c100 users enlighten me from the 60d

[Steve Bleasdale]

Ok guys shoot me down but I do not see any difference in footage from the c100 to the 60d or 5d iii for that matter,
I am ready to pull the trigger on the c100 and have spent all day looking at footage.
I want to justify paying £4k for a camera/camcorder that gives me a better look than a mere 60d. or even a xa-10/hfg25..
Some videos I have seen seem to have a soft edge look like a dreamy look?? what's that look?
Vimeo c100 forum there are quite a lot of examples and I dint see anything outstanding.
Even the best Joe Simon with his latest, the picture looks flat uninteresting...
Pretty much weddings I do I want the colours to pop an be really top dog like Ray romans examples...
Is it me? Enlighten me you guys!!!

[Pat Reddy]

The C-100 is one of the sharpest 1920 cameras you can get, and the files give you great flexibility for grading, you can make them pop as much or as little as you want. Two of my favorites:

Canon c100 Low Light Test on Vimeo

Canon c100 Tests on Vimeo

Is your monitor able to show the differences between files from the cameras you mentioned? Also the ND filters, push AF, AF on some Canon lenses, incredible image quality at high ISO, and other features make it more like a potent camcorder than the DSLRs. The camera itself is a basic kit for event work.

Pat

[Michael Bishop]

From videos I have watch the C-100 has look better. I thing they show more detail. Wish I had the money to buy one.

Comparison: Canon C100 to 5D Mark 3 - YouTube

[Wayne Avanson]

I think what you might be missing is a couple of things that make it better than a DSLR and how its more natural and 'grown up' look gives a more professional finish.

I have the 5D3 as well as the C100 (and I had a 5D2 and 7D before that) and although you can easily get that punchy look using those cameras, it's a little more tricky to get that nice natural look, that has lots of latitude, is detailed rather than sharp and brittle looking, and holds the highlights well.

As mentioned above you CAN get the punchy look in post with a C100 by just pushing your contrast etc. but it's a better way of achieving that look by getting a beautifully detailed image with lots of tones and than working from there, rather than getting that 'baked-in' look that you end up fighting when you're colour grading.

That's what I've found anyway, when I was doing the research before buying the C100. Now I've got one, I've used it on a few commercial jobs and wouldn't give it back if you held a gun to my head. The 5D3 only gets used for stills now.

Hope this opinion helps.


Wayne

[Bob Willis]

Same here. I do still use the 5D3 for timelapse, but that is also capturing stills to be processed into movies.

[Steve Bleasdale]

Thanks for your replies guys. I think the answer lies in whether the c100 is worth that extra £2000 than the 5diii, I do love the shallow depth of field the 5d iii gives you and I understand the c100 is easier to use , but you still have to go full manual I presume on the c100, still have to manually focus, still use the same lens, still need a view finder so it all lies down to the dynamic range and this is where you guys are saying it outshines the 5d iii. For weddings I need good colours good focus good picture quality, and both cameras gives me this. I understand great dynamic range for guys shooting corporates and TV but for weddings and other smaller stuff maybe I should just get the 5d iii. More views would be welcome..

[Pat Reddy]

The 5dIII is no slouch, and you get a pro stills camera in the bargain. In the end it all boils down to your skills, craft and vision anyway. Good luck with your decision, there are so many choices now we all end up going through this way too often.

Cheers

[Nicholas de Kock]

Rent the C100 & do a full day shoot with it, personally I won't touch a DSLR again after dropping my 60D's for two C100's.

[Dave Partington]

Steady Steve, don't get caught in the hype ;) I'll do some real world comparisons this week ;)

[Steve Bleasdale]

Cheers Pat, Michael. Bob, Nicholas, Wayne, your replies are excellent, and I will wait for Dave who is kindly testing the c100 soon for me. Cheers Dave....

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Nicholas de Kock

personally I won't touch a DSLR again after dropping my 60D's for two C100's.

That's easy to say :) the c100 is 9 times the price of a 60d so I"d expect a lot better quality, with a 11k euro budget (the price of two c100's excl lens here) I"d rather get me all the quality glass I need and a cheaper body, like a 5dIII and a 6d which give you full frame, high iso handling and raw capability. The c100 is no doubt a better camera in functionality though and from the looks of it it produces much sharper footage.

[James Davis]

You really cant see any difference? wow

I own both C100 and 60D and i see major difference in picture quality.

[Steve Bleasdale]

That's good James... Will wait for Dave's results because like Noa says it is expensive...

[Barry Goyette]

Steve. I've told this story a number of times, but at the c300 launch (different camera, same image), canon made the gutsy move of projecting the demo films on a 90 foot screen at the Paramount Theatre on the studio lot of the same name. Now if you saw the guest list to this event it would boggle your mind... And I saw many of those names walk right up to the screen -- pixel peeping at its finest. Well, even at that size the image was superb and I saw a lot of people walk away smiling, shaking their heads.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago, I was asked to shoot a performance and I decided to have a go at a multicamera set-up... Cinema eos in the center with a 5d and a 7d at the sides. It was a challenging situation. Lots of contrast, tinted, low light levels in an old ballroom. I had lots of confidence in what the c300 could do in this situation, but frankly I'd forgotten how bad the dslr's could look under those conditions. In the end I just went with the center camera, quietly depositing the dslr footage in the proverbial dustbin. When you get used to the footage from the c300/c100, you'll have a hard time even looking at what comes off of those other cameras you named.

[Noa Put]

I saw a lot of people walk away smiling, shaking their heads.

Weird, most of my clients do that after they have seen my film and I don't even have a c300? :)

But you are right that whatever camera you choose to make sure any other b-cam is up to the task as well, Canon dslr's are not exactly known for their pinsharp images, something to consider when buying 2 different camera's.