Comments on: Canon C100 vs. Canon 5D Mark III vs. Sony FS100 with Magnanimous Media

By: Augusto Alves da SIlva

Augusto Alves da SIlva — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:11:02 +0000

Try using a RED epic on a Glidecam then…is it a bad designed camera just because it weighs much more? If I were you I would keep the 5DMKII then…

By: Augusto Alves da SIlva

Augusto Alves da SIlva — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:08:29 +0000

A few years ago we were paying 20-30k just for a video camera…and not complaining. Now we have a true cinema camera with all the small limitations for 6.5k and everybody is complaining? If the cameras go that low in price what you would consider to be a fair price for your work??? You client could say…I have just the same camera you have and you are charging me that much to shoot?

By: Andrew Rydzewski

Andrew Rydzewski — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 19:41:04 +0000

I like this comment very much.

By: Victor Blondel

Victor Blondel — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:40:49 +0000

Finally ! Someone speaking with reason and not having the same stupid (because trully argument-less) answer: “BMC is the only way” “oh non you’re wrong, just take the BMC” “BMC nails every other camera”‘.

People saying that, obviously, have never touched a camera in their life (especially not that one eheh) except maybe when shooting in nice and filled with money big studios, which I don’t believe either because in that case they’s be playing with much more expensive cameras.

now really, I too find the price, the nice raw and dynamic of the BCM very cool for the price, but this is a tool you cannot use in real life. Internal battery is a pain. Sound is a pain. And most of all, you CANNOT take that camera in your hands and make proper shots. everything I’ve seen on the web is really shaky…and rigging it with a cage, additional battery plate, audio box, EVF etc is just ridiculous, and unless you’re philip bloom, have all the gear you need to make pointless/geek-aimed videos with sliders and all, this is useless. (and cost adding..)

I mean, I have to shoot going fast, going compact ! The C100 maybe have a shitty (and for what’ve seen, not that much..) codec but it’s delightful to use (I’m saying because I actually had it in my hands), got long-life batteries, XLRs, no need for an EVF with a dodgy magic arm, etc..

even in production conditions, I’m sick and tired with getting cables everywhere and dodgy accessories just when I need to go fast from tripod to shoulder, of from shoulder to doggy…and I think the C100 is just perfect for that…

By: Will

Will — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 01:49:51 +0000

The the perceived “problems” with the bmcc, can be easily remedied via mild rigging. I think it will be excellent for film.

By: Matthias Kraus

Matthias Kraus — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 12:28:11 +0000

For “Film” i would go for the Blackmagic.
For “documentary” definetly NOT. The C100 is the best deal out there in my opinion.
And i own already a Nanoflash – so the C100 is like the C300.
Its great to shoot with, its small, it has the C-Log, same sensor than C300 ND-Filters.
It´s not overpriced what i get for the money is really great. What would you buy instead of this camera when it´s about documentary? fs100? fs700? Panasonic?
For me the only other choice is to work with 2/3 cameras.

By: hardbonemac

hardbonemac — Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:51:16 +0000

NICE 2013!

In some days we see new cams in ces13.

Maybeeee the new c102. Same house. much from the c500 and $$$ goes to 3990,90,-…
So if you do not go down in cancer, if you can wait and not be a littel boy in front of christmasssss tree..
why so speddy?
Think CANON learn it a bit faster.
And waht is with the BRAND NEW SONY FS 800…?

hm….. funny out there war of cams…… calm down it is christmass..and if not..a goody first
to go back to where we started once…..a dream..

By: Terence Kearns

Terence Kearns — Sat, 22 Dec 2012 06:35:11 +0000

Good info. Cheers.

By: Terence Kearns

Terence Kearns — Sat, 22 Dec 2012 06:24:33 +0000

Agree 100% with Raphael.

By: Terence Kearns

Terence Kearns — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 23:00:46 +0000

I think it’s EXACTLY the same market.

By: pstchaseki

pstchaseki — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 18:03:11 +0000

i ditto your rant. yeah those are my thoughts exactly. . . . @ Phil: you mustve missed your breast feeding time this morning. and do us all a favor and go back inside the playpen you crawled out of.

By: wsmith

wsmith — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 16:39:31 +0000

I watched the demo of rolling shutter and it told me nothing, really. I was hoping to see panning results. All these half-assed tests are meaningless and a waste of time.

By: Erik Stenbakken

Erik Stenbakken — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 05:01:32 +0000

FWIW I didn’t bother watching the video in the comments section till last — should have watched that first. It is more meaningful than the first two tests IMHO. Boring, yes. Interesting, yes.

By: Tim Rockwood

Tim Rockwood — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:32:44 +0000

Ryan, we weren’t allowed to use some of these vulgarities at Middlebury! The FS100 looks darn good. I co-own a C300 and am in production on http://www.documentary.org/fsp/3850. We used an F3 along with the C300. In all cases, the skills of the cinematographers outweighed the technical specs of the devices. Having hired hundreds of DPs in productions all around the world, I’ve re-learned from these threads that the really negative people probably don’t get hired much. The really good ones are too busy working and getting better at their craft. cheers

By: David

David — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:24:28 +0000

The so called flat not impressive FS100 image you saw was a flat g-log profile designed by Frank Glencairn who spent a lot of time tweaking and finding that magic formula to deliberately get a high dynamic range in camera close to the Sony F3. It is close to 12 stops, but must use this flat profile to get it. I think all cameras that have these special logs give this flat image. But take that to post and watch the DR come alive – it is all there. The quality of the FS100 and F3 is definitely class leading IF you know how to make it work. It is not just a simple point and shoot out of the box. It must be worked over and understood.

OTOH, Vortex media has an FS100 profile that nails it right on in camera with gorgeous color that jumps out, but you sacrifice a bit of DR. His rationale is to get it right in camera and spend the time with the right profile, judicious use of filters etc. and forgo the PP work – it is too time consuming. Another DP who does discovery channel docs, says exactly the same thing with the F3. Spend the time in shooting, not in Post. And does that recording internally on the F3!! Not even external recording and gets his work published on TV, commercials, Discovery, TV series etc. Amazing, huh? It is all in the set up.

Cheers,
Take 5

By: Sarah

Sarah — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:48:21 +0000

FS100 clean your lens, it’s filthy!

(like Phil’s potty mouth)

By: Gary W

Gary W — Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:45:37 +0000

I agree with Robin if you don’t no how to get the best out of the FS100 and there is plenty of info on DVX USER to do just that, then dont include it in the test. Your inability should not reflect the abilities of this great camera and yes I own one and have gotten far better results from the camera then are showing here. Again basically this test means nothing.

By: Robin Schmidt

Robin Schmidt — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 23:41:07 +0000

This was a pretty poor test, the only way to evaluate a camera properly is to rent it and shoot with it, and even then the Sonys in particular really need a lot of time setting up. For reasons best known to Sony they ship with a total dogs breakfast on board which is the first encounter anyone has with them. Frank Glencairn has done a great job of developing a very good picture profile for the FS100 and it’s perfectly capable of competing with the C100 in terms of colour. DSLRs have blessed us with straight out of the camera goodness and the C range appear to be continuing that trend. Good for them. These kinds of tests though basically mean nothing at all.

By: Jeff Waweru

Jeff Waweru — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 16:51:25 +0000

Phil, both you and Raphael have a point. Raphael is saying the Canon cameras “should” be cheaper, and they should be, for what they offer, but because big business works the way it does they aren’t and they won’t be cheaper.
Raphael is not saying that they will be cheaper which seems to be what you are on about, he’s just pointing out the disparity in the canon pricing i.e the BS of big business. Please try and get what people are saying before pointing out the condition of their privates.

By: Richard van den Boogaard

Richard van den Boogaard — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 12:57:15 +0000

Not just ISO, but whatever function you activate, albeit ISO, Kelvin or shutter speed.

Good tip on the side handle plug. Had not thought about it. Shows that Peter’s suggestion to plug in/out the side handle to make changes is even more unworkable. No other way than to get a firmware fix, I guess…

And yes, I do miss the option to move the centerpoint around a lot too. Filmmakers rarely (if ever) frame their subject dead center, so you want to be able to magnify (pref 5x or 10x like on DSLRs, not just 1:1 pixel ratio) wherever the subject is.