16Dec Canon C100 – first impressions
I’ve been doing a bit of shooting with the Canon c100 lately. Many people rant and rave about how much of a step up it is from a 5d mark III or any DSLR body for that matter. While I’ve enjoyed shooting with it, i’m not exactly in love.
Currently the most disappointing thing about the c100 for me is the control layout. While the Canon c100 is about the same size as the 5d mark III body (above), the side placement of most major controls and settings is kind of a pain. Adding to the problem is the flip out screen which covers up the setting buttons you’re looking for. It could be that I’ve been shooting on DSLR cameras for so long that I’ve grown used to it, but I find the layout of the 5d mark III’s controls to be much more intuitive.
With the 5d mark III as well as most DSLR cameras, your controls are laid out around the screen on the back of the camera. The roll wheel and D-pad on DSLR can be set for most common controlls and it’s generally pretty easy to get around. With the c100, you can assign pretty much any button to any function. The problem is that the vast majority of the control buttons are located on the left hand side of the the camera.
I find myself constantly having to look around the side of the camera for basic functions and once you find what you’re looking for you have to use the joystick and wheel on the control handle to actually make adjustments. Quick adjustments on the Canon c100 aren’t possible without the control handgrip. You can remove the handgrip and put a cap on the mount to slim down the camera, but this basically cripples the cameras controls. While I find the handgrip nice for handheld work, it’s not exactly something I want attached all the time.
I’ve also become very accustomed to a quick half press of the 5d mark III‘s shutter button when composing a shot. Many people frown on this method of focusing, but when i’m trying to get things done fast, I find it much more efficient to check focus in this manner. The Canon c100‘s auto focus system is lacking at best, even in live view mode the 5d mark III does a much better job, especially in low light. I find myself having to use the magnification feature on the c100 constantly to check focus and it really slows me down.
The display on the Canon c100 isn’t amazing and I find even the t2i’s screen far more enjoyable to use. For a camera in this price range (around $6000) I would expect a much nicer looking screen. It’s very disappointing that the flip out screen doesn’t even stand up to the quality of the Canon 60d. The camera feels like something that’s really been limited on purpose by Canon.
Another irritation that you don’t see mentioned much is the file format. If you record in anything other than 24p your signal is wrapped up in a 60i file format. Added to this headache is the already highly compressed AVCHD format. It’s not a huge issue when dealing with an NLE that can correctly interpret the footage, but it’s still a bit of a hassle. If you work with multiple editors and don’t normally turn in footage wrapped in a 60i format, I could see problems popping up in the post process.
Yet another problem is that no matter what format you plan to record in, the hdmi port always outputs it over a 60i signal. If you use a Atoms Ninja you’re usually ok after a few frames as it does a decent job of detecting and deinterlacing the display. However, if you have a less intelligent field monitor, you’re going to end up seeing the rather nasty interlace lines on your field monitor with any fast camera moves. Not exactly an ideal option and it ends up giving you 2 or 3 second of useless footage at the beginning of every shot when using the Ninja for recording.
On the positive side of things, the clean hdmi output with audio is a handy thing to have and the ability to handle high ISO on this camera is pretty impressive. I wouldn’t push things as far as 20,000 iso, but 6,400, and 12,800 are pretty usable. The top handle with XLR and audio support is pretty handy and the preamps are much cleaner than any DSLR. Build quality is pretty decent, but not amazing, and you’ll find the Canon 5d mark III to feel a lot more solid. The on board fan is somewhat load on the c100 when you’re used to the fanless operation of the 5d mark III and you’ll want to make adjustments right away to the speed settings in the control menu.
Overall most of the “pro features” are things you would normally expect from a camera in this price range, but it doesn’t feel like much of a value when compared with the 5d mark III. A lot of people argue about the “superior image quality” and “sharpness” of the Canon c100. While they aren’t necessarily wrong about those statements, you really have to pixel peep for anyone to really see a difference.
You might be able to sell me on the image quality pitch if I did a lot of 720p punch ins that were being enlarged to 1080p, but that’s something that only really happens and when it does, the shots are so short that you’d be hard pressed to notice. I’ll post some more thoughts as I spend more time with the Canon c100, but right now i’m only lukewarm on the idea of actually owning it.
December 16th, 2013 at 11:19 pm
I have only handled a C100 briefly, not shot with one, but I can see how the control layout could be disorienting for a DSLR shooter. While the controls may take some time to become second nature, I think the overall ergonomics will be better for shooting video. I shoot with a GH3, and don’t envy the large, bulky, heavy “pro” video shoulder cameras, but I very much like the small form factor of the newer compact video cameras. Give it time, and it will probably grow on you.
December 17th, 2013 at 8:19 am
Before I moved to DSLR I was shooting on a set of HV20 (with lens adapter) as well as an sony hdr and before that a Canon XL2 and GH2. I don’t remember having a hard time with the side control layout on either the gh2, xl2, or the Sony for that matter. I’ve only taken the c100 out for 3 shoots so far. Maybe it’ll start to grow on me.
December 17th, 2013 at 12:16 am
Don’t forget the built in ND’s and Waveform, two key features.
I shot on the 7D and 5D Mk3 quite a bit before I bought my C100 and having used it on several gigs from weddings to short films, you couldn’t pay me to go back to a DSLR.
December 17th, 2013 at 8:26 am
The last short I worked on we shot with a c100 and a 5d mark III. A director I work with on a regular basis was working with me on the project and the first thing out of his mouth after playing around with the c100 was “i’d rather use the 5d mark III”. I do enjoy the top handle and built in audio features, but i’m not sold on the design.
December 20th, 2013 at 6:23 pm
That’s interesting, did he say why he preferred the 5D over the C100?
December 21st, 2013 at 12:54 pm
His biggest complant was all of the fine grain. Even at 1600 iso, the camera seems to generat a lot of grainy noise artifacts.
December 17th, 2013 at 1:02 am
It definitely has a lot of faults, the viewfinder, codec, no slow motion being the worst problems. But it’s a superior video camera to the 5D mkiii and it’s more than up close. The C100 out resolves the 5D by a long shot and is many times easier to use on the move. Once you do the dual-pixel upgrade in Feb, that should really open up a lot of additional functionality. I leave the grip on all the time. Plus Zacuto makes a grip relocater that’s supposed to be terrific when you rig it.
December 17th, 2013 at 1:04 am
Of course, I’ve never seen the Magic Lantern Raw on the 5D vs the HDMI output. That could be an interesting test. I’ve rented a Ninja 2 and really likee the Prores LT output.
December 17th, 2013 at 8:34 am
I have a ninja laying around and I use it for green screen work on the 5d mark III. I haven’t spent a lot of time posting about the 5d mark III’s Magic Lantern Raw workflow because I find it impractical for normal use. RAW images look great, but the workflow sucks and for most projects it’s more of a hassle than its worth. I don’t mind using the Ninja, but it doesn’t make a huge difference on the 5dmkIII or c100 unless you are trying to color key. The format is nice, but as a PP user I’ve never had problems with codec support and transcoding.
December 17th, 2013 at 9:17 am
Wow this is timely, I was just thinking of comparing these two as well!
December 17th, 2013 at 10:16 am
I’ll be taking it out for some more shooting this week (short xmas piece). Just made it home from England. Only had it out on 3 or 4 jobs so far, not horrible, not amazing. Currently I’d say it’s pretty pricy for what you get, buy used if you want to own one.
December 17th, 2013 at 10:16 am
Go for it, Dave! I’ll be interested to see what you come up with….
December 17th, 2013 at 10:59 am
I think of this camera as sort of a “student” cinema camera……it has a lot of things (zebras, built in ND filters, a waveform monitor) that the 5D3 doesn’t; coming from a DSLR background, it gives you the opportunity to start to think in terms of the cinema camera world (i.e., shutter “angle”, as an option to shutter “speed”). It has a deep (and often unexplored) video menu, where you can really get in there and tweak all kinds of things that a DSLR would never let you do. It is set up to use straight out of the box, and really needs no external rig, especially as a run-and-gun camera.
Everyone raves about RAW, and it is undeniably a great thing to have; but if you shoot a lot of material (as I do), and have to travel a lot, the advantages of an efficient codec soon become obvious. And of course there is always the possibility to use an external recorder and shoot with a much higher bit rate, rivaling or surpassing the C300. Yes, no slo-mo, the viewfinder is a joke, and AVCHD is not my favorite; but…..for me, anyway, as a filmmaker (and not just a photographer), it was a logical step up from a 5D….
December 17th, 2013 at 1:42 pm
If you’re speaking of a “student” camera I would think the Sony FS100 would be a much better fit. Priced at around $3,800 (often under 3k on the used market), it has all of the features of a pro video camera for half the price. Sure you don’t get the crazy low light capabilities of the c100/c300, but you do get slow mo if you really need it and a much more user friendly control layout compared to the c100. The screen is much nicer, af system is better, the codec is used more efficiently, and you get Uncompressed 4:2:2 via hdmi output as opposed to the 60i business. Canon might have the sensor going for it but the fs100 has pretty much everything else and for the price difference you can add a top handle to the fs100 for under $300.
December 17th, 2013 at 7:05 pm
Not sure what you mean with the “60i business” via HDMI….I ALWAYS shoot 24p…..the ONLY reason to shoot 60i would be to try to conform to some other interlaced project, or if it was demanded by some broadcaster trying to conform to an older broadcast paradigm. 24p is absolutely available internally or externally, via HDMI in the C100….
I bought my C100 before the metabones speed booster became available, because I have a lot of Canon glass…..never seriously considered it, especially after reading Philip Bloom’s review…..he really hated the form factor, which is one of the big things the C100 has going for it. If I had it to do all over again, I might check it out (with the Metabones adaptor).
Each system has it’s plusses and minuses, I guess; but overall, I am pretty happy with my C100.
December 17th, 2013 at 7:51 pm
If you take a look at the signal coming from the HDMI port of your c100, you’ll notice that it’s a 24p image wrapped in a 60i output. When using a Atomos Ninja for external capture, it actually takes some movement before the de-interlacing feature kicks in. If you record in PF24 or PF30 modes you’ll end up with an AVCHD file that is a 60i container for either a 29.97p image or a 24p image. In 24p mode you’ll get an AVCHD file that’s 24p but any other setting will give you a 60i container file which can be easily misinterpreted by an NLE. I’m often required to record 29.97 and find the PF30’s 60i container file to be a pain.
Form factor isn’t really an issue with the FS100 now that the cages are out. Most if not all of them attach so closely to the camera that you’ll have trouble seeing where the camera ends and the cage begins and you’ll end up with a form factor similar to the c100. The Tilta system is a good example as is the Camtree cages. I’ve shot on the c100 and FS100, for layout and features I prefer the FS100 with a cage to the c100, for low light the c100 wins, though I’ll admit the former is very subjective. I don’t hate the c100, but I haven’t been blown away by it either. As you said each system has it’s pluses and minuses, I wouldn’t fault anyone for buying a c100 or an FS100, both are very capable cameras all opinions aside.
December 17th, 2013 at 2:18 pm
I think most of the cons in your post seems to be just being too used to shooting with DSLRs for the last few years. Give it a few more shots and you’ll probably get accustomed to the new form factor and controls, happens with every camera.
I do disagree about the image quality, it’s very apparent and not just in a pixel peeping way. Put two images shot with both side by side and the difference in resolution, sharpness and DR is very noticeable right away.
Plus the pros of not really needing a rig (unless you want a Follow Focus and/or matte box), Fader NDs, external preamps/recorders, etc. just make it a much more comfortable and practical option to shoot with imo.
December 17th, 2013 at 6:02 pm
So far the differences I’ve seen haven’t been very dramatic (unless you zoom to 200x) but I’ll post some image quality results after I finish shooting with it again this weekend. As for the ergonomics, you’re probably right, I was completely fine way back in the day shooting on an XL2 and the 3 or 4 RED jobs I get each year to cause me to much of a hassle, so I’m probably just turning into a grumpy old man.
December 17th, 2013 at 2:50 pm
So I’m a budget shooter 😉 GH2 and now the GH3 but the C100 has always tempted me mainly due to it’s dynamic range and low light goodness. I have seen 5Dmk3 footage and it it noticeably less sharp that the lowly GH3 and the c100 so I’m curious why you say this is not so? (magic lantern shire). Can you look at dynamic range vs 5D.
It seems that all these manufactures throw a little spanner into the works in order for you to step up to the next level. GH3, the viewfinder is almost useless and the LCD is only 700k!!! BUT the codec is 80Mbps BUT I don’t have any way to focus – NO FOCUS PEAKING – zooming in on a crapy LCD or viewfinder barely works! Seems like with the c100 they’ve messed the viewfinder but get the $13k c300 and you’ll be golden!
Also depends what you shoot, I can see for fun and gun the c100 would be great – I have the zoom H4n and the tascam D60 and can see how I could mess up big time by using them for run and gun – press record, then again, setting levels via knobs built for dwarf fingers etc.
Remember there is no prefect camera, well the new shoulder mounted Alexa doc camera is close but $$$ so we all have to figure out how to work around the weaknesses – but sometime you just can’t use a camera for a certain job.
December 17th, 2013 at 4:22 pm
@Richard When you look at the footage side by side on your monitor, it will be pretty clear how much better the C100 is over the 5D. The C100 is noticeably sharper, has better dynamic range that holds detail in the shadows and highlights. AVCHD might not be optimal but it’s well executed on the C100 and even holds up to moderate grading! DSLR footage falls apart when graded. The viewfinder is bad but not useless. There are workarounds. There’s a cheap eye cup that you can buy that helps quite a bit. I use it when I need max mobility. All other times, I use a Zacuto C-finder which is ridiculously expensive but a must.
December 17th, 2013 at 6:05 pm
I’ll be shooting this weekend with a 5dmk III and c100. I’ll post some results once I get the footage in.
December 17th, 2013 at 8:37 pm
Caught a glimpse of a (B?) cameraman shooting with this for an NBC news segment the other night. Have always been curious about them. Would like to go find some comparison footage. I’m happy with my 5Dmk3 for what I do (equal video and photography).
I’ve had my eye on the GH1,2,3 for 4 years now. It’s amusing to me that that is how we refer to them. Panasonic doesn’t hold much sway in photography. Lumix, what the hell is Lumix? I passed on a GH1 partially because when you roll into a paid gig with a Canon, you just look more pro.
I know it’s the quality of the film not what’s on the logo, but still Image is is a two sided coin. Anyone using a GH3 with an Zacuto EVF? Sounds like that would be a good a good combo.
December 19th, 2013 at 6:48 pm
I believe If you are shooting on a 5D MKIII and you have magic lantern there is no point in updating. A lot of the features that make the C100 appealing to me are found in the new magic lantern.
I am holding out for future canon announcements when they are not muting their audience to keep other cameras relevant.
February 28th, 2015 at 10:58 pm
I think people are focusing too much on the camera itself, and not on all the other factors that going into making something look good. Lighting, production design, smooth camera work, creative composition, colors, framing, etc….I would rather have a complete filmmaker with a mark iii than an incomplete maker with a higher end camera. At this level of digital, the mark iii in the right hands is going to be just fine. For that matter, even a GH4 will work. It is truly not the camera, but what you do with it. Another way to say it is if you can’t create compelling video with the mark iii, the c100 isn’t going to make a difference for you.