|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 21st, 2015, 03:36 PM | #16 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Prague Czech Republic
Posts: 263
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
Quote:
Is it more clear? |
|
January 21st, 2015, 04:04 PM | #17 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 9,510
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
Quote:
Render speeds on those colorcorrected clips are almost twice realtime to either hq avi or a h.264 codec. |
|
January 21st, 2015, 05:22 PM | #18 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,006
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
That's great, but I am not about to switch to Edius. FCPX and Premiere performance on a maxed out MacBook Pro leaves a bit to be desired, but then I use heavier effects as well.
|
January 22nd, 2015, 09:02 AM | #19 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 3,014
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
|
January 22nd, 2015, 06:24 PM | #20 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,313
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
Yes, you can stop the recording with the "app."
|
January 23rd, 2015, 01:42 PM | #21 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Prague Czech Republic
Posts: 263
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
Quote:
at 2:15 is sample of the 50i to 25p slow-motion (but with internal recording, you can see AVCHD compresion artifacts). I hope this helps. EDIT: Here is a big test of Noise Reduction, internal vs. external recording, 25p vs 25i at lowlight. The best parts are at: ISO1600 25p (10:20), ISO2000 25i + deinterlace (15:56), ISO4000 25p (18:58) - the best part of all. I was working at Avid MediaComposer with these versions of clips (in this order): 1. AVCHD in XDCAM long GOP HQ 35Mbps 420 codec (usual quality) 2. AVCHD in Avid DNxHD185 (422, 8bit. I-Frame only) codec (better quality) 3. Ninja2 version in Avid DNxHD185 (true 422, 8bit, I-Frame only) codec (the best quality) 4. repeat "1." for better visual contrast with "3." The best results from ISO4000 25p are here: Look at these three pictures from NINJA2 at a full quality (NR0, NR2, NR4): videoproduce.cz/images/006b_NINJA2_NR0_at_21min_30sec_origQT.tif videoproduce.cz/images/007b_NINJA2_NR2_at_22min_07sec_origQT.tif - the winner videoproduce.cz/images/008b_NINJA2_NR4_at_22min_40sec_origQT.tif Last edited by Pavel Sedlak; January 23rd, 2015 at 02:25 PM. |
|
January 24th, 2015, 05:00 PM | #22 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 255
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
I've owned a C100 Mk I for about 1.5 years and was almost certain that I would be buying the C100 Mk II as a replacement for my 70D. However, once they dropped the price of the C100 Mk I to $4500 with Dual Pixel AF, I was very tempted to just get another one instead of the Mk II. I spent a few weeks thinking about it and I decided to save the $1K and buy another C100 Mk I.
My reasons are that the Mk I has been the best camera I've ever owned, it's been extremely reliable, and I've figured out ways to work around all of it's weaknesses. The Mk II looks amazing and I'm sure I would have been completely happy with it, but I just don't think the extra $1000 will come back to me by my clients seeing a difference between the two. I think the only thing that would potentially make me more money is the option for slow motion as it can be very helpful for wedding videos. In the end, I feel like the C100 Mk I has been everything I hoped for and more so why not save $1K and go with something that has worked pretty much flawlessly for me for the past year and half. |
January 24th, 2015, 05:07 PM | #23 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 34
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
The decision to buy better equipment should not be driven only by things such as it not having an effect on the product the client receives. The impact of the upgrades on how much easier it makes things for you to do your job should also be a major criteria.
|
January 24th, 2015, 05:09 PM | #24 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 255
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
Quote:
|
|
January 27th, 2015, 07:46 PM | #25 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Waterloo Iowa
Posts: 68
|
Re: Canon C100 Mark II -- Worth the upgrade?
I've noticed used C100 Mark I prices continue to drop as more Mark II's ship.
I watched a used C100 Mark I with extra battery and two 64gb SDHC cards sell on ebay last week for $2,800!!! I expect these prices to continue dropping as more Mark II's hit the market, which will make my decision even harder. |
| ||||||
|
|