|
|||||||||
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Sponsor: Westside AV
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA
Posts: 1,365
|
PP's on the C100
Just a few quick grades and the ungraded versions as well.
I know the grades are a bit much but it is just to see how much you can push the grade. These were shot with a 24-70 f2.8 L v1 (river shots) and a 100-400 f4-5.6 IS L (strawberry field). ISO was 400 Manual wp set to 6600. The one shot auto focus can be useful, but don't completely trust it. You can download the 1080 (P30) file, it has been compressed by FCPX to 22mb/s. Original was shot at 1080 30P 24mb/s. I really am happy with the picture quality, I will be doing more tests with NanoFlash and Ninja soon, as well as some studio shots.
__________________
Olof Ekbergh • olof@WestsideAV.com Westside A V Studios • http://www.WestsideAVstore.com/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Beverly, MA
Posts: 512
|
Re: PP's on the C100
Very beautiful.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 2,231
|
Re: PP's on the C100
Thanks for posting Olof. A lot of options with that footage. Although I have to admit, if you only showed the finished clips and said it was a 5DMKIII I would not have questioned it.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 70
|
Re: PP's on the C100
I use the 5DMK3 for video and like the image, but there is no way it can resolve the same amount of detail as the C100. To my eyes the difference is obvious.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Beverly, MA
Posts: 512
|
Re: PP's on the C100
I'd agree (from what I've seen).
Philip Bloom did show, in his 5DMKIII review how the detail could be brought out in post, but it still seems like the C100 has the edge. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 49
|
Re: PP's on the C100
For $3000 more I'd hope so
__________________
www.nickelsvision.com Canon C100, Canon 5D MK iii, Canon 5D MK ii (Magic Lantern), Panasonic GF1 (Hacked) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 2,231
|
Re: PP's on the C100
True. I did not say the detail levels were the same though. To me, the footage has a very Canon DSLR sort of look to it. Not a negative comment, just an observation.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 167
|
Re: PP's on the C100
I had a chance to do some (non-scientific) testing/shooting yesterday with a C100, a 5DIII and a Scarlet. The results were interesting…
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Beverly, MA
Posts: 512
|
Re: PP's on the C100
What's more, Peter, you're getting much more than just the improved image over the 5DMKIII -- you're getting (at least some) of the conveniences of a video camera, better sound inputs, ND filters, etc.
Not to mention slow-mo. Oh wait a minute! Doh! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| ||||||
|
|