I love my 5D MKII but I hate my Canon XH A1s, it's horrible in low light and very grainy. I shoot a lot of MMA training for UFC and other outlets and I need a good quality camcorder with the image quality of the 5D but Live auto focus. Nearly impossible to film MMA training with manual focus. Anybody have any HD Camcorder suggestions in the same price range as the 5D???

Thanks much.

2nd hand EX1

The closest I can come up with is the Sony NEX-VG900 at close to $3,200. Next in line I'd name the Canon C100, but that sells for a bit more, around $6,500

Both should have great low-light performance, with the VG900 having a fullframe sensor like the 5D, and the C100 a close to APS-C sensorsize like the 7D (but with fysically bigger pixels, ergo more light-sensitive) ... but the live auto focus might be a bit tricky here, sorry.

2nd hand EX1

Wow, the EX1 looks like exactly what I need, must buy new though, it's a shame they discontinued it. Thanks Colin.

The closest I can come up with is the Sony NEX-VG900 at close to $3,200. Next in line I'd name the Canon C100, but that sells for a bit more, around $6,500

Both should have great low-light performance, with the VG900 having a fullframe sensor like the 5D, and the C100 a close to APS-C sensorsize like the 7D (but with fysically bigger pixels, ergo more light-sensitive) ... but the live auto focus might be a bit tricky here, sorry.

Thanks Ruben, the live auto focus is a must. Appreciate it though.

In my opinion, you can purchase the Canon XF G10 or the XF G20 and get probably better low light performance than what you have on the 5D Mark III. I have both the 5D Mark III and the older XF G10 and I don't have any issues. If the low light shooting wasn't an issue, I would suggest the Canon XLH1. That cam is still a beast and will be for some time. If you go with the Sony (I like the Sony) the colors will be more of a problem to match than the Canon products based on what I have read. Good luck!

In my opinion, you can purchase the Canon XF G10 or the XF G20 and get probably better low light performance than what you have on the 5D Mark III. I have both the 5D Mark III and the older XF G10 and I don't have any issues. If the low light shooting wasn't an issue, I would suggest the Canon XLH1. That cam is still a beast and will be for some time. If you go with the Sony (I like the Sony) the colors will be more of a problem to match than the Canon products based on what I have read. Good luck!

Thanks Maurice, the image looks really good with those cameras but I do need an XLR input for my Rode NTG3 mic for interviews, 1/8 inch jack probably wouldn't cut it. As far as the XL H1, I think all the guts to my XH A1s are the same as the XLH1 if I'm not mistaking. Plus it is discontinued. Thanks though.

I was just looking at the Sony HXR-NX70, youtube low light tests look pretty good. Thoughs?

Wow, the EX1 looks like exactly what I need, must buy new though, it's a shame they discontinued it. Thanks Colin.

The Sony PMW-200 replaced the EX1:

Sony PMW-200 XDCAM HD422 Camcorder PMW-200 B&H Photo Video

The closest I can come up with is the Sony NEX-VG900 at close to $3,200. Next in line I'd name the Canon C100, but that sells for a bit more, around $6,500

Both should have great low-light performance, with the VG900 having a fullframe sensor like the 5D, and the C100 a close to APS-C sensorsize like the 7D (but with fysically bigger pixels, ergo more light-sensitive) ... but the live auto focus might be a bit tricky here, sorry.

Bad choice IMO. In order to get autofocus, you are forced into using E-mount lenses AND APS-C crop mode. Then, it's contrast detect autofocus (slow and will hunt).

Thanks Maurice, the image looks really good with those cameras but I do need an XLR input for my Rode NTG3 mic for interviews, 1/8 inch jack probably wouldn't cut it. As far as the XL H1, I think all the guts to my XH A1s are the same as the XLH1 if I'm not mistaking. Plus it is discontinued. Thanks though.

I was just looking at the Sony HXR-NX70, youtube low light tests look pretty good. Thoughs?

Don't be fooled. The XLH1 and the XHA1s are NOT the same camera. I had both the XHA1 and the XHA1s and the XLH1, XLH1a, XLH1s cameras are far superior; even more so if you add Canon 6x Wide HD Zoom lens. These cameras are still available new but will cost you more than you'll want to pay considering the newer cameras on the market. You might also try the XF100 or the XF300. Regarding the HF series, I believe that you can purchase a converter for the XLR or upgrade to the Canon XA10 which is a similar camera that offers the XLR jack that you seek.

In the end, if you have the resources to rent all of the cameras mentioned throughout your post, it would probably help you to make the best decision based on your personal needs.

Good Luck

Danny I guess it might depend how low the lighting is and how you are filming, let me try and explain. Also bear in mind this is just my opinion and is not a scientific evaluation in any way shape or form.

I own the XF300, XF100 and 1Dx DSLR. The 1Dx is the best in very low light by MILES in my opinion. I have tested all the cameras listed in my kitchen at night but with the normal lighting you would expect in a kitchen, in other words not sunlight but certainly not extreme low light. In every test the 1Dx blew the others away for noise. The XF300 is ok(ish) if you keep the gain below about 6db but with the lighting I had 6db ended up being pretty under exposed so not really that usable. The XF100 is worse than the XF300 but not by miles really. Certainly not as much of a difference as there is between the 1Dx and XF300.

When I tested it shooting a wide shot of the whole room the noise was there but you could live with it. It's when you zoom right in and get a shallower depth of field that the noise on the XF cameras really shows. It's the out of focus bits that become very noticeable noisy.

Based on this I would advise renting,borrowing or just testing in a shop if you think either of the XF cameras might be the one for you. I'm not saying they are rubbish in low light but for ME and MY needs they are too noisy really. I am looking to buy a C300 because it's a bit better than the 1Dx in low light but way more usable than the 1Dx (things like peaking, audio inputs etc etc).

Hope that's useful for you and I say once again this is just my own judgement and opinion based purely on my own uses and needs.

Andy,

I've been thinking about getting the 1DX for both photography and videography. With that being said, I do have the 5D Mark III. Is there a significance difference on the video side moving up to the 1Dx or should I go for the C100? The C300, for now, is out of my budget, as I am not that big and yet.

Danny I guess it might depend how low the lighting is and how you are filming, let me try and explain. Also bear in mind this is just my opinion and is not a scientific evaluation in any way shape or form.

I own the XF300, XF100 and 1Dx DSLR. The 1Dx is the best in very low light by MILES in my opinion. I have tested all the cameras listed in my kitchen at night but with the normal lighting you would expect in a kitchen, in other words not sunlight but certainly not extreme low light. In every test the 1Dx blew the others away for noise. The XF300 is ok(ish) if you keep the gain below about 6db but with the lighting I had 6db ended up being pretty under exposed so not really that usable. The XF100 is worse than the XF300 but not by miles really. Certainly not as much of a difference as there is between the 1Dx and XF300.

When I tested it shooting a wide shot of the whole room the noise was there but you could live with it. It's when you zoom right in and get a shallower depth of field that the noise on the XF cameras really shows. It's the out of focus bits that become very noticeable noisy.

Based on this I would advise renting,borrowing or just testing in a shop if you think either of the XF cameras might be the one for you. I'm not saying they are rubbish in low light but for ME and MY needs they are too noisy really. I am looking to buy a C300 because it's a bit better than the 1Dx in low light but way more usable than the 1Dx (things like peaking, audio inputs etc etc).

Hope that's useful for you and I say once again this is just my own judgement and opinion based purely on my own uses and needs.


Thanks for the great info Andy, I guess I probably left out some important details. 1, the gym I shoot in (Jacksons MMA) is very dark, dark grey walls and black ceiling. I Have decent dayflo lights but not nearly enought to light the whole gym up. 2, Since it's MMA Action, I would love to speed my shutter up to at least 1/100 to prevent motion blur, can't do that with my XH A1s with gain set to low, have to shoot at 1/30th becasue of the low light. I never use medium or high gain because of all the noise and grain of course, even with all my custom presets optimized. 3, MUST HAVE LIVE AUTO FOCUS. 4, I am very good at color correcting mediocre footage, the problem is that some of the orginizations I shoot for want the raw un CC'd footage, ugh, so hard to send when it's not perfect.

So what I need is most likely not in my budget unfortunately, guess I'll just have to do more spec work and earn enough money to be able to afford what I really need.

Thanks again!

Andy,

I've been thinking about getting the 1DX for both photography and videography. With that being said, I do have the 5D Mark III. Is there a significance difference on the video side moving up to the 1Dx or should I go for the C100? The C300, for now, is out of my budget, as I am not that big and yet.
Maurice I've not used a 5DmkIII so I can't really say what the difference is. From what I have read most people say there is a difference but not nearly as much as the price difference would suggest. I have the 1Dx rather than the 5DmkIII as I need an SLR for sports photography and something that will stand up to the rigours of day to day shooting in harsh environments.

If video was the main objective I would certainly be looking at the C100/300 because I find shooting video with a DSLR doable but not ideal. Audio needs to be recorded separately, no peaking, zebra, the C300 is much much better to hold in the hand if you are not using a tripod. I guess it really depends what you plan on doing with it. I'd say if you want stills as well as video go for a 5DmkIII and spend the extra on some glass rather than going for a 1Dx but if you do video mainly I'd go for a C100. As always though I'd recommend at least going to a shop and having a play with each of them.

It seems to me that we need different tools for particular applications from a video gathering viewpoint nowadays. I use an XF300, Canon 1DMK4, and Canon G1X compact, and I'd hate to be without any one of them. The XF300 gets by far the most use, but the 1DMK4 has much better low light capabilities and can do reasonable DoF, and the G1X is small and light and convenient. I often keep the G1X on my shoulder, while using the XF300 on a tripod, so I can grab b-roll on the fly.

Thanks for the great info Andy, I guess I probably left out some important details. 1, the gym I shoot in (Jacksons MMA) is very dark, dark grey walls and black ceiling. I Have decent dayflo lights but not nearly enought to light the whole gym up. 2, Since it's MMA Action, I would love to speed my shutter up to at least 1/100 to prevent motion blur, can't do that with my XH A1s with gain set to low, have to shoot at 1/30th becasue of the low light. I never use medium or high gain because of all the noise and grain of course, even with all my custom presets optimized. 3, MUST HAVE LIVE AUTO FOCUS. 4, I am very good at color correcting mediocre footage, the problem is that some of the orginizations I shoot for want the raw un CC'd footage, ugh, so hard to send when it's not perfect.

So what I need is most likely not in my budget unfortunately, guess I'll just have to do more spec work and earn enough money to be able to afford what I really need.

Thanks again!
Yeah you have a tricky choice there. My idea camera would be an XF300 with the low light ability of the C300. I film a lot in airplanes on the flight deck where it is very low light usually. Live AF is useful but I can sacrifice it for better low light performance hence wanting a C300. I will be keeping my XF300 for anything that absolutely requires live AF. I can certainly understand why it's essential for your use.

I have the 5D Mark II and Sony VG20. VG20 with Kit lens has very good autofocus comparable with my FX1. Its an APC size sensor. Very good low light- in my opinion a much nicer grain at higher ISO that even the 5D. . Only bitch I have ever had on the camera is lack of Picture Style settings. It does send clean HDMI out for capture to my Black Magic Shuttle. Some comparisons below.

Low Light Test of VG 20 on Vimeo

Low Light Noise Testing Comparison with the Sony VG20 and Canon 5D on Vimeo

ChartTest for Sony VG20 on Vimeo

Canon 5D chart Tests on Vimeo

[QUOTE=Chris Barcellos;1780813]I have the 5D Mark II and Sony VG20. VG20 with Kit lens has very good autofocus comparable with my FX1. Its an APC size sensor. Very good low light- in my opinion a much nicer grain at higher ISO that even the 5D. . Only bitch I have ever had on the camera is lack of Picture Style settings. It does send clean HDMI out for capture to my Black Magic Shuttle. Some comparisons below.

Thanks Chris, the VG20 sure looks impressive in low light, but as I said before, Live Auto Focus is a must. Looks like the VG20 is all manual, is that correct?

Boy, your low light and live focus requirements are a pretty tough nut to crack. The xf305 has great live focus, but it is marginal in really low light, so I can't vouch that it would nail your gym needs. However, before you give up, take a look at this video, shot by a guy in Italy with the 305. He certainly got better low light performance out of the 305 than I have done, but to be clear, I think the 305 has excellent overall performance. I also own a 5Dmkiii, and they are two different tools. 5D for shallow DOF, 305 for wide angle run and gun, along with shallow DOF when I can move back from the talent a ways, and tele in. They both are fabulous tools, and it's very hard for me to choose which one to take on any given day. I usually throw both in the van and decide later based on the light (G)

In your shoes I would think *very* hard about the C100. It's sort of a grown up 5D. (no knock intended!). The newer Sony might also work well for you, as described above. But the EX1 did not seem to have much more in low light than the 305 (it had some, but not like working with a full frame HDSLR).

Don't know that I would recommend the Canon XLH1 unless you prefer tape, or could find this used somewhere. For the price, tape is so hard to justify these days. I personally would never choose to be shooting to tape if I could afford a similar CF card camera.

Shot with an XF305...
The Artisan's Touch - La Mano dell'Artigiano Webseries Trailer on Vimeo

[QUOTE=Al Bergstein;1780869]Boy, your low light and live focus requirements are a pretty tough nut to crack. The xf305 has great live focus, but it is marginal in really low light, so I can't vouch that it would nail your gym needs. However, before you give up, take a look at this video, shot by a guy in Italy with the 305. He certainly got better low light performance out of the 305 than I have done, but to be clear, I think the 305 has excellent overall performance. I also own a 5Dmkiii, and they are two different tools. 5D for shallow DOF, 305 for wide angle run and gun, along with shallow DOF when I can move back from the talent a ways, and tele in. They both are fabulous tools, and it's very hard for me to choose which one to take on any given day. I usually throw both in the van and decide later based on the light (G)

In your shoes I would think *very* hard about the C100. It's sort of a grown up 5D. (no knock intended!). The newer Sony might also work well for you, as described above. But the EX1 did not seem to have much more in low light than the 305 (it had some, but not like working with a full frame HDSLR).

Don't know that I would recommend the Canon XLH1 unless you prefer tape, or could find this used somewhere. For the price, tape is so hard to justify these days. I personally would never choose to be shooting to tape if I could afford a similar CF card camera.

Shot with an XF305...

Thanks much Al, wow that video with the 305 is pretty impressive, would probably do the trick but I doubt I would be able to get a shutter of 1/100 to prevent motion blur. My 5D MKII would work great in the low light condithions but like the C100 it does not have live auto focus either. I'm afraid that the dream cam that I would need is about $3000 out of my budget. Just gonna have to earn more money I guess.

Thanks again!

Danny,

I don't know what the expectations of your clients are nor do I know how you're compensated for your work but it sounds like you need to explain to your clients that just as without light they cannot see, neither can your cameras. If they want better footage, they might be willing to mount lighting at the top of the cage. I shoot basketball games and martial arts competitions in gymnasiums from time to time and the light is not great but I can make it work. I would imagine with all of the focus being on a small cage, there must be a signifiant light source. Now with that being said, I have never been to an MMA event. Do you have some footage to demonstrate what kind of light you are working with? I am very curious.

Danny,

I don't know what the expectations of your clients are nor do I know how you're compensated for your work but it sounds like you need to explain to your clients that just as without light they cannot see, neither can your cameras. If they want better footage, they might be willing to mount lighting at the top of the cage. I shoot basketball games and martial arts competitions in gymnasiums from time to time and the light is not great but I can make it work. I would imagine with all of the focus being on a small cage, there must be a signifiant light source. Now with that being said, I have never been to an MMA event. Do you have some footage to demonstrate what kind of light you are working with? I am very curious.

Sure Maurice, below is some footage of my friend UFC fighter Cub Swanson shot a few weeks ago. This footage is decent in the fact that I could easily color correct a lot of it's flaws, however if you tried to grab a still or go to slo-mo you would get tons of motion blur, just look at the thumbnail. This was shot at low gain (-3db) anything higher creates way too much grain and noise for broadcast TV. My goal would be to shoot at at least 1/100th SS, but theres no way I can do that with this cam with the available lighting. This shot also demonstrate why it is essential that I have Live Auto Focus;)

In most cases I cannot bring a bunch of lighting rigs for these types of shots because theres usually 30 other fighters training all at the same time they get knocked down and in the way,

Thanks

MMA Training - Jacksons MMA on Vimeo

[QUOTE=Chris Barcellos;1780813]

Thanks Chris, the VG20 sure looks impressive in low light, but as I said before, Live Auto Focus is a must. Looks like the VG20 is all manual, is that correct?

No, not correct. With Sony lenses, including kit 18 to 200, auto focus is on board. Not sure, but you may even be able to use autofocus feature on some Canon glass, given right adapter.

I don't know if the others would agree with me but I'd like to offer a few comments.

First, I can't tell if lighting is an issue. More specifically, if the gym is dark, why not shoot it as it is. You will still get good sharp footage. The only drawback would be that it's not as well lit as if the gym were actually well lit.

Second, if you don't have to shoot 60 fps, why not shoot 24 fps. You will get a lot more light into the camera. This will allow you to use less gain or the same and get a brighter image.

Third, good workout. Keep it going!

If my understanding of shooting is correct, when shooting 60fps, you'll want to shoot at a minimum of 1/120 and if your shooting 24fps, you'll want to shoot at a minimum of 1/48 both of which should minimize or eliminate motion blur.

I don't know if the others would agree with me but I'd like to offer a few comments.

First, I can't tell if lighting is an issue. More specifically, if the gym is dark, why not shoot it as it is. You will still get good sharp footage. The only drawback would be that it's not as well lit as if the gym were actually well lit.

Second, if you don't have to shoot 60 fps, why not shoot 24 fps. You will get a lot more light into the camera. This will allow you to use less gain or the same and get a brighter image.

Third, good workout. Keep it going!

If my understanding of shooting is correct, when shooting 60fps, you'll want to shoot at a minimum of 1/120 and if your shooting 24fps, you'll want to shoot at a minimum of 1/48 both of which should minimize or eliminate motion blur.

Hey Maurice, the customers I shoot for (MMA speaking) request 60fps, I hate it, I shoot all my own stuff at 30p. They like it cause they use a lot of Slo-mo. But having said that, even shooting at 30p or 24p is not much better looking than the video I posted. I don't have 1/48 option on my XH A1s, I also dont have a 60P option, only 60i which is crap IMO.

If you've ever seen a UFC Countdown show, they bring their own PRO crews in, they use $90,000 cameras with extremely high shutter speeds that have no problem with the available lighting.

Bottom line, there's just no way I can meet my own personal standards with my current XH A1s. If my 5D MKII only had live auto focus I'd be fine. Haha

I just need to save more money brother. Thanks

[quote=Danny Winn;1780865]

No, not correct. With Sony lenses, including kit 18 to 200, auto focus is on board. Not sure, but you may even be able to use autofocus feature on some Canon glass, given right adapter.

Chris, are you talking about full live auto focus like a camcorder or one button push AF like the 5D has?

It is live just like the Sony FX1. Continuous autofocus.

This video, though probably graded a bit on dark side by me, was shot entirely with autofocus.

Branding Clips on Vimeo

As I recall, this one was shot with mostly autofocus ( Nite probably a fixed Nikon lens, no auto focuss)

It Happened In Hawaii on Vimeo

After using my Sony VG30 for the last couple of weeks, the ability to shoot on full auto focus with the beautiful 18-200 mm in manual or servo mode on the fly leaves the old DSLR's for dead.

I took it up in a Jetranger (Helicopter) over the weekend and the results hand held came out pretty good shooting in 50p on auto-focus. Add some more stabilization in post and you can get some great useful footage. Quality of that 28mbps AVCHD is wonderful but of course not as good as a true HD compression rates.

For low light its about the same as my Canon 60D with the Tokina 11-16mm on it.

Chris and Paul - sadly, Danny wants an XLR input for his Rode NTG-3 and the VG20 & VG30 have 3.5mm mic inputs (although there's a way around that with a $17 line matching adapter :)).

Danny - the big brother to the VG20/30, the Sony FS100, can almost see in the dark, has XLR inputs, full 1080/60 progressive to get rid of interlacing, and solid autofocus with E mount system lenses. It might be what you need.

Philip Bloom shot this in the gym with a Sony NEX-FS100, a Rode NTG-3 and manual Zeiss lenses:

Portrait of a boxer on Vimeo

You can get it new for $4799 with the 18-200 lens (http://www.adorama.com/SONEXFS100UK.html?kbid=66297) and $4199 body only (http://www.adorama.com/SONEXFS100U.html?kbid=66297).

Or you can pick one up used on eBay for as little as $3535 (http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5575034783&toolid=10001&campid=5337235943&customid=&icep_item=160982069187&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg).

To save money, I would buy the used body, plus a couple of inexpensive autofocusing f2.8 Sigma lenses, the $139 19mm and the $149 30mm.

Here is what the FS100 can do in candlelight with the little Sigma 19mm f2.8 on it:

Sony NEX-FS100 & Sigma 19mm f 2:8 on Vimeo

Sadly, the FS100 is not compatible with Sony's new power zoom lenses.

You would have to step up to the NEX-FS700 for that - but it costs $7999(!) body only (http://www.adorama.com/SONEXFS700U.html?kbid=66297).

Hope this is helpful and good luck with your decision!

Bill
Hybrid Camera Revolution (http://hybridcamerarevolution.blogspot.com)

Both JuicedLink and Beachtek have adapters that will provide phantom power for the NTG3 and other powered mics. . Over the years, though purists won't admit it, these adapters have provided great service and added value to lower end camera systems.

If you are going run a mic on camera, though, the on camera mic is a 5.1 surround mic that actually is not bad--- a lot better than I expected.

The FS100 is compatible with the new power zoom lens. The lens has a small zoom control on its body. You just need to use that.

Glen - pretty sure it's the FS700 with the zoom rocker switch on the handle, not the FS100.

Danny - one camera I forgot to mention was the $3500 Sony NEX-EA50. It has autofocus, a power zoom, great low light capability, a shoulder mount and XLR jacks.

Here is what it can do indoors (couldn't find any gym video, so here's a church :)):

Sint Trudo Kerk Peer / Sint Trudo Church on Vimeo

Cheers,

Bill

Wow Bill, that boxer video is very impressive! I will definitly look into that set up. You can see the fast shutter they used on it and it seems awesome in the low light. Thanks so much for the lead!

Both JuicedLink and Beachtek have adapters that will provide phantom power for the NTG3 and other powered mics. . Over the years, though purists won't admit it, these adapters have provided great service and added value to lower end camera systems.

If you are going run a mic on camera, though, the on camera mic is a 5.1 surround mic that actually is not bad--- a lot better than I expected.

Yeah Chris, I use the juced link with my 5d MKII and it works great, it's just that I really wouldn't want to have to attach it to a camcorder while running arount the gym tryin to follow fighters. But, if it's my only alternative I would do it. Thanks again.

Have you looked at the new JVC GY-HM600? Exclusive UK Review of the JVC GY-HM600 on Vimeo

I am also looking, and would LOVE the Canon C100 as well, but the JVC looks like best bang for the buck with great lowlight, 23x zoom and really wide angle. Not to mention lots of recording format choices including simultaneous recording.

Glen - pretty sure it's the FS700 with the zoom rocker switch on the handle, not the FS100.

Bill

Youre right the FS100 hand grip doesn't have the zoom rocker. But his point was that the SELP18200 lens body itself has a small zoom control lever.

Another vote for the FS100 for the OP--I wouldn't even think twice about it. With the native f/1.8 e-mount native lenses you get superb lowlight and full-time autofocus and great maneuverability. The 35mm and 50mm lenses are even stabilized.

Glen - pretty sure it's the FS700 with the zoom rocker switch on the handle, not the FS100.

Danny - one camera I forgot to mention was the $3500 Sony NEX-EA50 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009GKRQF2?tag=battleforthew-20). It has autofocus, a power zoom, great low light capability, a shoulder mount and XLR jacks.

Here is what it can do indoors (couldn't find any gym video, so here's a church :)):

Sint Trudo Kerk Peer / Sint Trudo Church on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/60037007)

Cheers,

Bill

Hey Bill, how does the sensor in the EA50 compare to the 5D? Some of the reviews on B&H gave this cam bad marks for low light. However the videos samples look great in low light. Strange.

Hey Bill, how does the sensor in the EA50 compare to the 5D? Some of the reviews on B&H gave this cam bad marks for low light. However the videos samples look great in low light. Strange.

The lens your using has a lot to do with it as well.

Buy some quality glass and your all set.

I would highly recommend the Sony EA50.

Awesome! Thanks James.

James, do you happen to know if the EA50 would accept my Canon 24/70 lens? That's the lens I use on my 5D.

Danny, I'm jumping in late in the conversation. Are you looking to replace the XHA1s or the 5D? I mean, which equipment do you plan to keep? If you sell the two XHA1s's and the 5D, you should be able to cover the Canon C100 with a bit more out of pocket. You already have glass for it (from your 5D). If I recall your original post, the only shortfall with your 5D is the audio?

I'm in the same boat with my two XHA1s! But I need to be able to do run-and-gun as well as cinematic work, and take pictures. C100 is a bit out of my budget because I have no glass whatsoever, so I'm looking hard at a 5D mk III and a C100 later when I hit the Megabucks.

Most of this thread is moot point though, this close to NAB. Expect some surprises - I would hold off a month

What I've read about the FS100 from Sony is that although it is a great picture, it's rather awkward and frustrating to use. If you decide on that, please report your findings

Wow, I keep hearing people downplay the audio on the 5D Mark III. In the shoots that I've done with this particular camera, I have absolutely no concerns. Although my experience is limited to the following:

Canon HV30
Canon XHA1
Canon XHA1s
Canon XLH1
Canon 5D Mark III
Canon HF G10
Canon HFS 30
Canon 7d
Canon 5D Mark II

I think that the 5D Mark III is the best by far for audio. With any audio that I have captured, I always import it into my Adobe suite and try to make it sound better. Just curious what camera, if any has such GREAT audio out that the 5D Mark III continues to get slammed. The camera overall is a GREAT camera. I actually don't think that the solution here is the Canon C100 (although I want one and will be getting one). Out of the box, the C100 will limit Danny's use as it only shoots at a frame rate of 24p. If my understanding is correct, Danny will pay additional money for the 60i, PF30, PF24, 24p, 50i, and 25p frame rates. Regarding the glass, I agree, good glass will make footage look significantly better with most any camera.

Wow, I keep hearing people downplay the audio on the 5D Mark III. In the shoots that I've done with this particular camera, I have absolutely no concerns. Although my experience is limited to the following:

Canon HV30
Canon XHA1
Canon XHA1s
Canon XLH1
Canon 5D Mark III
Canon HF G10
Canon HFS 30
Canon 7d
Canon 5D Mark II

I think that the 5D Mark III is the best by far for audio. With any audio that I have captured, I always import it into my Adobe suite and try to make it sound better. Just curious what camera, if any has such GREAT audio out that the 5D Mark III continues to get slammed. The camera overall is a GREAT camera. I actually don't think that the solution here is the Canon C100 (although I want one and will be getting one). Out of the box, the C100 will limit Danny's use as it only shoots at a frame rate of 24p. If my understanding is correct, Danny will pay additional money for the 60i, PF30, PF24, 24p, 50i, and 25p frame rates. Regarding the glass, I agree, good glass will make footage look significantly better with most any camera.

Original post:

I love my 5D MKII but I hate my Canon XH A1s, it's horrible in low light and very grainy. I shoot a lot of MMA training for UFC and other outlets and I need a good quality camcorder with the image quality of the 5D but Live auto focus. Nearly impossible to film MMA training with manual focus. Anybody have any HD Camcorder suggestions in the same price range as the 5D???

Thanks much.

Maurice, if you were referring to me, I didn't downplay anything. Nobody said anything about the sound on the 5D Mk III. I am considering buying a Mk III for myself. I was just trying to clarify for myself what the original problem was. We know he's not happy with the picture on the XHA1s. But he also said he loved his 5D mk II (not mk III - big difference) I got the impression he would use the Mk II for video, except for the sound. If that is true, why not get a Mk III, which I think has improved sound capability. Danny also insisted he needed XLR inputs, though, which the C100 has.

What are your thoughts on the 5D mk III for run-and-gun video? I would love one.

Apologies Alex. I've got to get some glasses. Like me I'm sure that you hear that beating that the 5D Mark III takes, some for good reason but in response to your question, if you have the correct setup and really get to know and understand the camera, I think it works fine. I like some of the others actually do prefer a video camera over the HDSLR for run and gun and then simply get some cinematic shoots with the Mark III. I would however like to try shooting an entire wedding with 4 Mark III's. I'm just waiting for money to start growing on trees, bushes, plants and anything else that I can have easy access to. :-)

The only poeple I see knocking the 5D are Nikon owners. Lol!

I'd really like a C100 after the reviews I saw and read, but a little too pricy for me at this point. I don't have a still camera, and I'm being asked quite often to do shoots. I can sell my two XHA1s's hopefully. I'm inclined to get the JVC GY HG600 (affordable and all the right features) I just don't know how it would do with a Canon DSLR on a 2-cam shoot. At least the 5D mk III would hold me off until I can get a C100 or something similar. Once I start buying lenses I'd like to swap them back and forth between cameras. That's why I would't go Sony or Nikon once I get anything Canon.

I probably wouldn't use a 5D for run and gun, unless I absolutely need a great picture or in low light. But you are happy with it as a video cam? I usually record audio separate because I do a lot of showroom bands and concerts, etc.

I can imagine video with a 5D being VERY awkward without a rig or tripod. How's the stability?

Danny, I'm jumping in late in the conversation. Are you looking to replace the XHA1s or the 5D? I mean, which equipment do you plan to keep? If you sell the two XHA1s's and the 5D, you should be able to cover the Canon C100 with a bit more out of pocket. You already have glass for it (from your 5D). If I recall your original post, the only shortfall with your 5D is the audio?

I'm in the same boat with my two XHA1s! But I need to be able to do run-and-gun as well as cinematic work, and take pictures. C100 is a bit out of my budget because I have no glass whatsoever, so I'm looking hard at a 5D mk III and a C100 later when I hit the Megabucks.

Most of this thread is moot point though, this close to NAB. Expect some surprises - I would hold off a month

What I've read about the FS100 from Sony is that although it is a great picture, it's rather awkward and frustrating to use. If you decide on that, please report your findings

Hey Alex, I want to get rid of my XH A1s but keep my 5D. I love my 5D, but because it does not have live auto focus I can't use it to follow live action MMA training. I use a juiced link box for my audio into my 5D and it works great, but the Live focus is a must. The biggest problem with the A1s is the low light limitations preventing me from using fast shutters without adding grain.

Thanks

Awesome! Thanks James.

James, do you happen to know if the EA50 would accept my Canon 24/70 lens? That's the lens I use on my 5D.

The fact you own Canon glass already is a big bonus.

You might want to invest in the Metabones adapter then. It will give you an additional F stop and more without loss in quality at all ...

Head over to the EA50 subforum if you want more information.

Out of the box, the C100 will limit Danny's use as it only shoots at a frame rate of 24p. If my understanding is correct, Danny will pay additional money for the 60i, PF30, PF24, 24p, 50i, and 25p frame rates.Not so. It was traditional for Canon camcorders to come in NTSC & PAL models with a $500 charge to upgrade the firmware to a world model. The Canon DSLRs have all frame rates as standard as do the C100 & C300 Canon U.S.A. : Professional Imaging Products : EOS C100 (http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#Specifications)

I think Maurice meant to say 720p (instead of 24p). Forgive me if I'm wrong Maurice. I think the C100 records 60fps progressive at 1280x720 but not at 1920x1080, which is inexcusable for a $7,000 camera.

Canon XF300/305 camcorder does 60p at 1920x1080 http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/hd_video_cameras?pageKeyCode=65&category=0901e024800611ee&compare=0901e02480127a94&compare=0901e0248012fbaf&compare=0901e02480041726

I think Maurice meant to say 720p (instead of 24p). Forgive me if I'm wrong Maurice. I think the C100 records 60fps progressive at 1280x720 but not at 1920x1080, which is inexcusable for a $7,000 camera.

Canon XF300/305 camcorder does 60p at 1920x1080 Canon U.S.A. : Professional Imaging Products : High Definition Camcorders (http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/hd_video_cameras?pageKeyCode=65&category=0901e024800611ee&compare=0901e02480127a94&compare=0901e0248012fbaf&compare=0901e02480041726)Having owned an XF305 I can assure you that it does not record at 50p/60p at 1920x1080 but only at 1280x720 just like the C100 & C300.