C100 Mark II -- Mostly About Waveform

[Pete Bauer]

Originally Posted by Troy Moss

Most important, keep the topics about the products and not the person

Perfectly stated, Troy!

[Ken Diewert]

Though my c100 has more than paid for itself, I'm delusionally optimistic and hoping for the codec and frame rate firmware update...

[Pavel Sedlak]

I made a short comparison between C100 M1 and C100 M2.
There are three parts - short movie (95pct M2 and 5pct M1), comparison from movie and comparison from other places.

Canon C100 M2 test (wih C100 M1) on Vimeo

Thanks to canon.cz and also thanks to my friend Vladimir for assistance.

/ at 1:04 is flickering from the reverse motion /

[Michael Thames]

Thanks for the comparison. I have to say I like the images coming out of the MKI more than the MKII......

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Michael Thames

Thanks for the comparison. I have to say I like the images coming out of the MKI more than the MKII......

Probably wouldn't be able to say that if the camera wasn't labelled. Plus, I don't see what lenses were used on either. That can make a difference too if they are not identical.

[Pavel Sedlak]

All informations are at video, lenses, etc.

I used exactly the same setting, all menus, CP, color temperature was set with kelvin (the same), the same iris, very close focal length, etc. (only log gamma has on both cameras shifted color matrix: R-G is -21, it is only one change - my old trick .-) , but also this info is at video at the end).

Some differences are only at evening when light quick fall off (at the end of movie), the time for change one camera to other was about 5min for one sekvence of footage. But differences go on at another day, so some result is visible (M2 little tend to pink on faces, but has better noise - monochromatic with wdr and log gamma, and has less black and little average colors - for me).

M1 has more hard black with the same setting, but "EVF + autofocus (or push autofocus)" on M2 is killer combination for one which don't like manual focus if you have no time.

My first impression is 50:50, some features are better on M1 and others on M2, would be nice to see more real videos from M2.

[Pavel Sedlak]

Originally Posted by Michael Thames

Thanks for the comparison. I have to say I like the images coming out of the MKI more than the MKII......

Thanks.

The basic question about colors on C100 M2 is about DIGIC DV4 - the same procesor is used at G30 and we really see a lot of "pink" colors at many videos - a very good sample is here (look for cyan color at sky):

Canon LEGRIA HF G30, First Test - YouTube

Another basic question (about cons) is about color processing - is there same averaging of colors? Average colors mean a little flat resolution in colors (it is about surfaces, not about edges) - in the opposite to luma resolution which is better on M2 (you can probably see this on face color test at the end of test or on calendar part - on the wall is visible more details with M2 and wdr or log gamma).

All other is about pros.

I recommend to download the orig file.

[Gary Huff]

The fact that both cameras have different exposures going on means that it is hard to glean anything useful from this test.

[Pavel Sedlak]

Hi,
all the test have both cameras exactly the same exposure

- only at the end of "movie" exposure differ, but not too much (but you can see the original at second part of test, the church at the end of evening - we started shooting at 2:00pm and end was at 5:00pm, where last twenty minutes light quickly fall off - it was about two shots from the test where exposure may a little differ - there was very could and I can't remember the last two shots .-)) , thanks Canon that C100 has no metadata about exposure...).

Two elderly women have given us wine to drink, this saved us.

I hope that this help .-) .

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Pavel Sedlak

Hi,all the test have both cameras exactly the same exposure

Did you use the waveform monitor?

[Pavel Sedlak]

I like your question, have a nice day :) .

The same setting all menus, CP (gamma curves, black levels, saturation, NR, color matrix), the same kelvin and...

...the same exposure of the CMOS chip = the same ND, shutter speed, iris and iso = the same amount of the light on the CMOS chip and the same processing, but different result due to different procesor. This show you differences between both cameras.

Yes, I also used WF monitor, but only as basic information about exposure.

---

But this is not an exact test and at movie part (at exterior) can be some small differences (for example at focal lenght), it's a real life and not payed testing (good news is that interiors are exactly the same and show a very similar result). One interesting thing is that new OLED display has big contrast but not the same as pictures have, but I think that longer usage solve this. My three days (and two nights .-) ) with C100 M2 was too short.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Pavel Sedlak

Yes, I also used WF monitor, but only as basic information about exposure.

That's an odd way to put it...the waveform monitor IS your exposure information. Everything else is just guesswork.

[Pavel Sedlak]

Really :-) ? Can you more explain how you mean that info about WF monitor (for comparison M1 and M2 which has the same CMOS chip)?

My concept of this test is:
the same light, the same exposure (the same lens, iris, ND, shutter speed) of (the same) CMOS chip on both cameras, then the same signal processing (gamma curve, ISO, WB with kelvin, CP setting) but on different camera processors - on WF monitor you will see the result - differences of (identical) signal processing between DV3 and DV4 processor (and also on WF you will see the "basic info" about unwanted signal clipping, you don't need any other info during shooting in this type of comparison test).

I made comparison of two cameras with the same chip and different signal processor and not a test of a new camera. I hope that you will understand to this fact. I'm not interested in "the same output", but really in "the same input" which show me differences at signal processing.

Really hope that you will start thinking about this clear concept of my test.

Thanks for your suggestions.

[Michael Thames]

In WDR the waveform monitor seems to ride in the middle, I thought this because it seems slightly flatter than say the 5D3. It took me a while to understand this after I got the C100.

When I look at the WFM on my Atomos Blade and hit the Auto iris button and check the exposure meter on the LCD the Blades WFM is spiking. When I adjust the image to the WFM and bring down the highs it shows the image to be under exposed on the LCD meter. I have since learned to pay little attention to the WFM in camera and on the Blade (same thing really).

Even after adjusting the exposure to the meter on the LCD screen and using the Auto Iris button. The image in post always needs some exposure tweaking because it still seems under exposed...

[Gary Huff]

The waveform monitor IS your exposure. Learn it, love it. Everything else is just misleading.