Anyone hearing anything about a C100 MKIII announcement yet?

[Dan Brockett]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

Actually this forum and those like it are full of those who are happy to discuss the importance of specs, skin tones, bit depth and fine detail when attacking other cameras they don't like, but as soon as their preferred camera suffers a similar attack, the comeback of, it's all about content is reminded as to why these things are not important.

You're no different to the rest of us in that respect. You'll wag your finger against the GH4 over specs and colour science but tell us the Canon 80d is perfectly acceptable because it's all about content. I'm afraid many of us are equally guilty of similar behaviour, so I can't really complain.

Whilst there are plenty of techno-nerds here, at least many who write here are working professionally. I occasionally dip into DpReview forums and its more hobbyist there.

Steve, still with the bruised feelings of inadequacy because I didn't like a camera that I bought years ago? I thought this was an NAB possible intro of a Canon C100 MKIII thread? You really should post more in the GH4 forum if you want to talk about the GH4.

Just out of curiosity, how can one "attack a camera"? Does the camera have feelings? Does it's esteem and personal worth suffer because one of us rude humans didn't like it? My 80D told me this morning that it doesn't care one lick about the rude bullies in this thread and all of the nastiness they heaped on him. I think my 80D has higher self esteem than your GH4 ;-)

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

Steve, still with the bruised feelings of inadequacy because I didn't like a camera that I bought years ago?

Nah, just amused at the hypocrisy in these discussions. See below :)

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

I thought this was an NAB possible intro of a Canon C100 MKIII thread? You really should post more in the GH4 forum if you want to talk about the GH4.

So it's okay for you to defend at great length using the 80d when it's criticised (your bruised feelings), but my mentioning the GH4 in relation to your own words on it in this thread are out of bounds. No problem. Your thread, your rules. ;-)

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

Just out of curiosity, how can one "attack a camera"? Does the camera have feelings?

One definition of the word attack - "to criticise or oppose fiercely and publicly."

Perhaps this is a British / American cultural difference in the use of the word. However I see no mention of feelings in that broad definition there.

To be honest, I can't say anymore on the C100 Mark III as it's all speculation. Will monitor NAB for any announcements, but not holding my breath. I did ask one guy to confirm his sources on how he knows for certain it'll have 4K 60p. Would be interested to know. Knowing Canon, they'll give the C100 Mark III 4K but make it a crop on the sensor just for the sake of making it not the C300.

[Stewart Hemley]

Returning to the topic, sort of, and trying to avoid the flying handbags...

I agree that content is king but it also depends on how the client wants that content delivered. If they are happy with a C100, 80D, G4, or whatever, then it's obviously ok to use that level of gear provided it will do the job you want. I'm currently working on a doc for broadcast TV and in answer to an initial enquiry about the delivery specs we were told quite directly that "a C300mk2 shooting 4k is the minimum they would accept." So for us the camera specs were critical.

Specs are vital for many people and these forums offer great advice on what cameras will or will not do the job and I have learnt a lot. Photography, whether still or moving, is an unusual blend of technical and artistic considerations, You can't ignore either if you want people to see your product.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Stewart Hemley

I agree that content is king but it also depends on how the client wants that content delivered. If they are happy with a C100, 80D, G4, or whatever, then it's obviously ok to use that level of gear provided it will do the job you want. I'm currently working on a doc for broadcast TV and in answer to an initial enquiry about the delivery specs we were told quite directly that "a C300mk2 shooting 4k is the minimum they would accept." So for us the camera specs were critical.

Specs are vital for many people and these forums offer great advice on what cameras will or will not do the job. Photography, whether still or moving, is an unusual blend of technical and artistic considerations, You can't ignore either if you want people to see your product.

I always see it that I can discuss any technical issues here and then content with my clients. It's rare I have a content issue to bring up here and if I do, its more in the Wedding forum where it would be best served. As we all deliver very different content, its often the technical issues that is common ground for discussions. I don't think that makes me a nerd obsessed with specs. Like Dan and many others here, I wear two hats and whilst specs make for lively discussions, it doesn't mean we rate content any less.

I hope Dan is not offended by our mild bit of hand bag waving at each other, but I can assure him and others, the last thing I wish to see is this forum detract from it's subject more than it already has. Always willing to read any other thoughts on the C100 Mark III and any possible info too.

[Dan Brockett]

The latest is I have now heard from two, independent sources that Canon will show no new camera at NAB. This is shaping up to be one of the more ho hum NABs in recent memory. Canon will obviously intro a new sub $10k camera at some point, but it sounds as if there is a good chance none of us will have it in hand before 2018. Sigh.

In the meanwhile, my C100 is still making me money. I shot more C300 MKII jobs last year, this year, so far, not one 4K project yet. Funny how demand ebbs and flows.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

You can say this with certainty - who are your sources just to ask?

The proof of the pudding is in the eating :)

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Sabyasachi Patra

Canon will not announce C300 Mark II successor at NAB. They will try to squeeze it till 2018 and announce its successor in 2018. However, they are likely to launch the C100 Mark II successor in 2017 which will definitely have 4K 60p.

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

You can say this with certainty - who are your sources just to ask?

Originally Posted by Sabyasachi Patra

The proof of the pudding is in the eating :)

Ahem. "I have a feeling" that Sabyasachi might be at least half-right.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Sabyasachi Patra

The proof of the pudding is in the eating :)

I think you misunderstand; I wasn't being sarky, I was actually asking you where you had received this information. Mainly cos I'd like it to be true. Just would like a bit more proof than you telling me you've gobbled up your dessert.


P.S. I'm a Treacle Tart fan if you're offering. Maybe with a small dollop of Ice Cream if that's not imposing too much.

[Chris Hurd]

A favorite Spike Lee movie quote comes to mind...

"Those who will tell, don't know. Those who will know, won't tell."

Meaning, basically, that I doubt Sabyasachi is able to reveal his sources.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

A favorite Spike Lee movie quote comes to mind...

"Those who will tell, don't know. Those who will know, won't tell."

Meaning, basically, that I doubt Sabyasachi is able to reveal his sources.

Ah. I see. Still it would surprise me to see 4K 60p on it; a very pleasant surprise. Canon have held back the good tech from their sub $5000 dollar cameras. It would make it quite the upgrade to the Mark II and tempt many who jumped ship to the Sony FS5 back to Canon.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

It would make it quite the upgrade to the Mark II and tempt many who jumped ship to the Sony FS5 back to Canon.

Why would these people switch back from the FS5?

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

Why would these people switch back from the FS5?

Probably won't, but as I said, some maybe at very least tempted. I know a few who loved their C100 but switched to the Sony FS5 because of the lack of updates. I've been tempted loads of times by a couple of Sony cameras and especially the Blackmagic Pocket camera; even ordered the latter, but cancelled when I realised it had no place in my workflow despite my liking its image.

I'm tempted by the C300 Mark II but my Bank Balance has put paid to that dream. :)

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

I'm tempted by the C300 Mark II but my Bank Balance has put paid to that dream. :)

Seems less expensive to go to the C300 Mark II than to keep switching camera systems.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

Seems less expensive to go to the C300 Mark II than to keep switching camera systems.

Agreed. It was but an idle remark. Not a statement made with any clear thought and logic. :)

[Dan Brockett]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

Seems less expensive to go to the C300 Mark II than to keep switching camera systems.

Isn't that the pre-requisite to be in this business, wasting a lot of money because you don't know how all of the gear really works? Most of us, early in our career wasted a ton of money buying the wrong gear, cheap gear because we were clueless about it. Tripods are the easiest example.

1. Noob buys cheap tripod, tries to put their shiny new camera on it and attempts professional moves. "This thing sucks, I need something better." Takes $200.00 loss to get rid of cheap tripod or throws it away in disgust.

2. Spends double the amount, $400.00, doesn't realize until using it that they just bought a fancier version of the cheap junk they just got rid of. Too busy, pre-occupied to sell it, it sits in the closet or gear locker.

3. Buys $1,000.00 tripod that is beginning to approach something decent but then goes from a DSLR/Mirrorless to a real video camera that weighs eight times as much so $1,000.00 tripod is now struggling with pro video camera. Same thing, too busy to list and deal with Ebay, gives it to cousin to who is shooting weddings.

4. Buys $4,000.00 Sachtler, Miller, Vinten, used O'Connor, finally achieves camera support nirvana. A professional head, resting on light, rigid carbon fiber legs, great pan handle, nice bag.

So let's see, starting out, spent $200.00 on junk, $400.00 on junk, $1,000.00 on halfway decent but still too light without enough mass and too much counterbalance for a 2lb mirrorless, $4,000.00 for a proper tripod and head. Total expenditure, $5,600.00 over 2-3 years. Imagine the tripod and head one could have bought with $5,600.00 right out the gate? The kind that would last for two decades and support the next five cameras you own?

It seems as if most of us go through this process with all of the gear that we buy. Too bad more of us don't adhere to the "buy once, cry once" school of thought. When I think back or even go through my garage shelves, I look at all of the cheap matte boxes, FFs, tripods, lighting and together, it adds up to significant money I wasted when I should have been buying good stuff. My current regular Sachtler and Miller legs, I bought eleven years ago and they have already been through five cameras. It's tougher with cameras because they are all outdated so quickly but with all of the support gear and audio, buying subpar support gear is just wasted money.

I've had a full C300 MKII package sitting in a shopping cart numerous times but the overall cost keeps causing me to not pull the trigger.