September 11, 2012

Watch the First Canon C100 Footage Available Online, How Does It Compare to Its Big Brother?

The camera that seemingly appeared out of nowhere at the end of last month, the Canon C100, looks like it has its first real footage online. While we don't have an official price yet from the largest American reseller, B&H, it's looking like the final price may be somewhere between $6,000 and $8,000. In typical Canon style, though, the video is something we've got to watch extremely compressed through an online streaming service (in this case Vimeo). The creator of the video, Sebastien Devaud, had a talk with Sebastian over at cinema5D at this year's IBC about the camera and shooting the video for Canon. There is also a behind-the-scenes of the video that is embedded below.

Here is the video, followed by the behind-the-scenes and the talk with Sebastien (thanks to the other Sebastian -- different spelling! -- also thanks to user Peter Kelly for first pointing out the video). The film was shot with three C100 bodies, 12 EF lenses, and recorded internally to AVCHD on SD cards:

Since Canon did not put its 50mbps codec inside the miniscule C100, compression could very well be an issue in certain instances (but more likely when you're doing heavy grading). Many don't seem to have a problem with the compression in the FS100, but that codec can also fall apart if you start pushing and pulling. It is very difficult to judge the picture quality from a camera that is recording a highly compressed image and then a video that is also doing the same. There's no doubt that you can get very good looking files on Vimeo, but it's probably too early to pass any final judgment on the quality.

At the moment it does seem sharp but a little muddy, but to my eyes it does look better than most DSLR footage that I've seen from these Canon videos. There is certainly a fidelity to the image that exists -- which I can tell just by looking at Vimeo, but in the end the AVCHD will be better for shoots that don't need a high quality (and therefore higher data rate) codec. Film-style shoots would benefit from a an external recorder using a high-quality codec like ProRes. I know I may have been a little harsh in my first opinion of a camera that hasn't even been released yet, but if Canon actually keeps the price around $6,000, even with the compressed codec, it would actually find itself competing admirably to the FS100, and not the FS700 like it is now.

Has this video swayed anyone's opinion on the camera?

Link: IBC 2012 – Sebastien Devaud’s Canon C100 film & interview - cinema5D

Your Comment

93 Comments

I know that it won't be productive to a discussion about the C100 to say so, but: holy crap. The debut clip is pretty awful, especially the audio. I think this is just one offshoot of Canon's empire that (barely) authorized it, within Europe, and we can expect more elegant and professional promotional work on the way.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

yes i agree, pretty bad presentation...i left the first video after only 2 minutes in...

September 11, 2012

-2
Reply
Ionesh

I liked this, but it could have been better if they would have put more pictures of the letter C in it. I really think they were lacking in this department and think that the absence of adequate C's really lowered the production value on this one.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

Totally agree with you. :D

September 11, 2012

-2
Reply

Why they not just rendered the movie in the "ALL-C" codec???

January 12, 2013

1
Reply
Markus

I didn't think that promo was THAT bad. To me this camera looks like a nice little workhorse...Better than some other options? tough to tell.

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
Shank

That was one of the worst videos for a debut camera. Screw the "C"!

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Moore

I think it is on par with MKIII footage. Good at times but not as much as its big brother. I would pay i little more and get the FS700. Seems a better deal...

And yeah, a little muddy at times and now with the new MFT mount on the BMCC I would probably rig it and go Prores all the way for the same price.

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
Alex Mand

C power...really? The content distracted me from the footage. I like Canon and still use my 7D like crazy, but the pricing seems inflated. I guess we'll see when it's actually released. I'm still leaning toward the FS700.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

I'm speechless. What a pathetic concept. This is the kind of idea that a 1st year media studies student comes up with (and then throws away). It's so poor they had to prop it up with attractive women, which is the mark of the amateur.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Ant

I'm still in a power struggle between an outfitted BMCC and the FS700. This clip does little to convince me otherwise.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Ian

Well you either need slow motion regularly or you dont. :) If you don't, and don't need to shoot in candle light, then BMCC is the only way to go. :)

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
Ant

Still waiting to see what Sony does with the 4K upgrade and how the footage looks. Right now I definitely prefer the look of the BMCC over the HD FS700 footage but if their 4K is a 12 bit RAW with the same post grade options as the BMCC I would like to future proof myself a bit (even if that means spending more in the future on the firmware upgrade/acquisition etc). I know this is a C100 post so I wont go too far off in a tangent. lol

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
Ian

........that being said, does anyone know how much (if any) more dynamic range will be unlocked with the 4k upgrade?

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
Ian

None of Sony's current cameras...including the F3...shoot RAW. The 4K firmware upgrade will give you exactly that. 4K. Higher resolution that will require an external recorder. That's it. At least, that's all that's been said to this point. As for the price, it was said it would be similar to the F3 firmware upgrade which was $500 EU.

If you want RAW...you need BMCC or RED. Those are really your only two options for RAW footage right now. (at least under $20K)

I love the FS700 as well. However, I simply can't justify 3 times the cost of the BMCC for that cam. I'm on the list for the BMCC. Maybe in a year or so, I'll add the FS700 to my cabinet and have both ends covered ;)

September 11, 2012

-2
Reply
sean

"I love the FS700 as well. However, I simply can’t justify 3 times the cost of the BMCC for that cam."

240fps 1080p, S35 Sensor and 4K upgradeability?

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

I thought according to this http://nofilmschool.com/2012/09/sony-fs700-4k-upgrade-could-be-weeks-away/ article it will allow 4K RAW recording. Again, this is an unofficial source, but still. The FS700 sensor is different than that of the FS100 and F3.

There's just something about the movement in the images from the FS700 that turns me off. Can't put my finger on it,....but I'm hoping it has to do with the 4K sensor doing HD. Maybe the 4K footage will look better? It's all conjecture at this point,.....NEED TO SEE THAT FOOTAGE, ARRRGH!!! lol

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Ian

The FS700 will output 4K RAW from its 3G-SDI, that is confirmed and not rumor or speculation, that is literally what we were told by Sony.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

That's awesome. This should mean similar control of the image in post as the BMCC, correct? Thanks.

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
Ian

This is why I hate the french (semi jk here). Also, this would've been way funnier if after she went on the plane and they were high fiving, it blew up like a 007 film.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
z

Some problems with the film, mainly the overactive color correction. However, it's obvious that the tech behind the sensor is terrific, as there's very minimal rolling shutter. For those of us interested in filming motion, not just hunting pixels, it's a reconfirming of Canon's advancements. Hopefully the next black magic can follow suit.

September 11, 2012

-2
Reply
Lucas

That was six minutes of my life I will never get back. Actually, more like four, because I turned it off.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

Funny. :)

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

BH is currently listing it for $6499.99.

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
Mo

Or...

$2995 for an XF100
$2995 for a BMD

Always some poor soul doing run and gun in low light - Canon saw them coming that's for sure.

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
nobody

Well, it seems to me someone fooled Canon into paying for their vacation. Just like Canon is trying to fool us into buying this camera with that ridiculous price tag.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Ces

Ha! My thoughts exactly.

September 13, 2012

-1
Reply
Brynn

Next year Canon will release the C050 for 2.5k with the same image and less features.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Marcus

Maybe I can get a free holiday by pitching them a video with me holding signs that say "50!!" everywhere with a budget of $500k.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Ant

This camera looks great and the avchd probably wouldn't be a problem for me most of the time but I think there's a certain sub $2,000 panasonic hybrid camera that is going to shake things up big time in a few weeks. If the GH3 is as good as it sounds then the only thing going for this cam would be the ergonomics, xlr mic imputs and the sensor size imho.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

Weak sauce

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Marko

A lot of the muddiness you might be seeing is actually not from the camera: it's the image stablization (i.e. "Smoothcam" or "Warp stabilizer") done in post. Visible most on the helicam shots. What it looks like is frame suddenly blurring in an image that otherwise remains still. This can be compensated for, to an extent, by using a faster shutter (smaller shutter angle) to minimize the blurring. Another way is to drop the blurred frames, though it makes the motion jerky. A better codec will not compensate for this.

This camera probably has the best build and ergonomics of anything under $10,000 (and maybe a lot higher) right now and the only thing crippled in it really is the codec. For an effortless workflow with web delivery it's really hard not to like...the total cost of ownership is very low given you only need a handful of SDXC cards to last you an entire day of shooting, and there are 80 milliion EF lenses (and plenty of Nikon F's too) that can be fitted to it in the field with full support. And those lenses will cover any sensor size or flange distance in the forseeable future, preserving investment and resale value.

I like the FS700's features but the C100 really looks like something that, as long as you are happy with the look and are disciplined enough to expose your shots properly, people are going to find very pleasant to work with. Even though I am into cameras right now because it's in an exciting development period, I really would rather the thing just work and let me ignore it. Canon will sell enough of these and if they don't they can always trickle the C500 features (which is their only uncrippled camera in the C line) down to the lower price points. They clearly have their stuff together even though we like to moan about the pricing.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

When I talk about muddy, I'm literally referring to close up shots of people's faces and the tell-tale signs of heavy compression. Camera or Vimeo? Who knows, but it's there - if only Canon would release a full resolution file and there wouldn't be any speculation.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

Well I agree with what you said about web delivery...the current state of streaming means that e.g. the banding on the shot of the sun is inevitable. I imagine even with the 8 bit color space the camera is handling a lot of those gradients fine in practice. I didn't notice noise or aliasing or false color, and I don't mind they chose a saturated color look, the skin tones were fine enough especially on the beach girls, and the highlight handling was nice on the water.

As for the video, it was very French, and just a silly excuse to show various shots on a camera compact enough to be happy in action settings. The notable absence is slow motion of course, but the rolling shutter performance in the airport terminal looks good. The interesting choice was the woman who I interpret as playing the Canon representative on her way to Tokyo was not Japanese. It's sad that the promos for the western markets are still Japanese-free for the most part, we are almost encouraged to forget most of our camera gear is made there.

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
Peter

I kinda like this camera. Ergonomics and body design are unmatched, 6500 is a way more tolerable price than 8000. The video was horrible thoug- shit was overgraded and the "story" and "acting" was cheesy. And for everybody complaining about the compression/codec, it DOES have a clean HDMI out, doesn't it? ;) slap a nanoflash behind it and you are good to go.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

If I could get uncompressed video out of the HDMI port that would hold up in post and delivery, it might be worth my while. I don't see the lack of PL mount a major issue, just the price. I'd like this a lot better if it were closer to $5K.

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
Marc B

HDMI port is uncompressed 8-bit, just like the C300

September 11, 2012

2
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

I still don't know whether that HDMI output color space is 4:2:0 or 4:2:2. Anyone with a definitive on that yet?

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
Peter

The HDMI is 4:2:2 8-bit, just like the C300.

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

That's very good news, it means we would just need an external recorder for green screen work, which isn't a pain in studio setups.

Can I trouble you for a link that confirms that? Canon USA site had 4:2:2 listed for a few days for the whole camera, then quietly changed it to 4:2:0, and has no mention of the color space of the HDMI out other than "uncompressed." "Uncompressed" is too vague a term, it's not as if it is streaming RAW, right?

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

Don't have a link off-hand but it's been talked about by pros. Canon also doesn't state the HDMI color space for the C300, either, so I wouldn't worry about it.

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

4:2:2 is a compression ratio. That ain't uncompressed. :)

Plus if you're wanting RAW, consider this 8 bit 4:2:2 compared to BMC 12 bit uncompressed.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Ant

4:2:2 is just sub-sampling of color information. If you want to think about it like that I guess it's a sort of compression, but it's really not, it's really just averaging and interpolation.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

The one thing Canon has right now that the BMCC doesn't ... durable body and better design and many software options (like delete). But at that price with a compressed codec... I just don't feel it's worth it.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Sean

I'm so tired of seeing this kind of content. It's fine for something like GoPro because the adventure film style is all part of its brand but for the C100? Canon marketing folks need to give their heads a shake. Maybe I'm just getting old but people leaping off cliffs screaming "Whoo-Hoo!" together with shallow DOF (i.e. lazy to non-existant focus pulling) and overly graded footage does not make me want to save up and buy this camera.

September 11, 2012

-1
Reply
Neil

+1 on that.

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
Martin

Really guys? I could really care less about the content of the promo as I just want to see what kind of images this camera produces. I'm pretty sold on it having seen this. I like the skin tones and the general look of the footage. I can see it being something my clients would like, large sensor look with compact design. While I'm not a big fan of AVCHD, it is easy to work with, doesn't fill up my drive and allows for fast turn around.

If I need higher quality, then 4:2:2 ProRes via a separate recorder would be just fine. If it's the same sensor as the C300, then the low light performance will be killer. I may be the schmuck doing run 'n gun in the dark, but that's the reality of some of the work I do, you know, the stuff where people pay you to shoot and they don't really have any clue about lighting conditions?

I see this as a work camera and in that sense the BMCC just wouldn't cut it for a number of reasons. Not to knock the image which is pretty impressive, but it's not as flexible a camera for the variety of jobs I do. The FS100/700 are pretty interesting, but having shot on one, not ergonomic and need lots of bits to make useful. For starters, it's an E mount camera, so you have to invest in adapters and that just adds to the price along with all the other gadgets 3rd party vendors want you to buy. $$$

With the C100, just slap a mic and headphones on it and you're ready to shoot, bam. I already have Canon glass, so not a problem. I know it's horses for courses, but I wouldn't be so hasty to write this one off. B&H has it listed for $6499, that's not a bad price for a professional camera. A new EX-1 costs more. I don't know what you guys do, but I shoot and edit every day for a living. Give me a tool that's makes my life easier and ups my game and I'm a happy camper.

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
JW

"I may be the schmuck doing run ‘n gun in the dark,"

If that was initiated by my earlier comment, I wasn't having a pop at anything other than the price. Now you mention it though, do you really want to be operating and manually focusing using a large sensor camera in low light?

September 11, 2012

1
Reply
nobody

No worries, but that's a pretty big part of what I do. Yes, focusing a larger sensor in the dark is hard. The 2 things this camera does to address that are 1. Quick auto focus, like a still camera, to get you close and 2. useful high ISO performance. I've seen that sensor look pretty decent at 10,000 ISO, so it can see in the dark better than virtually anything else out there and not look like crap. Even an EX-1 at +12db looks pretty shabby. If you can get to at least a useable f4, then you've got a fighting chance at it. If it got really dark, I'll pull out my 50m f1.8 and rave about the virtues of shallow depth of field LOL.

I've shot the FS100 in dark venues and bright lights that pushed the DR beyond it's capabilities, and it looked like video. The C100 has some sort of variant on the C log setting, so there's another way to extend the DR.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
JW

The C300 didn't have AF though and I'm guessing the C100 doesn't have it either? The ISO capabilities, I agree are impressive. My days of struggling with a bounce board strapped to my chest are thankfully over. Sooner write "foresake all hope" on the thing, down a bottle of whiskey and go and stand outside a bar shouting at strangers.

If you can get a result as a solo operator, shooting wide open at high ISO through this codec... well go for it. You won't be short of work.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
nobody

The C100 will have push AF with current lenses, but will have constant AF using Canon's new STM lenses in a future firmware upgrade. Neither of those will be particularly great solutions, but they should work.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

Well I stand corrected.

Cheers Joe.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
nobody

I think this is an excellent camera for its easy to use spirit. It is small and offers very good quality image for a wide range of situations. If you work a lot with little projects, and you need a fast workflow, this is a good option.

Some people say it is expensive. Of course I would prefer a $4000 camera, but forgetting to turn on the audio recorder or not being confortable with a cage and a bunch of cables is much more expensive! Maybe Sony has better numbers on their FS100 and FS700 for the price, but those cameras look weird and feel weird to handle.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Jordi

Snort.... That's very entertaining. What does the C stand for again?

September 11, 2012

0
Reply

This is the perfect documentary camera, is small, relatively light, has NDs, shoots on CF cards (so no 400$ SSD like BMCC) and has a super 35 sensor (low light). Shoots compressed video just like your DSLR (4:2:0) but it does have the built-in viewfinder, option for external recording, ergonomic design, better audio controls, NDs, longer battery life, can record longer clips, has a faster offload speed (less rolling shutter, which so far is one of the biggest flaws on the DSLR cameras together with aliasing and moire that are not present on the c100) has programmable buttons. Also shooting RAW is very cool but I have no supercomputers or gigantic hard drives. I prefer having files that don't fill up a 2TB drive in less than 2 days. Color grading is possible on 4:2:0, of course is better with less compression and if you need that external recording is there. I don't see why complaining on the price: if you think it's high and want a BMCC to shoot RAW go for it, remember the drawbacks of said camera. After all the canon XL H1 is 9000$ and so are other cameras of that category.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
AS

The perfect doc camera is hard to come by with a super35 sensor I would seem, but not because of the camera itself, it's the lenses that are the real bitch. Ideally you want an 18-100 lightweight constant aperture zoom, 24 is just no quite wide enough. All the options are either too slow, too small a range or just massive. We're literally drowning in camera bodies hese days but there does seem to be a aping hole in the lens department where we might reasonably expect to see the next big innovation, or am I being too guilty of wishful thinking!?

September 12, 2012

0
Reply

Even if the quality was similar to the 5Diii, all the various usability features make the camera worth more than the 5Diii - NDs, EVF, monitor with focus assist & zebras, handle, XLR, etc. Personally I'm still a little bugged at Canon for not including 60p, even at 720p. I mean, even the T2i from years ago had that!

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Clayton Arnall

I think it is a bit Euro vs the US here. Just FYI, Reverie was a terrible film too. I didn't hold that against it and neither did you.
The point was to show how flexible and immediate the cam is. Worked for me, but then I'm a Euro working in the US.
I thought this was a terrific showcase of what this cam could do. I'm not a Canon fan AT ALL, but I already know people I will tell to take a look at this cam based on this (with an ATOMOS or similar attached) for TV projects and docs. The price is at least 2K too high, but for B/C cam on a TV series shooting C300s? Sure.
If it was a bit cheaper I'd seriously consider it.

Also, all those FS700 fanboys up there: have you shot with that cam yet? I would not want that image at 4K thanks (and I'm a big fan of the F3). A used RED ONE is a much better camera, for the same money - already 4K, admittedly will top out at 120fps. We had an FS700 in for a producer meeting on a large TV project. It did not survive the 1st round. I've used it twice as basically a cheap Phantom, and my grader also hated it.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
marklondon

I agree with Clayton. It has everything DSLR shooters have wanted. I really really really wish Canon had dropped a better codec and 60p. This camera would have taken over. Can there be a firmware update to upgrade the codec?? Is that possible??

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Santa

What just happened?? How am i supposed to judge the camera with those action shots that were over graded! This really pisses me off. Who is Canon trying to fool here. It makes no sense to me that they want to lose the DSLR video customers that gave them the boost to even want to make these camera. Just give the darn thing to Phillip Bloom. That way we can get some real insights on the camera with some real test footage. I am a DSLR shooter and like most of you, I am impatiently waiting on the sidelines for my next camera. Its a shame that they all seem flawed in someway.

c100 body (EF mount, ND's EVF, XLR, swivel monitor) and sensor.
2.5k Raw from BMC
4k upgrade-able from FS700
120fps (Red Epic)

Wrap all that up for $6500 and you could sell a million of them in a weeks time.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Creep

Canon has that camera, it's called the C500. It will set you back only about $30,000, but I'm pretty sure you will have very few complaints using it.

I think what happened is Canon designed the C500 as a direct competitor to RED and ARRI and the higher end Sony's. And then they decided to make a product line from it by cutting it down...for half price, you could have the broadcast minimum 50mbit MXF (C300, which probably had fewer technical challenges and thus appeared first) and for half again you would get a consumer codec (24mbit AVCHD on the C100). The DSLR range was instructed not to compete with these pricepoints; the $7000 1DX could have a vaguely similar picture to the C100 but nowhere near the ergonomics, and half down from there the 5D3 was not to have enough resolution to be taken seriously.

That's how the world should look according to Canon, and they probably did enough market research to know that each of those markets (including the rental houses) could and would pay that for those products. Hungrier companies are trying to undercut that regime but it's very hard to assemble all the core competencies on board at once to make something really professional when it's a low-margin high-turnover business. Sony looks like it may put it all together at some point, but they seem disorganized with too many teams putting out too many poorly differentiated products, none of which are as fully thought out. Panasonic and Olympus apparently have managerial challenges. BMD, Kineraw, Digital Bolex etc. are just getting started.

Rent.

September 11, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

Damn, MBA school level swag right there. That was a spot on analysis.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
john jeffreys

Yeah, and I'd like a Porshe 911 for $6500 too

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

Wow, that video has lots of hyper happy acting with those thumbs ups, high fives and flag waving. Is that supposed to make the Canon brand seem cool to French filmmakers? Had to watch Dante Ariola's C-500 film after that to get rid of the bad after taste. Ha ha. Anybody know if the EVF of the C-100 is inferior to the C-300 EVF? Also agree the C-100 needs more frame rate options...What's that all about Canon? Please explain.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Rob

I read the comments before watching the video, and I couldn't imagine that a Canon launch video could be as terrible as everyone made it out to be, so I decided to give it a watch.

I'm now banging my head against the wall out of the anger that comes from knowing that I'll never get my six minutes back.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Robert

You are so right... Do you remember a certain short film shot to show the c300 potential, "Mobius"? XD
Now, that is how you do a "promotional video" for a camera.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
AS

Honestly, when did it become so cool to hate Canon?

Was it because the C300 was too expensive for you, even though loads of people are using them? Did the 5D3 not having XLR inputs and 4k RAW make you start hating?

I bet if this was any other camera manufacturer releasing footage looking as good as this for $6500, not to mention the pro features, clean HDMI etc, people would be jizzing themselves with excitement.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

When both Nikon and Sony have cameras that give a clean HDMI out and Canon can't get their Mark III to output to the back LCD and to an external monitor at the same time. Little stuff like that...

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

Yes that stuff is annoying. I agree. But its almost like people support a camera company like they support a football team. If there is loads of annoying things for you with the Mark iii dont buy the mark iii, but don't decide you wont buy anything from Canon ever again for the rest of your life because the Mark iii LCD screen wont stay on when you plug in an external monitor.

My next camera purchase will be the one that most makes for me in my unique circumstances. I dont care what the label on the front says. At the moment this camera is the front runner

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Peter

People get riled up when they feel like a company is taking advantage of them - and often that means charging more for less. I am not one of those people you talk about, no one should ever really make purchases based on emotion for a company, but you asked when did it become so cool to hate Canon and I gave one reason out of many. Both Nikon and Sony have cameras that can do clean HDMI, and Sony even has 1080 60p, all for less than Canon is charging...

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Editor-at-Large
Shooter/Writer/Director

At 1:27 there is definite moire in the ceiling and jaggies on all the vertical window frames. No amount of post-processing is going to make that go away (without adversely affecting the rest of the image). Therefore I'd have to choose a different camera.

There's also an odd strobing effect on the wide snow shot, and later at the airport boarding-gate sign--any guesses what's causing it?

September 12, 2012

1
Reply

Are you guys slightly dumb or what? That is definitely not from the camera, looks like some horrible scaling artifacts that CANNOT be from the cam. It's the same sensor as the C300 and it's no slouch.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
mikko löppönen

The C100 EVF is inferior to the C300. It is fixed position with lower resolution, like a fixed XF100 EVF.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Philip Lipetz

This footage looks amazing to me. Trying to figure out where all the negative comments are coming from. Very clean footage, and if you've noticed, more dynamic range than expected. I'd shoot with this camera any day. Sebastien did a great job.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Lorenzo S.

I think most of it looks like a commercial. A bit less filmic but still pretty professional. There are moments where it looks sort of awful, but I think that's mostly from post-processing more than anything. Overall it really looks pretty nice to me if you make documentaries or, say, super-cheap horror movies on-location (so, pretty much what I look for in a camera, to be honest). In those situations it looks like this I think the image quality will probably match the F3.

If I were going for the most authentic Hollywood look I probably wouldn't get this camera (Blackmagic probably would be better but I still want to see more samples), but I'd also need a lot more in the way of other equipment, too so saying "ugh but the Blackmagic is so much cheaper" doesn't really seem to be the point.

And, let's be honest; the C300 wasn't what people expected AND it was too expensive, so from that moment on people started being more skeptical of Canon.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
cows

There is a big dilema with Black Magic. It simply does not seam practical, form factor is to no comparison to his c100 or c300. This devices can be hand held, but there is no way to hand held Black magic, and get the focus right, with its small sensor. So no matter the cheap price is far from ideal. And if only c300 would drop price for a tiny bit I would be the first to buy it. but I am not so sure about c100, at least, not until I see professionally made promo with as less grading as possible. I hope there is something out there soon enough. Cos price will fall, as everyone is jumping on Black Magic, that canon will realise, that no matter how lovely, it just does not cut at 6000.

September 13, 2012

0
Reply

dont know what footage you were seeing where you say cant focus on blackmagic "small" sensor. doesnt even make since. just take a look at the footage, its seems pretty "focused" to me. plus all you need for blackmagic cinema cam is a cage, which in the long run is more practical, considering accesories. thus making it very"handheld" and excellent for run and gun style.

to my eyes, the footage is just barely filmic. some places better than others, im not a canon hater, im actually just taking the plunge into filmmaking and looking to invest in a camera. based on what ive seen...i think i'll stick with the blackmagic cinema cam...if it ever ships.

November 11, 2012

0
Reply
Will

I like canon, but I fear they are pricing themselves out of the game, and falling behind Sony. Sony is offering more features for less. And I don't feel like Canon is listening to its users. They need to learn from Apple's mistakes and fast.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Dave

C100 blows.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Johnny Unitas

Above peter mentioned people should support a company like they support a football team, I agree. But at the same time we need to see if a company from no where called black magic developed a camera which can do amazing stuff for $3k, canon can do the same but they are not doing it, everyone is looking for options, I guess Sony has realized it, and giving people options at a reasonable price.

In my opinion After the announcement of black magic cinema camera, all the companies are really thinking and trying there best to compete in the video section, but we as filmakers are comparing apples with oranges, dslrs and cinema cameras are two different categories. But there is one truth why canon dslrs were so popular .(because of video). And now they have changed the video division to pro cinema line, which is expensive, I love canon camera but can't afford so I need to see what are my other options, I am a big canon fan, I own couple of canon dslrs but it's time to move on, if canon can not provide which other manufacturers are , surely any oneone would move. I am still waiting for one more release from canon if they still disappoint the video lovers, I guess this is the time to move. This is no canon hate comment, I respect there research and technology but please canon should not let down thousands and thousands of there customers. I am really thinking about Sony now. Very good times for filmmakers.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Aurelien

Men, you guys are making me tired of all these nerding around cameras details and argument over argument, x plus but y minus. it's ok and important to discuss things like that but here on nofilmschool it's becoming a boring tech debate, one after another and another and another. my god, isn't there anything else on film making? once here and there you guys post something about creativity, screenplays, but it's obviously not a main concern. sorry if I was a little rude, but this is a sincere comment of a guy that maybe it's not going to acess nofilmschool anymore if things remain like this. if you think this is the path you want, keep going, because in that case your job is being extremely well done.

September 12, 2012

0
Reply
Raoni Franco

we all are struggling with the same problem, creativity, tools are limited, budgets are limited, we want everything for nothing, but if you come and expect screenplay comment on the page of the new highly anticipated camera, then you are most probably in the wrong section, there are plenty of sections on nofilmschool, and there is no better blog out there for filmmakers. Just find the right section to talk about creativity, or use contact the forum administrator to direct you to the right page. here is simply about technical and canon, you do not need any C camera, you can make a great film on your phone, but the more you will film the more you will understand how important is quality as well.
We are a bit ferukt about the camera specs. We all want Alexa and a few prime lenses for 6k, but it simply isn't going to happen. Once it does, it will no longer matter the camera, and we will all be looking for the same page as you are, about screenplay creativity:)

September 13, 2012

0
Reply

Once it does there will be much "better" options to film with, and an Alexa will no longer be your dream-cam, and so on and on. It has been like this for years and years, didn't you notice? And you're all going to be like "oh man, I want a 12k resolution cam with X dynamic range, then i'm going to be able to tell my story". I've been following this crazy chase for about two decades and what i've seen so far is that the quality of the image is constantly increasing and, in the other hand, the content and meaning of what is being produced is constantly getting shallower and shallower.
And I don't think I'm in the wrong place or section of the site because I knew here you were going to probably disagree with me and that makes things more interesting. What do you think?

September 14, 2012

0
Reply
Raoni Franco

Wow... I'm sure the camera is pretty great, but that is possibly the worst promo film I have ever seen. This isn't seriously the official one commissioned by Canon is it?

September 13, 2012

0
Reply
Brynn

Horrendously overdone color grades, poorly exposed and lit in many places (even for natural light only), obvious (hence overdone) use of a stabilizer in post (boat shots at 3:01), some kind of fake HDR shots as well (or is that poorly executed highlight recovery?? - jeep shot at 3:08 is one example), fake tilt shifts to exacerbate the "shallow depth of field" look (00:49 and 3:06 are particularly drastic examples)... this thing is riddled with cheap, overdone amateurish gimmicks.

Like I said, I'm sure the camera is actually really great but this video cheapens it to no end. I'm really, really shocked that Canon would put their name on this. It drags the C100 down into the realm of the GoPro.

I wonder if they are regretting giving the director too much creative freedom.

September 13, 2012

0
Reply
Brynn

Such a great comment, that is exactly what it was.

September 13, 2012

0
Reply

They forgot to put a "C" on the paraglider. I'll never buy Canon again!

Seriously, that was horrible. I feel dead inside after watching that. The complaints about the technical aspects are valid, but my main take-away is that I feel like a sheep being hawked fake Louis Vuitton handbags. Crass.

September 13, 2012

0
Reply
George

Sorry but 4:2:0 for £6000? are you insane??
It has lovely organic compression, it does not look like dslr, it loks a bit closer to c300, but it does not compare in any way.
This video was supposed to show the highs and the lows, and what did Sebastian produced, a promo, full of ugly magic bullet looking like graded video, that is just pathetic.
Seams that he did not really demonstrate the camera, but try to hide its flaws behind loads of fun shots. So that we would be trick to believe, its fun to buy right now.
I am sure its more practical then BMDC, for use in factual and fast delivery productions. But the image just does not cut it. At least not for 6k. sorry. Maybe at 4k cost this would be worth the money. But right now with so many competition, I do not even look to spend much over 4k, I cant even make as much money to cover for the cost of this, even sold my 5d2, as i knew it will half the price in 6 months. And If I have to chose, I would prefer to buy 5d Mark 3, D600 nikon, both just for its full frame, or even one of those new sony RX1. IF I cant have C300, I dont want any C:)
C300 its superb above all right now, but C100 its trying too be a bit too much, just for a bit too much money, just like this film is trying to be a bit too cool for a simple camera promotion, should have just shot a date scene, would make more impact in low light. It's not teenagers buying the camera, but a very technical people, who notice french balls straight away, and to me personally they are not attractive one bit.

September 13, 2012

0
Reply

i agree completly. it also seemed to me like he was trying hide the cameras abilities (or lack-there of) behind too many jump cuts...as if he were compensating for "limits" somewhere. what good is getting the same sensor, if the footage doesnt measure up. people keep saying sensor sensor. you can have a rolls royce engine, but if you put in in a body that doesnt maximize its performance, what do you have?

November 11, 2012

0
Reply
Will

Never seen a worse promo video, all critic on the camera aside... where is Canon locating its target audience? The Promo video for the GoPro Hero 3 makes this look like a cheap home video and that camera sells for 400$!
Looking at the price tag this camera is targeted at pros and right now I can think of at least 3 models from other brands offering twice as many features for less then half the price,
And where does all this crap of having to support a brand like a football team come from? A brand should look at the consumer needs and offer a competent product at a competent rate. Ever since Canon released the 5D2 with its video features more by accident then anything else, all they have been coming up with are what seem to be compromises trying to get the price / value ratio back to were it had been before the so called DSLR revolution.
Canon should change their mentality, it should be going back to 'with Canon you can' and not to ' With Canon you can't do what you can do with with BMC/Sony/Nikon for half the price'!

October 20, 2012

0
Reply

Girls!
For me this is the greatest camera of the new "low priced" big sensor cameras. You get the sensor of the C300! Thats more than great! The images of the C300 are so good, and here you get the exact same sensor! Take a nanoflash and you have a cheap C300. Images are great and the handling is superb! I have tested it last week and for me the form factor of a camera is very important. I want a small camera with great, filmlike pictures, good to handle with a big sensor for documentary work, and for me this is the camera to go. No Blackmagic, no FS700 and no Panasonic will give me that. The FS700 is just the slow motion i want, but be true: how often do you really need slow motion? It´s an effect, not more. And the Blackmagic is awful to handle... for me its just a camera for indie filmmakers who do acted films... .
But for documentery work, in my opinion the C100 is the biggest deal out there!

October 20, 2012

0
Reply
Matthias Kraus

for docu work yes..but i think you underestimate the blackmagic cinema cam. geez people...all you need is a cage and your good-to-go for form factor. the right lenses will give you the equivalent of full frame in most circumstances.

November 11, 2012

0
Reply
Will

That is absolutely horrible looking stuff (footage), I've got waaay better images (resolution details) with a panasonic gh1, canon 7d.... anything from years ago.
I was pretty excited about the whole "same sensor as the C300"
but this is a Joke ..and yes I'm aware about the compression, vimeo 's max. bit rate etc.. etc.
Hopefully this camera is able 2 do better than that... and get higher frame rate for Slow Motion!

November 14, 2012

0
Reply
perrona