How does the 5D Mk3 compare to the C100?

[Kevin O'Connor]

I’m assuming this question has been asked already. If so please let me know where I can read the results and I'll go there.

If not, I’m researching for my next video camera purchase. I have a 5D Mk2, which I have been using for my indie film projects but would like to move up. I also like still photography, which my 5D Mk2 is just fine for. I don't really want two DSLR bodies but I’m not opposed to it. Although I know some of the video specific features of the C100 are very handy.

One way or the other I would probable still use both (5D and C100) or (Mk2 and a Mk3) on my indie projects. But do I go for the Mk3 or the C100?

Thanks, KO.

[Jon Roemer]

This is not quite what you are asking for but it's similar. Some samples of C300, 5DM3, and 1DM4.

Late 2012 Video Smackdown | Learning to See

If you right click the still frames and open in a new window you can see and compare them at 100%.

The 5DM3 did have sharpening added in post in FCP X.

Paul Joy has some C100/C300 comparisons on his blog: The C100 is doing well, but it could be better | Paul Joy – Freelance Filmmaker .

[Kevin O'Connor]

Thank you for the links.

Maybe I should start the questions with; Is the C100 an accurate comparison to the 5D Mk3 for video?

[Matt Davis]

Is the C100 an accurate comparison to the 5D Mk3 for video?

Oh boy, this could be a hot topic. Here goes...

"Not quite."

The 5d Mk3 is a 'special case' because of its Full Frame sensor. As such, you're getting more of the 'limited depth of field' effect simply because you need a longer focal length to make a bigger image circle that will cover the Full Frame sensor.

Bottom line is that the 5D Mk 3 (and other FF cameras) will have 'more' shallow depth of field than an S35 sensor camera like the C100.

Secondly, and it is at this point we get into qualitative rather than quantitative differences, the Canon 'DSLR' look is marked (amongst other things) two tell-tale things: a rapid fall-off of blacks, and some sort of skin smoothing that makes everyone look nice. Beyond mere chart based detail measurements, people look nice on the 5D Mk3 (and 2), and skin in general seems to be flattering rather than accurate.

The Canon C100 makes a more 'traditional' image. Good, accurate skin tones, pleasing highlight and shadow handling, neutral and flexible.

The lens/look/skin/focus thing is enough of a difference to make a big still pocket of air between the 5D MkX and the C100, you choose the image and the ergonomics - and almost the lifestyle - between the two. Your choice is based around how you want to shoot, what you want to shoot, how you want to shoot it, and what the person who will be paying you wants.

[Mark Dobson]

You are right to point out the esthetic differences Matt, but surely the egonomics will also play a big part in any decision.

Audio is a core component of video recording, and whilst things have got a lot easier over the last couple of years, recording audio with a DSLR is separate function to recording the picture or at least it require active management.

That's where, within this comparison, a C100, with its built in audio capability, would make a better bet if there is a lot of filming to be done.

And the Canon 3840x2160 Super-35 CMOS Sensor in the Cinema EOS range produces fabulous images
throughout the range. Producing images with a narrow depth of field, if that's your cup of tea, is a doddle with both cameras.

[Kevin O'Connor]

Interesting, I was not sure of the difference between the FF sensor in the 5D (physical size) and the S35 in the C100. Although I knew the Super 35mm sensor is very large for a single sensor video camera, I did not know it was still smaller then the Full Frame sensor in the 5D. Would this account for the difference in the effective pixel rating between a FF sensor and a S35 sensor?

I’m getting a little off topic hear but are all S35 sensors only used in dedicated video cameras and are all S35 sensors the same size?
When the term Full Frame (FF) sensor is used is that only in reference to DSLR applications? Then are all FF sensors about the same size?

Back to my original purpose, what to buy to compliment my 5D Mk2? The max DoF the 5D offers is great for still photography but I rairly shoot video of moving subjects f/2.0 or less, can't keep the subject in focus.

Sounds like if I want my second camera to produce an image as close to my current Mk2 I should get a Mk3 then. I have learned to live with the non-video camera issues of using a DSLR to shoot video.

Thanks

[Matt Davis]

I think we're closer to nailing your doubts and thoughts.

Mark is spot on with the arguments for ergonomics and audio - but I would add the following:

If you like the DSLR aesthetic - the pace, the gear, the lenses, the audio - if you're happy, and the image is what's right for you, don't feel swayed to abandon it. It's like Diesel vs Petrol. What works for you (and your clients if that's not you).

I really wanted to immerse myself in the DSLR thing, but got stung badly - and have been a 'Down with DSLRs' proponent ever since. Not to dissuade others from using DSLRs, just that it's absolutely NOT for me. Having said that, I've had a number of jobs where the client specifically requested it or the job entailed the use of DSLRs over other equipment (e.g. low profile - had a number of Olympics based assignments where it was all DSLR).

Audio? Funnily enough, I became dissatisfied with the audio from my EX1s because I started using the dual system with DSLRs. If you can put up with the workflow, I think I really boosted my audio quality using dual system sound. Hiding Zoom H1s, using them as quasi radio mics, passing an H4 around in an impromptu 8 person interview, all impossible with my previous way of working. So it's taught me well.

I think that the 5D Mk3 will compliment your existing camera well - making it the A-cam of course. If you wanted to *change* your game, selling your 5d or using it for stills, C100 is a very capable machine - we all love it and the audio's a dream. Ergonomically, it's the best of both worlds (which is why I forsook the DSLR thing, and the FS100/700, for the C100). In my little odd niche, it's superb as it can be handheld, it doesn't look imposing, and generates images that are better than my previous Gold Standard - the EX1 - and it will cut with the F3.

But the image is very different. You can make the C100 cut together with a 5D, sort of, but it's a compromise in grading. IMHO! :-)

Just to put the cat amongst the pigeons: I strongly feel that today's videographer doesn't own One Camera To Rule It All - one has a selection. Something like a 1/2" sensor PMW-200 or even a s/h EX1 might mop-up on the jobs your Canon DSLR hates. A little self-contained black sausage of joy like the PMW-200 will cope with anything you throw at it in terms of difficult or unpredictable shoots, you'll never be caught changing lenses or overheating, B-roll just gets sucked up, and meanwhile your DSLR is doing the sexy talking heads... Or have I just muddied the waters still further? ;-)

[Kevin O'Connor]

I like everything you said other then sucking down a dish of Black Pigeon Sausage, not sure I want to try that. ;-)

My original camera purchase plan was a fixed lens video camera like the PMW-200 or XF-300. I can still use the 5D for the close up head shots, take advantage of DoF then use the real video camera for everything else. For the projects I shoot this is a better solution and I always seem to have a production sound guy on set.

Thanks for the insight,
KPO

[Andy Wilkinson]

Some good advice and thoughts for you already on this thread Kevin!

I am certainly in the camp that one needs more than one camera (type) to cover the sort of work I do (EX3, C100, 7D and TM900 being my current camera crop). The 7D is mainly just for stills now - which it is very good at/some clients need additionally anyway!

I thought hard about buying a 5DMkIII to superceeed the 7D (and it sure is a big improvement over the 5DMkII) but the very fact that it lacked some of the critical tools that make video shooting easier (focus peaking, XLR audio, waveform monitor etc.) made me hold back for a while. When the C100 was announced, about 6 months after the 5DMkIII came out, it then became the obvious choice for me - I have lots of Canon glass - so I ordered mine immediately!!!

Anything unpredictable/fast moving I still get my nearly 5 year old (and still very capable) EX3 out for - but I'm using the C100 more and more for that too now as it produces such lovely images. For sure, I get shots with the C100 that I cannot get with the EX3 but the XDCAM EX is still more flexible for some work (e.g. timelapse, 50p etc.).

If your budget can stretch to the C100 over a 5DMkIII then I think it'll be something you won't regret doing. The ergonomics/built-in ND filters are worth it, let alone the image quality step in both resolution and dynamic range. If your budget won't, then don't worry, the 5DMkIII is still a fine and capable cam - it'll produce some wonderful images that with care/some post work can really pop - just like those from your 5DMkII can.

Also, don't be fooled by all the negativity after the 5DMkIIIs launch from people expecting far more from Canon than they chose to equip it with - and that probably includes me a bit too. Of course we now know why Canon's Marketing department held back on some of the features - as they were destined for the C100 with its higher price tag. But then again, many were disappointed that the C100 lacked some of the C300s killer features...and so it goes on...that's business.

I think that you'd find the C100 a significant and worthwhile step up from the 5DMkII - and the better III (although I stress I've never owned the II but have used one now and again). However, I think the 5DMkIII would be a better MATCH to your 5DMkII.

Bottom line, ANY modern video cam costing a few £1000 is capabable of stunning results when used creatively. They all have technical strengths and weaknesses and the 5DMkIII and C100 are currently right up there as good examples of their respective niches - just choose the one that best complements the work you do/meets your budget needs.

[Kevin O'Connor]

Thanks for the feedback Andy, I checked out your demo reel from your web site link, very nice imagery. I noticed the EX-3 in many scenes and possible the 7D but didn’t notice a C100. I’m assuming all the time laps or fast motion shots were done with the EX-3.

I also have the need to video ice skating competitions and music recitals, which I’ll use a smooth zoom push or pull during. This ENG type work really screams for a fixed lens camera like the XF-300, PMW-200. The EX-3 is outside my budget. I cannot pull a smooth zoom transition on my 5D, especially if it’s hand held. Although my indie movie work does not call for this action, I’ll dolly in for that affect if called for.

Yeah I’m torn again. I like the idea of getting dual use out of my Canon DSLR glass, sharing between my 5D Mk2 and a C100. It helps me justify the purchase better, which is why I have the 5D to start with. But dressing up my DSLR in its video camera costume and lugging all that to a music recital is not practical for me. Hmmm!

Thanks for the help,

[Andy Wilkinson]

Thanks for the comments Kevin - and well spotted! There are no C100 clips in my demo reel yet. Been too busy earning money with it to have time to update my reel - which is great/I'm not complaining!

:-)

[Jon Roemer]

Here's a direct comparison: 5DM3, C100, 60D

Kameravergleich Canon: C100-60D-5dMarkIII on Vimeo

On the Vimeo page you can download the original.