First generation C100 body (not the Mk. II) for $1800 from B&H. That's a pretty good deal.

Check it out at... Canon EOS C100 Cinema EOS Camera (Body Only) at B&H (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/889545-REG/Canon_EOS_C100_EF_Cinema.html/BI/2855/KBID/3801)

oh my God kill me now. Just bought one like 2 months ago for $2500.

Dude, I paid about $5000 for mine, then the Mark II dropped 18 days later. Needless to say, I was pretty angry about it.

You win. Still miffed.

I hope they do the same for the C300. I'd buy one in a New York minute.

I noticed this yesterday Black Friday deal only supposedly till the end of tonight... I ordered the C100 with Dual Pixel Readout upgrade, $2300 or so...

I think they're out of stock on the original C100. They still show the $1800 price as good through the 28th.

And, the C100 DPAF for $2300. For a little while...

Great prices on great cams that have helped redefine the under-$5k category. At least for those of us satisfied with FullHD.

I've always wanted a C series but it's been out of my price range. Back when I was researching the C100, I remember complaints the Lcd screen was almost unusable, the low bitrate, focus without the dual pixel and the lack of slow motion. I realize there was II version but its like double the price for those tweeks.

With all that in mind and the advancement of other cameras how does it compare with cameras with similar sensors even at $1,800?

Thing is, complainers gonna complain. They are very popular cams and I know quite a few owners. They had a bunch of other choices, chose the C100.

I've heard good things but I've never used it so it's hard to judge what drawbacks are deal breakers. As a freelancer you never know what the next job will demand. Some cameras are good but too niche. The c series seems tailored to controlled environments on a tripod like interviews etc. It's hard to make sweeping statements...

I've never owned one, myself, but have used them several times. That would be the original C100 (no DPAF).

My impression is of a down-market documentary / indie camera that punches above its weight with Canon's color science, quality build, and glass. Not so versatile at the modern tricks like 4K and high frame rates, but a solid camera that makes beautiful images. 60i/30pf/24p is certainly too limiting for some. No 60p, such a handy tool :-(

No servo zoom limits its use for pure videography. Compatible with the *wide* selection of Canon EF and EF-S glass, not to mention the Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Zeiss lenses. I think of it as a great learning camera for cinematography.

Canon's DPAF is really very good. They've made AF a useful tool, I don't say that lightly. The MK 1 (optional) DPAF isn't the latest version - the updated DPAF in the Mk 2 adds face detection. On the Mk 1 DPAF it's catch AF in the center and lock it to reframe, because continuous tracking is only for the center of the image.

I don't use the EVF much, but I think the biggest problem with it is the cup. There isn't enough to it to keep out light leaking around your eye. Accessories help...

To my thinking it is an outstanding value in FullHD. Above all, it shoots pretty imagery, with beautiful skin tones. We can't keep them on the shelf at my college - a good thing. With the pricing on the Mk 1 they're less costly than the 5Dmk4, with decent audio and image processing favoring video, so, a lot of Canon DSLR owners with glass find them an easy upgrade.

If it were me, I'd spring the $500 more (current promo $2300) for the DPAF upgrade Mk 1. If I had the money for such a cam, the Mk 2 seems a very thoughtful upgrade at $4000.

let me offer some insights:

the c series (more the 300 than the 100) are incredibly popular on reality shows, documentaries and shows like Vice (swear I read an interview where the DP said that's what he used--a C300). Lots of uncontrolled b-roll type shoots environments with these cams. The 300 (original) has better codecs and probably a better LCD, some other improvements, otherwise very similar to the 100. codec thing can be worked around by adding an external recorder to the C100.

if youre not feeling it there's no way for me to sell you on them but just know the C cams are well loved for corporate, doc, reality sectors. Anything you would use a dslr for you should have an easier time using a c-series cam for unless you need the 4k, codec or full frame look of a certain dslr/mirrorless cam.

A large part of my side work is theatrical performances.The only way I could justify getting it would be for a wide lock shot of the entire stage. But from my understanding there are no direct physical controls for gain and aperture and the manual doesn't recommend changing the gain while recording. It would be nice for the occasional artistic cinematic gig but the more I familiarize myself it doesn't lend itself to most of my eng/live work.

Agreeing with everything JB wrote...

Pete, you're shooting in a challenging location. Theatrical lighting designers will design for the eye, not the camera. Unless you get a lighting design for video in a tech run-through, you're usually at the mercy of many colors of light at different times. Ouch. You probably know all this much better than I do.

If you're serious about a camera upgrade I'd recommend you consider renting first.

On the C100 the control dial on the grip is typically used to control aperture. There's also a button for momentary auto-iris, though that may not be useful in scenes where much of the stage is dark. You do have a button for a Waveform Monitor overlay, a great exposure guide.

I don't have a cam in front of me, but if I recall the gain/iso does require use of the joystick? Or once Gain is selected with a handy push-button can you use the control dial? I'm thinking that if your work requires changing gain during a take you ignore the manufacturer's recc and give it a try. What is the basis for their recommendation? The real question, I'd think, is the acceptability of changing video noise levels during a take, which will affect your recording on any cam.

You can use third-party primes on Canon cameras to get an actual iris ring on the lens.

I've always wanted a C series but it's been out of my price range. Back when I was researching the C100, I remember complaints the Lcd screen was almost unusable, the low bitrate, focus without the dual pixel and the lack of slow motion. I realize there was II version but its like double the price for those tweeks.

With all that in mind and the advancement of other cameras how does it compare with cameras with similar sensors even at $1,800?

Around a year ago now I took the leap and sold off my ENG style camera and went with a Canon C100. I wouldn't say the the LCD screen is almost unusable. It isn't great, but it isn't the worst either. While the LCD screen is probably my least favorite thing about the camera, reading all the reviews before I purchased it had me expecting something much worse.

The low bit-rate really isn't an issue for me. I thought it would be, and have an Atomos Ninja for recording with it, as I expected the low bit rate recording to be pretty poor. However, the low bit rate h.264 files hold up well, very well. I am surprised at just how good the material from this camera looks and how far I can push it in speed grade, considering that it is low bit rate h.264. I have no idea how they accomplished it, but the small file sizes are super easy to work with and at the end of the day I am able to deliver great results, so I guess that is what counts, right?

Focus isn't really an issue for me- I use peaking, check the focus carefully, and that is all. Using any kind of autofocus is never something I have done as a videographer, but it all depends on your style. Lack of slow motion might be an issue for you, but it isn't something I really ever used before I got my C100, so not having it isn't something I really miss.

It is my understanding that the C100 uses the same sensor as the C300 and C500, though I could be wrong on this. However, even though it only records 1080p, it is the best looking, highest resolution 1080p I have ever seen from a non 4K camera.

Recently I was working on a project that was shot with both a C100 and Sony FS5 at 4K. I was not the shooter, so I don't know exactly what the settings on each camera was. However, the shoot seemed like it was done mostly with available light and both cameras were shooting in log. Even though the Sony was higher resolution, there was more visible noise do to the low light environment. When the project was all done, I really thought the C100 video looked better. Without the grain of the FS5, the C100 looked sharper when everything was delivered at 1080p. Now, this could of been due to the settings on the FS5, and things might of been totally different if there was proper lighting. However, in this particular circumstance, the C100 really held its own against a camera that was shooting at a much higher bit-rate in 4K.

A large part of my side work is theatrical performances.The only way I could justify getting it would be for a wide lock shot of the entire stage. But from my understanding there are no direct physical controls for gain and aperture and the manual doesn't recommend changing the gain while recording. It would be nice for the occasional artistic cinematic gig but the more I familiarize myself it doesn't lend itself to most of my eng/live work.

I do some theatrical performances/concerts as well, and I could not imagine using my C100 in such a scenario. For my live multi-cam stuff I use 3 Sony FX1 cameras and a video switcher. Having servo zooms controlled with a lanc controller is really necessary here, in my opinion.

It's a moot point because like Adam said its not the right camera for live events.

The manual specifically says not to change the gain while recording https://www.manualslib.com/manual/703143/Canon-Eos-C100.html?page=58

Normally my practice is to adjust the aperture for exposure because dof is so large with 1/3" sensors but in this case to keep the proper dof of the stage I would lock in the aperture and adjust the gain as needed. My eng camera has a toggle switch with 3 preset gains. It also can gradually transition so it's not noticeable while shooting.*

I have no desire for 4k either. I'd rather have the low light performance than the higher resolution.