Best b-camera for C100

[Jody Arnott]

Thanks for the information guys. I'm starting to consider the GH4 now, I just wish it had an EF mount! :) It's going to get quite pricey once paired with a smart adapter.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Jody Arnott

It's going to get quite pricey once paired with a smart adapter.

Yes, but you can also think of it as moving with you for as long as you decide to stay with the m4/3 format. GH5, AF200, etc.

[Eric Coughlin]

I've used the GH2 with the C100 as a b-cam for interviews and it works quite well. A little less sharp, but sharp enough to match up well, and way sharper than a 70D or 5D Mark III (I'd rather do single camera interviews than mix those mush images with C100 interview footage), and the GH2 only costs $400-450 used. Colors match up easily with tweaking in Colorista. I use a $13 Fotasy Nikon to M/43 adapter with Nikon primes such as the Nikon 55 f/2.8 ($265.00) and Nikon 105 f/2.5 ($149) which I both got used and in great condition.

In larger rooms I use the Nikon 105 f/2.5 on the GH2 for the tight and Nikon 55 f/2.8 on the C100 for the wide, and in smaller rooms the Nikon 55 f/2.8 on the GH2 for the tight and Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 on the C100 for the wide. Add in an extra battery or two and that's around $900 out the door for a b-cam for interviews. I also use the GH2 a lot for weddings and other event shooting.

Interviews you also generally have time to set up for (and mine generally aren't in changing light conditions), so you could also use a non-powered $13 Canon EF to M/43 adapter to use your Canon lenses and change the aperture with the C100 before putting it on the GH camera.

Here are a couple videos I did where you can see the C100 as an A-cam and GH2 as a B-cam for interviews.

Seton Home Study School - Catholic Homeschooling on Vimeo

Shakespeare in Performance - An Original Practice at Ave Maria University on Vimeo

In the first video, I switched them out sometimes using the GH2 as the wide and other times as the tight, but after editing the video, I found that the GH2 holds less detail on wides and works better as the tight shot, so in the second video I always used the GH2 as the tight and the C100 as the wide. Both those videos are on Vimeo at 1080p, so should show the resolution well. I don't use any hack on the GH2.

I was pretty happy with it, though I did recently buy a second C100 as my b-cam, so yeah. I still use the GH2 as a c-cam, and I also own a Canon 60D, which I rarely use for video now, and mostly for stills.

[Al Bergstein]

I've had good luck matching my C100 with my 5D mkiii. Especially white balance before hand, and watch the waveform monitors (I use a Ninja on the 5D when trying to match). It's been interesting how much closer I'm able to get with the Ninja. It really helps my exposure with the external monitor and the waveforms on it. Given that, a 7D or more more modern model might work. I had a 7D and did not think the video quality was even close to a 5D. Way more macro blocking evidence. I recently bought a ninja for the 5D, and will be using it tomorrow for a shoot. I ought to be able to report back on how that matched. my first inclination though was that the Ninja, beyond being a great monitor and waveform, did not give me noticeably better quality images. Maybe if I was working with green screen I'd see a better look.

[Darren Levine]

i've been happy with the rx10 as a bcam to the c100, it's got the sharpness to match and cuts quite well with the right profiling

[Jody Arnott]

Thanks all. Lots of interesting suggestions here. The RX10 looks like a great camera, although the fixed lens puts me off. I think I'm still leaning towards the GH4 at this point.

[Jody Arnott]

This is probably a long shot, but has anyone managed to match a Sony NEX-EA50 to their C100?

[Michael Thames]

Originally Posted by Dave Partington

Jody, this is not aimed at you but it always amazes me how many people spend quite a bit of money on a good camera, then want a cheap camera to go with it that looks just as good. Why then didn't they just buy such a cheap camera int he first place, in fact buy two ;)

I have a C100 & GH4. I use an EF to M43 adapter on the GH4 so I can also use my Canon glass there too.

But be warned, the lure of 4K is dangerous. Now I have the GH4 my C100 isn't getting half as much use because I shot the last 4 interviews with only the GH4 (reasonably wide) then zoom in post. Now I don't need two cameras, I only need one. Hmmm.....

To be honest the GH4 is a cheap camera! What are you talking about? Your hypocrisy knows no bounds!

[Jody Arnott]

I suppose "cheap" and "expensive" are relative terms.

[Michael Thames]

Well it didn't seem relative in the context of your post. The C100 is $4500 and the GH4 is $1600. The GH4 is cheaper than the C100 by a long shot.

[Dave Partington]

Originally Posted by Michael Thames

Well it didn't seem relative in the context of your post. The C100 is $4500 and the GH4 is $1600. The GH4 is cheaper than the C100 by a long shot.

Yes, the GH4 is cheap to buy as a body only, but by the time you add lenses it's not $1600 anymore (nor is the C100 $4500 either, I understand that).

But I see a lot of people buying a decent camera then go looking for $500-$1000 solutions to be "a good match for" their expensive camera.

What I was trying to say was that if the $500-$1000 camera is 'good enough' to use for shots you actually want to cut to in the interview then why wouldn't you just have bought two of the $500 cameras in the first place?

Cameras like the GH4 and even the new LX100 are going to change the face of local video production due to size, weight and price. The more I use the GH4 the more I'm impressed with it and honestly my C100 is getting used less and less. In fact, the C100 is fast becoming my B-Camera for interviews where I really want an alternative angle, with the GH4 being the A-Cam giving me both wide and close from the same angle.

[Michael Thames]

Actually yer right. By the time you get the XLR thing a speed booster, and some decent lens your paying more than the C100 for us Canon guys with an assortment of excellent glass.

I've tried and tried to fall in love with the GH4 image.... but something leaves me a little cold. Of course 99 percent of the viewing public won't notice..... and they won't notice the 4k super sharp image either.

[Kevin McRoberts]

While ideally we could all buy 2-3 of whatever camera we prefer, a smaller and less expensive B-cam makes plenty of sense for many many users. Really, only one camera might need integrated NDs and XLRs and other such conveniences... a simple 'sensor/recorder in a box' might be all that's needed for the alternate angles, and take up a lot less space in the travel case.

To that end, you don't need the YAAAAAAAAAGGGHHHH!!!!!!!! to get XLR on the GH4... a simple Beachtek adapter or the like does nicely for a lot cheaper. The YAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!! only really seems to make sense if you need SDI out. In a B-cam role, one wouldn't even need that much. Ditto all that for a slightly more expensive camera like the Sony A7S. Both can easily use Canon glass (via boosted or unboosted Metabones adapters) if that's the owner's thing, and also give the professional flexibility of stills ability. The GH4 seems to have an edge if battery life and 4K flexibility are most important, the A7S if low-light sensitivity and wide angle fields of view are most important.

C100 poorly shot is just as capable of looking as crappy as a GH4/A7S poorly shot, and all are capable of looking very good. I've seen more than a few examples where people have matched the look of all those cameras... the tools all just seem to work together better now than they once did.

[Michael Thames]

Just a quick word of warning, I bought a simple Beachtek XLR adaptor and sold it on ebay a few days later..... those things go through 9v batteries like crazy!

[Erick Munari]

I own a C100 and just bought a BMPCC while it was on sale for half price. I do not know how well they will match up, I'll post my impressions once I test it out.