be my choice. But, at that point, I really lose the form factor and might just decide that the 5D3 has a plenty good enough picture for me (which it currently does!).
 
Upvote 0
Jan 12, 2011
760
103
I agree with a previous poster- no 1080 60p is a huge deal breaker when thinking of buying an $8k camera. I'll stick with a 5Dii and maybe a 5Diii until something better comes out. Not a fan of the FS700 either- looks like video, not cinema.

Take it from a fan and customer, Canon- you need to add value to these products to get us to buy them. Customers are smarter than you think and know when they're being played. Differentiation between your camera models will only get you so far.

If you made a camera like the C100 but with 60p and 4:2:2 50Mbps codec, people would be more enthused to buy it and believe me, you want people to be enthused about your products, not thinking about which feature they have to compromise on.
 
Upvote 0
transpo1 said:
If you made a camera like the C100 but with 60p and 4:2:2 50Mbps codec, people would be more enthused to buy it and believe me, you want people to be enthused about your products, not thinking about which feature they have to compromise on.

Those stats would effectively bury the c300. This would require somebody admitting a mistake in the pricing of the c300. This doesn't happen in Japanese corporate culture. No, instead they double down with another overpriced cinema camera.

I still think the c300 is the best camera at its price or below, but I don't think the quality jump justifies the huge price premium.
 
Upvote 0
May 12, 2011
1,386
1
AG said:
Some sites say 4.2.2 some say 4.2.0 we will have to wait and see.

As for the 24Mbit thats still faster than the Reds 24Mbyte.

Plus uncompressed HDMI out so thats kinda a mute point.

Remember the 1DC was first announced as costing $15k, and can now be found for $9999. Lets hope the same thing happens with this camera, that may change people opinion slightly.

I agree, I think it will be in the $5k range. Pretty much everything in the Cinema EOS line has debuted lower than originally expected. The cinema primes were supposed to be $6800/each but they're available for preorder right under $5k.
 
Upvote 0
May 12, 2011
1,386
1
JasonATL said:
For me, it all comes down to the price and how this camera's value stacks up against an FS100, which has almost all of the positives that the C100 does, except built-in ND and a built-in EF mount. I already have ND filters for use in DSLR video and a metabones adapter can be had for $500 - plus the FS100 has 50p/60p.

If the C100 has the same image quality as the C300, then it will beat out the FS100 at the same price (including adapter) in my eyes and might even justify a premium over FS100+adapter. But if the street price is USD8000, then I'll probably go with an FS100. Or, if I talk myself into spending USD8k, then the FS700 might be my choice. But, at that point, I really lose the form factor and might just decide that the 5D3 has a plenty good enough picture for me (which it currently does!).

I don't think it will be $8k, almost everything in the Cinema EOS line has ended up being cheaper than the announcement price.
 
Upvote 0
May 12, 2011
1,386
1
Videoshooter said:
Canon Rumors said:
I have to disagree with Vincent here. The only things I added to my kit for DSLR use were a LCD loupe and a Zoom H4n. Everything else (tripod, monopod, etc) I had already, and would need for any camcorder.

If that's all you got you're working with a truly minimalist setup, but whatever works.
I had to get:
Redrock Field Cinema Deluxe- with riser, tripod plate, brace, follow focus gears, and extra rods to make other rigs was $3k
Marshall 7" Monitor/batteries/charger - $1200
Marshall 5" - $500
Z-Finder - $350
Zacuto EVF- $700
Fader ND - $180 (and that's on the cheap side)
Zoom - $300

Of course you can exclude the rig technically because it would be useful for the C100 too, but all the other stuff adds up quickly.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 12, 2011
760
103
HurtinMinorKey said:
transpo1 said:
If you made a camera like the C100 but with 60p and 4:2:2 50Mbps codec, people would be more enthused to buy it and believe me, you want people to be enthused about your products, not thinking about which feature they have to compromise on.

Those stats would effectively bury the c300. This would require somebody admitting a mistake in the pricing of the c300. This doesn't happen in Japanese corporate culture. No, instead they double down with another overpriced cinema camera.

I still think the c300 is the best camera at its price or below, but I don't think the quality jump justifies the huge price premium.

Agreed, it wouldn't happen in Japanese corporate culture. However, it hurts their brand loyalty in the long run and they need to hear that.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.