May 3, 2013

1080P is Better Than 4K (Or Why I Chose the Canon C100) with Ryan E. Walters

This is a guest post by Cinematographer Ryan E. Walters.

After many years of owning a wide range of camera systems, including a RED ONE and an EPIC, I decided to sell it all and rent. So for the past three years I have been exclusively renting cameras on a per project basis, that is, until recently when I made the plunge and bought the Canon C100. Little did I know how many eyebrows and questions it would raise when I posted a picture on Facebook. Here is why I chose a 1080p, 4:2:0 camera over a 4k RAW camera.

Reason 1: It Is The Craftsperson, Not The Tool, That Matters

I am a firm believer that it is the talent behind the lens that matters most, not the camera. I want to surround myself with people and productions who value the craft more than the tech. When was the last time you hired a carpenter and asked what brand hammer he was using? Or what brush the painter used on the oil painting you bought? Or how about the contents of this blog -- does it matter if I am writing it on a Mac, PC, iPhone, or Android?

What matters most is the craft that goes into delivering results that are appropriate for the project at hand. The people who get that, and have those values, are the ones who I work with. I'm not a monkey pushing buttons on a camera.

The C100 is a tool that checks off enough of the boxes that are important to me in owning a camera system. It is far from perfect, but it is a capable camera system that will allow me to create the images I want.

Reason 2: I'm Not A Rental House

While I do rent equipment on the side to generate additional income, the tools I buy are the ones I use frequently. I am not interested in owning everything, nor am I interested in worrying about making a camera work every month in order to make it pay for itself. Instead, I would rather choose the appropriate tool for the job, and not force a camera onto a shoot just because I own it and need to make a payment. For example, last year I chose the Alexa, Epic, Canon C300, Sony FS100, and the Canon 5D MKII & MKIII to shoot different spots for Adidas. Each tool was appropriate for that specific application.

With the instant $1,000 rebate on the C100, I felt that it came in at a price point that allows me to own a camera system objectively without forcing me to choose it due to financial reasons. (Although at $5,500, I think the camera is still about $1,000 over priced for the features it offers...). But I can't complain too much. Within a week of buying it, it is already going out on rentals that it is a good fit for. And with no payments on it, that is a great feeling!

Yes there is a 5D in there somewhere...

Reason 3: Some Tools Are Easier To Use Than Others

A 4k camera for $4k sure does sound appealing; I can't deny that. However, the truth is that in order to get that camera to play nicely on an actual shoot it has to be outfitted with external batteries, audio adapters, and other accessories. So the cost is more than $4k. (The same can be said of DSLRs). As cameras get smaller and smaller, my frustrations with them grow.

The C100 comes in a form factor that works straight out of the box, with real professional, industry standard connections (1/4" is great for mics & guitars... XLR is for video), and even an included microphone. (Not that the on camera mic is good for anything other than natural sound/scratch track). I don't have to buy any accessories to make it work on a shoot if I don't want to. Instead, the accessories I buy will be for my own needs and style of working.

Reason 4: I'm Not Interested In Hype, I'm Interested In Reality

Reality check: 4k is not here, nor will it be for at least 5-10 years. Camera manufacturers and sales people love to play on our insecurities and want us to buy into their 4k and beyond hype machine. It is how they make their money -- selling us new technology. If you were at NAB this year, 4k was everywhere, just like 3D was everywhere last year. (And 3D was nowhere to be seen at NAB this year... but I doubt 4k will disappear like that).

However, I found it interesting that out of all of the booths displaying 4k content, NONE of them had it next to 1080p content for a side-by-side comparison. To me that is very telling. When we made the transition from SD to HD, the show floor was FULL of SD and HD comparisons and it was easy to tell the difference on the same sized screen. THX even states that most people will not see a benefit of 4k content on a 50" screen, which supports the claims of this chart: 1080p Does Matter, Here's When. So for the vast majority of end viewers and clients, all that 4k does is add overhead, expense, and complication without any real reward.

By the time the marketing machine has gotten us all to succumb to our insecurities and upgrade our tech to 4k, it will be light-years ahead of where it is today. And that will be the time to make the switch. Today's 4k+ cameras will not be able to compete with what is next. When 4k is a reality, I HIGHLY doubt that Adidas, Autodesk, or Nike will be wanting to have their 5+ year old commercial remastered in 4k. They will be on to new marketing campaigns shot with the newest cameras/tech available.

This is NOT to say that 4k doesn't matter; it does. Especially at origination of the recorded image. A 4k image down sampled to 1080p will have more detail in it than a straight 1080p image. This is where the brilliance of the C100 comes into play. The C100 has the SAME 4k sensor as the C500 and C300. So I am getting the same performance as their $26,000 camera at 1/5 the price without the added expense or complication that 4k brings with it on set or in post.

Reason 5: Protecting Vision Is Important

While I have to admit that I like working with RAW 4k images (I did own a Red after all), it is a double-edged sword. The proliferation of affordable camera tools and post tools means that a lot more people can play with and manipulate footage. This is GREAT when working with people who care about the quality of the finished image, and who work with you to get the most out of it.

This same power can be disastrous when people who think they know something start playing around with reframing and grading the images, destroying what I have worked hard to create. I have been burned on projects by people who have done just that -- poorly reframed images & poorly graded them.

In an industry where you are only as good as your last project, this can have a real negative impact on your career. Which is why I am now selective about whom I work with. (And I'm not alone, other cinematographers on CML have expressed facing these same problems).

The compressed footage, and the fact that the C100 only outputs a 1080p file means that there is a lot less that can be done in post to drastically change what was shot. Another upside of the compressed format is that it keeps me honest while shooting. I have to be much more precise in what I do as I have less flexibility in post if I screw up -- I HAVE to be on my A-Game at all times, and I like the discipline that it reinforces in my work.

Comparison of Dynamic Range Of Various Camera Systems

Reason 6: Dynamic Range In Over Exposure Latitude Is Important

The smaller the production's resources, the more important the overexposure latitude becomes in the camera choice. The smaller that range, the more work has to be done on set to protect the highlights by bringing up ambient levels on the set. (Or a compromise has to be made by letting them clip). That is one of the major reasons why the Alexa is my favorite cameras to shoot on. With ~7 stops of overexposure latitude, it is hard to clip highlights, and even when they do clip it is more pleasant than other camera systems.

The RED ONE MX and the EPIC-X*, on the other hand, have ~5 stops of overexposure latitude. While this is a lot better than previous cameras, the headroom is not the same, nor is the roll off as pleasant as the Alexa. (As demonstrated by my extreme test). The Blackmagic Cinema Camera also has a similar overexposure latitude, as does the C300 and C100 (and presumably the C500, but I haven't tested it). So if all of the cameras have the same overexposure latitude, then I do not see a reason to jump on the 4k+ bandwagon just to be cool. All I am gaining is additional expense/work on set and in post.

I wish that the C100 had more overexposure latitude, but at least it doesn't have less than the other "affordable" options out there.

*I realize that the EPIC-X has HDR-X. However, I have yet to see an implementation of it that I personally like. Furthermore, it adds extra hassle and potential for BIG problems in post. See Reason 5 above.

Reason 7: Low Light Performance Is Important

Cameras these days can see more in the dark than our eyes can. The ability to work with and shape existing light on an exterior night location should not be overlooked, especially when working with a small crew. When a camera performs well in low light, it becomes more about removing light than adding it. And that directly translates into smaller setups, smaller power requirements, smaller everything. (Side note: I'm really interested in testing out and working with the F5 & F55 for this very reason).

This is where the C100 really shines over the RED MX, EPIC-X, and the Blackmagic Cinema Camera. Coming from the pedigree of the C300 sensor, the C100 allows for astonishing clean imagery at EIs (A.K.A. ISOs) of more than 3200.

Yeah, but the C100 is only 8 bit 4:2:0...

Yep, it sure is. One of the huge takeaways I had from participating in Zacuto's Revenge Of The Great Shootout is that today's 8-bit 4:2:0 is not the same as when it first came onto the market. Now it doesn't come close to 16 bit 4:4:4 imagery, but if it is shot correctly, it can be graded well, delivering beautiful results. And, as a craftsperson, I should be skilled at choosing AND using tools that are appropriate for every job.

When I do find that I need a 4:2:2 color space (for green screen, or other VFX), then I can always add a Ninja 2. And if I find myself on a project that needs more than that -- then I can rent a better tool for the job. This is the beauty of owning an affordable camera system. See Reason 2. :)

Yeah, but the C100 only shoots up to 30p at 1080...

Correct. :) That is why I think this camera should be priced at $4,500. After all, even cameras like the AF100 can shoot in variable frame rates up to 60 fps in 1080p. This is a major oversight by Canon. I think they are working too hard at protecting their higher end cameras. The sensor is capable of 60 fps at 1080p. Why cripple it, other than to make more money?

This is when I have to realistically evaluate the work I do. While I would love to have 60 fps at 1080p, I don't shoot a lot of high-speed work. And when I do shoot high-speed work, it tends to be around 100-120 fps, which means I'm renting anyway. So while this is a downside for the camera, it isn't one that will impact me significantly.

The Bottom Line

Is the C100 the end all, be all camera? Not even close. I like it, and it will allow me to do what I need for the money I spent. If you haven't caught on by now, let me say it clearly -- I'm not interested in being a fan boy who is entrenched in one camera system or platform. The end all, be all camera doesn't exist. There isn't one camera system that fits every situation. It is about knowing the camera and using it effectively. After all it is just a tool.

What are your thoughts? Am I completely crazy, or only partially? ;) Why did you choose to buy the camera you have? Or have you chosen to continue to rent?

This post originally appeared on Ryan’s Blog.

Link: 1080p is better than 4k. (Or Why I Chose The Canon C100) -- Ryan E. Walters


Ryan E. Walters is an award-winning Oregon-based cinematographer. His work has allowed him the opportunity to travel worldwide in the pursuit of telling stories that are visually compelling. His experience includes feature films, documentaries, commercials, and shooting for Comcast, TLC, Oxygen, and the Discovery Channel.

Your Comment

320 Comments

He's got some great points. He actually sold me a little more on the C100 than I had been. Still, I am not running out to purchase it.

May 3, 2013

2
Reply
Harry Pray IV

Thanks. :) A point of clarification- I'm NOT trying to sell the C100. It is only one choice of many capable tools that I use. I'm just sharing why I decided to buy one. :)

May 3, 2013

2
Reply

I know. I don't mean literally sell. Though, if I were you, I'd have interjected the same disclaimer as well. Thanks for your tests and blog, Ryan. I know I'm listening intently to your posts and loved your BMCC, Red Epic, and Alexa comparson test. The IR part was particularly useful.

May 6, 2013

-1
Reply
Harry Pray IV

Great post, Ryan. I agree completely with Reason 1 - people have become obsessed with the tools sometimes to the detriment of the craft. You make a compelling case for the C100. I haven't used it yet, but I'll give it a whirl.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Thanks. :) It is a nice tool that works well for a lot of projects. But not everything. :)

May 3, 2013

1
Reply

Reality: Hollywood produces the most expensive crap nowadays. Great visuals but terrible acting, casting, storytelling etcetra.

The amount of crap in cinema today is mindboggling.

Just look at this scifi short movie. Made by 1 guy. Best scifi i've seen in years.
https://vimeo.com/57148705

Or this beautifully shot,edited,graded short docu/portrait on a Canon 550 D
https://vimeo.com/63626357

'A talented musician also will sound great on a old cheap guitar'

May 3, 2013

3
Reply
Paul Jay

Great point Jay. :) And I think that fits along the line of what Steven Soderberg was touching on in his state of cinema speach: https://vimeo.com/65060864

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply

Sorry but I disagree regarding R'ah. Accomplished VFX but far too much expository dialogue ('show, don't tell') and anaemic CGI. That might be more taste but film, for me, is sets/locs, H&M, wardrobe, props, and talent. It's a collaborative process, and that's excluding the screenplay and crew. Certainly CGI has its place but it should always service the writing. Watching Toy Story, I'd forgotten within mins, because I was absorbed by the plot. Watching R'ah, I was acutely aware it was all CGI. As I said, it was a technical accomplishment. But as a film, it didn't hold me.

May 5, 2013

0
Reply
Sasso Palmieri

That hammer analogy really doesn't apply to cameras. Technology matters. It's why there is such hype about these new low cost cameras with such great DR. If the camera didn't matter we'd all be shooting on camera phones. It will never matter more than story though!

I think a better argument might be: "Use the right tool for the job and for most of my day to day general use the C100 is the right tool, hence I bought it."

I do however agree that we shouldn't buy into the 4K hype. I recently finished a film on the Alexa (1080P Prores 422). 1080P from a decent camera is mind-blowing.

May 3, 2013

-4
Reply
MWL

That would be my thoughts, too.
We should stop thinking technology vs creativity. They just need to go hands in hands.
A better camera for a good story can support the story better than a lower-quality camera. So good quality will alway be better, even if you're after a special lo-fi look, but that's a specific case.

The thing we should probably balance more is all the other aspects of a camera aside image quality and resolution: form factor, portability, audio, monitoring accuracy, battery life, etc.
There are even situations where shooting with a RED would be impossible due to the reactions of people in the street, so a DSLR would be the only option...

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply

Yep- it is about choosing the best tool for each job, and not just choosing one tool because you own it, or buy into the hype around it. :)

May 3, 2013

-3
Reply

Fair enough. :) It is also why I backed up what I said with my real world example of shooting commercials for Adidas on 5 - 6 different camera systems. Some VERY high end, others not so much. :)

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply

You will never get me to pay again several thousands for a camera with block artefacts on film

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply
Eric

Cool. That's why there are choices, and why I LOVE options. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

I completely agree. I shoot with the C100 all of the time, because it's great for a lot of my work. Now the past two days I've been shooting with a rented Epic package because the job called for a camera with its capabilities and form factor. I think it's important to understand the technology that's available so you can make the best camera choice to suit the needs of the job.

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply

Nicely done. :) And to me that shows your professionalism- choosing the right tool for the right job. It's what we do. :)

May 3, 2013

3
Reply

People own gear and tell everybody how great it is...nothing new.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
hansd

Perhaps they own the gear because it's great and it is not great simply because they own it.

May 3, 2013

2
Reply

That is also a valid point. :) Although with all of the camera hype these days, I wonder how true that is ... I see a lot of people in my area buying cameras based off of hype rather then reality, and all it does it put them into massive debt and their work isn't any better ...

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply

But that is kind of the opposite of my points in this article. The C100 is only one camera, one choice among many. I like what it does for the money, but it doesn't force me into using it because I own it. Making a choice based purely on ownership is short sided in my opinion. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

lol.

Not a tech person but own every camera possible, and writing a whole article on why this gear is great.
And, by the way, you can be bot craftmen and techmen. Thinking you must one or another is a mistake.

If technology doesn't matter, keep shooting in DV, or in film ( wich is great, of course)
If every project is different and have differents needs, why did he come here to talk about this cam specifically.

Tool in cinema is important. The possibility in story telling comes also with the technology.

Rethink about that for agriculture.

May 3, 2013

2
Reply

Awesome- congrats. Glad you have the business model to support owning every camera. :) That is a great place to be in. :)

You are correct- it is important to be both a technician and a craftsperson. :) See reason #3. And if you take a look at my blog, ( http://www.ryanewalters.com/Blog/blog.php ) you'll see a lot of highly technical articles. :)

But I think today, we focus on the tech to the detrement of the craft. Which is why my first two points are more about craft, and I end the article talking about craft. :)

May 3, 2013

1
Reply

I like your post mate, the c100 is one of the most underrated cameras out there, I do agree however with the price needing to be 1K lower.

May 3, 2013

1
Reply

Thanks. :) Yeah $4,500 feels about right for what this camera offers. (Or lacks ...)

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply

A used fs100 with a matte box and filters is a better deal than a c100 at the moment.

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply

No doubt. There are better deals to be had, and if that is your preference, jump on it. :) That was another camera I was considering, however two things turned me away from it and to the C100:

1. Built in ND. While 90% of the time I have a matte box and ND on me, having the option to go ultra small and still have ND control was important to me.

2. The bigger factor for me was color science. Straight out of the box, I like how the skin tones are on Canon cameras better then Sony cameras. (And I've own both.) This is purely a personal preference- both make great images. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

I agree that built in ND is defiantly a plus over the FS100, but I got it for half the price of a C100 and it does 60FPS.

May 3, 2013

-4
Reply

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply
Dan

Thanks for sharing that- great write up. :)

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply

I agree. I have similar reasons for having bought and stuck with the FS100.

May 3, 2013

1
Reply
Tom

Awesome. :) Congrats on your purchase. :)

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply

Very interesting article. I also feel that there is no "One Cam Fits All" but without an unlimited budget I have found that I often have to work with what I have. I still often shoot with a Canon GL2 in SD as a backup because I still haven't found a camera as versatile for under 5k. It really must be replaced, however, and I have been searching for a suitable replacement.
I was thinking about moving into the 4k space with either a Black Magic Production Cam or JVC GY-HMQ10 but now I'm not so certain. So the search continues for a camera that will fit my needs.

May 3, 2013

5
Reply

Good luck on your search- that is the tough part- finding something that will meet your needs at a price point you are willing to pay. :)

The Blackmagic Production camera will not come in under $5,000, unless you only plan on shooting with the internal battery, the monitor on the back, no audio adapter, and you already have the lenses. If that is your plan and it works for your needs Great! But if you are expecting it to function like the GL2, then you may be disapointed when it comes time to buy the accessories ...

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply

Yes, you are completely crazy. Placing value on the technical ability of a camera and good craft are not mutually exclusive.

May 3, 2013

-3
Reply
Ant

Glad to know I'm completely crazy. :)

You are correct, the two are not mutually exclusive. :) And that is why the first part & last part of my article is about the craft, and other parts focus on the tech. Obviously I could have done better to emphasize that point. :) (Check out the rest of my blog, as I have a lot of highly technical posts on there- tech matters ...)

However, I think we in the film industry, and especially us camera geeks, get too focused on the tech to the detriment of the craft.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

So then why are you even talking about 4k vs 1080?

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply
MD

I'm pretty sure that not everyone using a Red feels like a monkey pushing buttons. Just sayin.

But yeah, the c100 is less expensive and smaller, easier to handle, I'm sure. But better? If less expensive and smaller means better, then it is better. 'Better' is in the eye of the beholder.

I'd like to see the best 1080p from the c100 compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYYYT48Iv_c

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Gene

But it's true, 1080p does look great. And for the money it's better. Just about anyone can afford 1080p. And 1080p is in its heyday now. But there's nothing to sustain that heyday, especially with the Sony 4k tv coming out in a couple weeks. Once people walking through Best Buy see the 4k picture they will be anxiously waiting for the day when 4k tvs come down in price and tv shows and movies are available in 4k.

4k cameras will eventually come down in price and be in a smaller, easier to handle unit, like the c100. No one will use 1080p then.

But for now, yeah, 1080p looks absolutely fantastic, even in the GoPro Black at 60fps:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPr32OYuEmo

May 3, 2013

-3
Reply
Gene

Opps, this was done in the HERO2, not the Black. This is a Black, 1080p, 60fps. I really like how the sun and shade looks on the dirt:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFTwaf3iBjU

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply
Gene

that video is boring

May 3, 2013

1
Reply
Peter Kelly

The one in 4k from Jacob Schwarz? Did you click on "Original" in the quality button and wait for it to download?

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Gene

I did. Watched it in "original" on a 1440p monitor, and was completely underwhelmed.

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply
Brian

no because i dont have a 4k monitor, its pretty but its just flowers, the music is slow and dull, its too long. I turned off halfway through.

May 3, 2013

-5
Reply
Peter Kelly

From the other comments listed, it is easy to tell that there is more to our craft then just the tech. Great tech doesn't automatically make for a great end result. (I think the movies coming out these days are a great example of this ...)

Also, keep in mind what I said in Reason 4- 4k does help in the origination of the image. (A 4k image down sampled to 1080p is "better" (has more detail) then a straight 1080p image.)

May 3, 2013

3
Reply

So you're just saying that because of cost, less cumbersome to use, and familiarity with the C100, are the reasons you're not going 4k at this time.

May 3, 2013

-2
Reply
Gene

I'm not going 4k due to all of the reasons I listed above in the article.

I have shot, and will shoot on camera systems that shoot at all kinds of resolutions depending on the needs of the production. It is about the story, the craft, and the needs of the production. I use it when appropriate, not just because it is "cool" or the hype of the tech ... in the end it all gets delivered to 1080p ...

May 3, 2013

2
Reply

My point wasn't that people who shoot on Red are monkey's, (I know I don't feel like a monkey when I'm shooting on one.) you missed the point. My point was that it is the craft that matters- if it is ALL about the tech, then anyone behind a camera becomes just a monkey pressing buttons, and will be replaced. :)

May 3, 2013

1
Reply

Um, did you even read the article? He said it was good for what he was normally shooting and if he had to do slow motion and intense color correction he would get a different camera for those shoots. Finding shots that a camera is not designed to make is pointless. This is like me complaining that my Gopro doesn't do good interviews.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Kian

Wish you would have posted this one of Jason's instead Gene http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_okcNVZqqI

...mostly because I helped with it... :P

May 3, 2013

-1
Reply
Dan

Nice article!

The C100 is overpriced but it's fun to shoot with it. I can rent a package for about €100 a day. And yes, it can do slowmo. Check out my C100 slow motion test:

Youtube
http://youtu.be/mZp3_KVPCGg

Vimeo
http://vimeo.com/56285688

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Bryan Arnold

Thanks for sharing Bryan. :)

I'm looking into shooting at 60i & 50i and converting it for slow-mo as well. I think that is one work around that has potential for some limited uses in the work that I do. (I'd rather have "true" slow-mo, but this is an option.) :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

You're welcome. Thanks for taking time to reply. Keep up the great work you're doing :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Bryan Arnold

thank you. thank you. i've been considering a new camera buy for about three weeks, and my work has just about ground to a halt with all the research. bmcc ? c100? sell the lenses and flip to d800? pray the ML guys can hack my mk lll ? used ? 1dx ?

this is the clarity i've been looking for. and yes: it's probably still a bit overpriced, but the $1k rebate on now makes it a lot more palatable.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
sjk

Anytime, glad to help. :) It is just one tool of many options out there. If it fits your needs, it will serve you well. (But the C100 isn't for every production.)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Blah blah blah, the old "what I'm shooting on is the best camera!" circlejerk. We get it - you bought a camera and have to justify it for yourself (and now, thanks to the Internet, to the whole world). Big deal. Let people buy whatever they want to shoot on. But don't go around acting as if 1080P is objectively "better" than 4K.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Hummer

Glad somebody said it. I get some of this sure. The hammer thing doesn't really work - I'm not going to shoot green screen with a 4:2:0 at that price.
But the overall attitude is pretty uppity for someone sitting on an Epic.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
JM

Did you read the post? I think you may be misunderstanding...

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Brian

Um, I think you missed a lot of what I said ... as that is exactly the OPPOSITE of what my post was about. At the very least I'd highly recommend going back and reading what I said in The Bottom Line.

No circle jerk here. :) I use whatever tool fits the needs of the jobs I work on. From the big boys all the way down to the DLSR's and I'm ok with that. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Crap, Not only did I miss your point I got the spec wrong on the camera. It does 4:2:2 out uncompressed HDMI.
This is embarrassing. I just wasted everybody's time.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
JM

No worries. :) I know I get a lot of things wrong- none of us are perfect. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

+1

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Peter

Thanks. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

This pretty much summs up why I've bought a C300 16 month ago (nobody knew about a c100 back then).
Great allround tool for so many tasks. Not the best for every, but good enough for most.
The C300 adds a few things up. But I could do a lot of my work also with a C100.

They look weird first, the price might be not the best if you compare spec sheets. But as soon as you worked with these cams you will love the out of the box package that lets you just work without playing Lego everytime and spend money on additional stuff.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

For sure. I have loved working with the C300, and I'll continue to shoot with it. :) You have some great points about the form factor and playing Lego. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Interesting article but the first line makes NO SENSE ....
'After many years of owning a wide range of camera systems, including a RED ONE and an EPIC, I decided to sell it all and rent. So for the past three years I have been exclusively renting cameras on a per project basis...'

The RED ONE is only 5 years old and the EPIC 2 the most so you can not have been renting cameras for 3 years ....

May 3, 2013

2
Reply
Tony

Sure I can. Here's how: I owned a Red One. When Red announced that they were making the Epic, I sold my Red One and got in line for the discount for the Epic. Red missed their deadline for delivery for the Epic by 1 year. So I have been renting for 3 years. (When my Epic finally did arrive a year late, I sold it.)

Easy math. :) (Although I admit that I could have done a better job at explaining that part. But I didn't think it was crucial to the rest of the article. :) )

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

I admit the lowlight capabilites of this camera are nice indeed, but sorry I am not going out to buy a $6000 8 bit camera, when technically a black magic pocket camera can provide a better picture quality for only $1000.

Also i would rent a 1dc for low light over a c100 especially if it was for a indie film

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
JayClout

To each his own- that's why there are options. :) And they are all tools that should be used in service to the project and the story. :)

The pocket camera is VERY interesting, and I am interested in using it. But don't fool yourself, that $1,000 is NOT $1,000 by the time you get it to work like a proper camera with the added accessories you will be much closer to the price of a C100. And then you have the sensor crop factor to deal with ...

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Great write up, Ryan - I'm glad I'm not the only person that thinks 1080p can work wonders for most of the work NFS readers are doing. A competently rendered and projected 1080 image will look just as good to most viewers in a theater as a 4k capture/2k render. Anyone see THE RAID: REDEMPTION? Shot on a AF100 with external capture.

Curious about your comment on the BMPCC accessories that would get its base cost close to a C100. Are you talking about rigging, or lenses? I'm biased - I put in a preorder in the day it was announced - but in part I put that in since I already have a set of m43 lenses and Nikon glass fitted with m43 adapters. It looks like the only thing I'll need to invest in is a few extra Nikon batteries (less than $20/piece) and some faster SD cards than I have (maybe $200 all in). If I decide to pick up an external monitor, that might be another $600-$1k, but that's still way under $6k.

If you meant getting everything you need from scratch - rigging, lenses, sound, etc - then certainly that'll be considerably more than the $1000 price tag, but the initial buy of any camera is going to have addons.

What I'm definitely not getting with my preorder, though, is the lowlight performance of the C100/300. Tradeoffs :-)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Put 'The Raid' side-by-side with the 'Hobbit' and see if you still believe that "A competently rendered and projected 1080 image will look just as good to most viewers in a theater as a 4k capture/2k render" nonsense.

May 4, 2013

0
Reply
Marcus

Pfhahah, troll harder. Tons of indie work have had theatrical releases in the last few years that were 1080 capture.

May 4, 2013

0
Reply

I have a C100 and a Ninja 2 and it's a superb combination. Shot a video on the F5 last night and the C100 is so much faster to use, albeit with inferior spec.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Richard

Thanks. :)

Ooh, the F5- can't wait to use that camera. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Great article! I was fortunate enough to work on the Zacuto Great Camera shootout with Ryan. I was shooting on the FS100 with Den Lennie on that job. I too found it extremely enlightening and educational. Not only to spend time with the other DP's and learn from them, but to see all these cameras compared on the big screen and just how capable the less expensive cameras were when directly compared to the higher end of the market. I too bought a C100 in December last year and it is one of my favourite cameras to shoot on. Very versatile and produces stunning images in my opinion. I also recently purchased a Sony F55. For me it has been a really crazy time to purchase cameras, considering how quickly they are advancing in features and plummeting in price. I chose the C100 as an "all rounder" and because I absolutely love shooting on it, for all the same reasons Ryan mentioned. The F55 ended up being a purchase instead of a rental because it simply worked out more economical to actually buy it than rent it for the 9 week period that I would need it. I am currently shooting a green screen VFX series that uses the 4K resolution for a mixture of live action and animation and affords the post team much more room to move the images around within the HD frame that we will deliver. I agree that 4k distribution is still a while off and to be honest I could see no real benefit to that resolution on a domestic TV sized screen. 4K is here as a production tool and I too think it will live in the production realm for quite some time before we see an uptake in distribution and delivery of it. Thanks for the article Ryan, a great read!

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Thanks Mic. :)

Great perspective. I would love to have the business model to own the hire end cameras, but it just doesn't pencil out for me. I'm glad that it does for you! :) Congrats on the F55- what you said makes A LOT of sense. :)

By the way- if anyone hasn't checked out Mic's work- check it out. He is a talented guy. :) (And a pleasure to hang out with.) Watch his stuff here: https://vimeo.com/mickjones

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

MORE PIXELS EQUALS BETTER THAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
dogge

??? Not sure how to respond to this one ???

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

The one part i find most interesting about this post, is where Ryan says he likes the fact that you are more restricted in post when shooting 1080p.

We've been hearing for years now, since Star Wars Ep1 really, how amazing it is to have all these capabilities in post since the invention of HD, and its continued with the evolution of UHD. And not just from amateur/professionals who do mess up the final product with bad reframing and grading, but also from big names in the business.

I just find it interesting that we're now heading in an opposite direction.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Yep, restriction in post does force you (me) to make more selective choices while shooting, which means I have to be a lot more present, and make sure I'm on my A game. The discipline it brings makes for a better craft in my opinion. When everything does become 4k, that same discipline in craft will translate over. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Thanks for sharing you thoughts Ryan. Very brave.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Travis Jones

Thanks sir. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

What's a 422 color space?

And even if there were such a thing, why would any professional aim to use 422 chroma subsampled media for green screen work?

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Jordy

Oops, nice catch. :) Wrong terminology used for that sentence. :) Thanks for catching it. :)

Personally, I've found a sampling of 4:2:2 to be perfectly adequate for many of the projects I work on. Sure 4:4:4 is better, but the data overhead is not always welcomed by the production, especially when 4:2:2 will get the job done. Now if it is a heavy VFX project, that could be a different issue ... but it is not the work that I do. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

As someone who works in post I agree that 1080p and a well shot image at any compression can be more than enough. I also feel that there's a HUGE benefit to having extra resolution to play with. For example, on a recent project the DP shot 4k on a R1MX and captured all the interviews at a mid-shot. We were finishing at 1080 so I had a LOT of room to punch in and make the edit much more dynamic. I guess with the ease of use and the cost you could just buy two C100's, but I feel that little things like that make a big difference to the final product in the end and a 4k image makes that possible.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Matt

Thanks for your thoughts. :)

I chose the Epic and shot in 5k for one of the spots that I did for Adidas because we needed the extra resolution to push in past the level I could go on the lenses we were using. So I hear you there. :)

While I get that for an interview, you can punch in and get "two" shots for the price of one when shooting in high resolutions, it is an aesthetic that I personally don't care for. Punching in like that never feels the same as when there are two different cameras at different angles using different lenses. (But if it is a one time event, and there are only the resources for one camera, I can see the appeal / need.) :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

For sure... Different tools and different solutions for different jobs.

May 3, 2013

1
Reply
Matt

I would agree, If it fits the work you get then it the camera for you. I also agree with your thought on 4K, its not here yet, and when it will be the tech of now will be outdated by the tech when it is feasible then. Great article.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Xiong

Thanks. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Simply put, most paying projects don't require more quality than what the c100 offers.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
ryan

Great point. :) We can wax philosophical all day- but at the end of the day we have to make a living. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Thanks for this. Great read!

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Great post. This reflects my feelings about equipment.

I produce learning modules in PDF format with embeded video. I do it all with my 7D. I shoot the video at 30p at an shutter speed of 1/60. I set the camera to shoot the stills at the same setting so I don't have to adjust any camera settings. Post is a snap.

I went to NAB this year and looked at all of the new and reinvented "gear" and decided that the 7D is just the right camera for what I am producing. I own great lenses and some older still lenses that I have adapted to the 7D.

If I need any other video with the video look, then I use my XA10. It too is just fine for the small screen and laptops.

Most of the readers of this site are doing other projects beyond mine, and that's fine, but this Post is about having the right gear for the job, and I do.

Thanks for the great post.

Regards,

Rachael

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Rachael Dakoda

Thanks for posting this. I'm constantly back and forth on the C100 and whether we should invest in it or not, so I really appreciate your statements here.

" As cameras get smaller and smaller, my frustrations with them grow." I could not agree more. I know the perfect camera doesn't exist, but for me, the closest thing I've had yet was the EX3 (especially when paired with a lovely 35mm adapter). Yes, there are cameras that can make prettier pictures with bigger sensors, but from a standpoint of size, functionality, out-of-the-box shooting, etc. it's hard to beat. I'm still waiting on a true upgrade to that wonderful camera.

The C100 is among those that I think are close. Just wish Canon wasn't nearly as obsessed with protecting their more expensive options. And yeah - it needs to be 1k less to match the features it is missing.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
David S.

Anytime. :) Glad to help. :)

The C100, or the FS100 may be a good fit for you. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

"However, I found it interesting that out of all of the booths displaying 4k content, NONE of them had it next to 1080p content for a side-by-side comparison. "

You don't need a side by side comparison to see the difference. It is night and day. I was at NAB too. Furthermore, I much rather use a camera that supersamples from 4k to 1080P than something that is limited to 1080 acquisition. Cleaner, sharper, and more DR.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Mark

Which is what the C100 does- samples the 4k sensor down to 1080p. :)

However, resolution is different the Dynamic Range. Just because you have a lot of resolution it does not mean you have a lot of dynamic range. Take the older digital DSLR's for example, they had high resolution, yet limited dynamic range ...

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

I usually don't comment here because I don't have more time to write meaningful contributions, I wish I had.. I think most of my comments are about how inexpicably angry some of the people here are. I don't know....I think I have a sad curiosity about why all of this hatred, and this kind of behavior exists on almost every comments section I read. Have you guys considered taking yoga classes or something? Tai-shi perhaps? Or just a morning meditation would do. Peace.

ps: by the way, nice post Ryan!! Lucid thinking.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Thanks Raoni. :)

The questions you raise are ones that I have wondered as well. Yoga, meditation, going for a walk on a nice sunny day sure would be beneficial. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

There is a new diagnosis for the condition referred to as monocameria, and many potentially on here are showing symptoms. When a video guy has not produced watchable material in a prolonged duration of time, and then is exposed to marketing material from camera manufacturers they form a complex. As their logic deteriorates they obsess over whatever manufacturer of the day has the largest specs for the lowest price with a undetermined release date, neurotically they swarm message boards the advocate their one camera in all threads no matter what the subject. Specs and price of the camera body is all that matters with monocameria, and though those without the complex can easily understand there are many other variables, monocameria patients tirelessly pervade threads regurgitating the same marketing specs and price points that caused their condition. Then when a new camera is announced with even more specs for a lesser price, those with monocameria cancel their pre-orders to get other pre-orders and the cycle of denial continues.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
ryan

Sounds like the back of a B-Movie Horror film jacket. Someone should write this ASAP, I'll pull focus.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Jorge Cayon

I made something once... it was horrible. I need a new camera.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Tyler

" Have you guys considered taking yoga classes or something? Tai-shi perhaps? Or just a morning meditation would do. Peace."

Raoni, you ´re spot on. BTW, the most simple meditation ever is the buddhist anapana, you just sit with your back straight and breath in and breath out slowly via the nose, pay your conscious mind attention into the nostrils and the air coming in and out and let the thoughts go on and on without holding (feed) them in your conscious mind... simple breathing and relaxing... great as a morning meditation for sure! :D :D also great when anger possess us! :D

I used to be an angry S.O.B. and explosive martial artist, so one day life took away a very dear person and I got shit depressed and as a "cure" a friend introduced me to taiji and after that I got into deep daoist meditation (small universe)... best thing in my life! i got even more energy now! also it made me S.M.I.L.E. (Start My Inner Love Engine! :D) Life never was SO FUN! I discovered I live in an organic asymmetrical hologram (time-frequency uncertain principle from dennis gabor explains it well! :D) and that I´m, as a temporary identity, I am a piece of fiction as the ones we like to create in comics, movies, novels, short tales, so on! :D :D we are all funny self-recursive "tulpa" (the tibetan word is the only one to explain this for me! :D)

Now, back to the subject of the article... :D :D

Ryan Waters, your article is PERFECT, reading it from my erisian reality tunnel! :D :D
I got one RED Scarlet and a couple of Gh2s and 5Ds and one 7D for "professional" corporate stuff, but for my next short I´m dying to get a pocket cine cam from blackmagic and go minimal with micro 4/3 lenses and c-mout lenses but with 13stops (!), because I got my love for cinema from a long friendship I had since college with, now dead, one of the masters of authoral and underground cinema in my homeland, Brazil, a lovely man called Carlos Reichenbach, for whom the ideal way of filmmaking is the one you make at home, with friend, to express your singular view of the world, kind like Cassavetes, Hal Hartley, Shane Carruth, etc, cinema as freedom of speech mostly and as an urge of invention (coming from the lack of too much resources! ) -of course it´s not the ONLY or the BEST way, there is lots of different ways for all kind of reality tunnels, people, taste, desires, etc, in the lovely fictional holographic universe of ours! :P

But that´s it, also I don´t get this "future proof" thing people are getting into... like the quality, even in 2K of David Fincher´s "Zodiac" (his best movie for my taste!), the 2K of Haneke´s "Amour", the 2K of the gorgeous cinematography from "Skyfall" plus the elegant modern rewrite Sam Mendes did to the series, or is not Cronenberg´s "Cosmopolis" NOT future proof because it was shot with Alexa @2K????, even the 480p images from Lars Von Trier´s "Dancer in the Dark", etc, etc, or the 1.9K of the anarchical little master piece that is the unpretentious and fun "Crank" from neveldine/taylor, like these lovely films don´t have their future guaranteed ONLY because they can´t be shown into a 4K TV without getting a little soft! I really don´t get this kind of sharpness of image fetich!!

Sometimes an art form that depends too much in technological stuff to generate itself can blind us from what makes great art in the first place, be it 1.9K, 2K, 4K or 8K...

KALLISTI! :D

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
guto novo

Nice contribution guto!! I'm starting a little research about meditation, how to avoid stress and how to be a more positive and light person. I'm going to look for information based on what you described.
I'm from Brazil too (fiquei pensando se escrevia essa mensagem em inglês ou português rsrs) and also admire the way Carlão Reichenbach saw the filmaking process. He trully is one of the biggest names in the brazilian cinema culture. All the best to you and keep up with the "mucho take it easy" exercises! Abraço!

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

The sanest comment about 4K I read lately. It makes me sick reading all that junk about "4K is now" at Reduser, I also work as a senior visual effects artist and can tell you that 4K delivery for visual effects is not happening anytime soon in the next years.
Also I agree with you, if you do a great work on set you don't need to stress the footage in post, for my short, I loved what I got in camera, however it was nice saving a couple of shots since I shot in 4k (reframe=ing), and I mean a couple (literally) not every shot :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Marcus

Thanks Marcus. :)

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

I grudgingly admit that even the C100 has a sharper, more cinematic image than my 5D Mark III. Whew! That was a tough one. That said, for me it's not worth selling it to trade up. I'm getting a decent amount of photo gigs. As a freelancer, I have to be flexible, and I often offer video clips to photo clients and professional still photos to video clients as icing when bidding for jobs. It works. Also, I'm getting better than 50 mb/s bit rate with the all-I codec, more than enough for broadcast, so don't feel like I'm missing out on image quality. Adding 20% sharpness in post to the 5D image works subtle wonders. Where I'm really feeling left behind is in the dynamic range race, which has replaced the megapixel race. Your points about overexposure latitude are well taken and dynamic range is where I see the biggest advantage of a C100. But that is mostly an issue when shooting outdoors in full sun. I'm looking at keeping the 5Dm3 for indoor low light shots and hopefully grabbing a BMCC pocket camera for outdoor, high contrast shots. I also have a Ninja 2 for the extra color latitude in post when I need it. Until there's a camera with the BMCCs dynamic range, the C100 low light capability/sharpness and the 5Dm3 price point, it'll have to be work-arounds or rentals for me.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
JohnGreen

Ryan,

Thank you for saying this. You just reinforced my plan to forgo a 4K option at this time. I think the C300 is the camera for me. I'd rather have the 50Mbs Codec internally. Good luck with everything.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Ryan,

I'd also like to thank you for the classy way you are handling the comments both positive and negative. It's a breath of fresh air.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Terrific post. I feel the same way with the Sony EA50. It does the job without question and yes, creativity is in the person, not the tech. Great article without question.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

+1

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Martin Calvi

i think this is your don-draper-letter-to-the-tobacco-industry moment.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
sjk

Whilst I agree to an extent, I would much rather have a BMCC 2.5K than a C100.

I've spent £2800 in total including ND's, storage etc and have a camera that records ProRes internally and if I ever feel like it 2.5K RAW.

I'd much rather have this than have spent £4500 on a camera that records 4:2:0 internally and have to buy an Atomos Ninja to go any further.

I'm not sure how anyone can justify the price of a C100. It's far too expensive for what you get. If it was £2100 then it would be more attractive...

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Adam Smyth

Just curious to what kind of work you do with the BM?

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Peter Kelly

Corporate and Events as a freelancer and I work 30 hours a week for a charity producing all of their promotional work.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Adam Smyth

What!! Event and Corporate?! What is your battery solution on BMC? How much time do you spend changing and storing ND filters? How do you format cards at an event? Do you know that you can operate for 10 hours easily on c100 with no computer present, no dropped frames, and two batteries. What do you do in dark rooms where you need higher isos than 1600? Reduced rolling shutter on c100 wouldn't help running around an event? I'm stumped how events could benefit more from a BMC than a C100.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
ryan

Adam I think Ryan above justified it very well.

Your working life would be much easier with a C100

May 6, 2013

0
Reply
Peter Kelly

Great post! Filmmakers have to work with their business plans. If the camera earns you money, buy it! If it costs you more than you earn, don't buy it. It's really simple and there's a lot of hidden costs in post production: FX, reframing, syncing sound, converting files and so on.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

It's a great point! It really changes some one new, like me, to think realistically about a projects and my money.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Sean

Great article. Nice to know how the pros think too. Plus we need to address the workflow issues associated with rendering 4k images. You can't realistically edit 4k on just any system, even 2.5k is a task. What's the point of shooting 4k if you can't handle it? Hi quality 1080p footage with an external recorder on a newer iMac or even laptop is certainly feasible, jump to 4k you're entering into a spending frenzy. That decent $2500/3000 system you need now just doubled (at the minimum) to get where you need to be. Right now there's a few more reasons to wait it out than to jump into the 4k revolution. I think Ryan's article is spot on. Thanks

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Anthony Marino

I edit Red footage all the time (including a commercial I'm finishing up as I'm typing his) on a newer macbook pro retina. Editing is very quick and smooth (at 1/4 res of course), it doesn't slow down until I get to grading. When it comes to VFX you need a MONSTER machine whether you're working in 4k or 720p. Granted, 4k does take longer to edit, but it's totally realistic to do so with a laptop... or at least a $3k Macbook Pro.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Tyler

You do what you gotta do, glad to hear your Mac is somewhat capable. But, 1/4 res, no VFX (even mild is a bitch I know). I have to say no thanks in spending $3000.00 for such limited system.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Anthony Marino

Heh, 1/4 res of 4k = 1080p playback. Downscale to 1080p for heavy VFX, and on anything but a massive machine, VFX is a bitch no matter what.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Tyler

True, I'm not knocking you or anyones system. I'm sure red and the rest of the crew will be making it easier and easier as time goes on. However I do know to effectively edit most 4k material a $2500 system will most likely struggle. I never said it couldn't be done.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Anthony Marino

You don't need a super computer to handle 4k footage. Your statement is so 2010.

You can edit 4k files on a 1200 $ machine. With the Mercury Playback Engine you can edit on a 4k timeline, and if you have a more advanced machine (1700 $) you can playback 4k in realtime. (No need for Red Rocket)

Intel 6 Core 3930k = 550 $
Take a decent GTX 570 and a fast SSD and you are ready to go.

The cheapest Imac is round 1200 $ and it is basically just laptop hardware and therefore not suitable for heavy post work.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Frederik Olaf

The SSD now are great. But still limited to huge files. Like I stated after you add you hardware to effectively edit 4k footage you need to spend $$$. Sure you can sit there all day and edit at 1/4 res and constantly off load your footage. But in a semi professional environment editing 4k or even 2k with those specs you mention are just silly. Talk with a guy named Eric Bowmen from ADK (google it) and he'll tell you the bare minium you need. Trust me I got it and don't see how anyone can find a somewhat blissful editing experience with anything less.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Anthony Marino

" But in a semi professional environment editing 4k or even 2k with those specs you mention are just silly. "

Not true. Check out this video: http://vimeo.com/31104360

It shows how Tom Lowre can edit his 5k .r3d-files on his home PC with a 4k timeline and make a 4k finish. (You can buy Timescapes in 4k).

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Frederik Olaf

I've seen that. It's amazing. But look at all those drives...he has 2 systems tied together (one edits the other one renders). I'd say with his system including monitors he's well into 5g's. Again I'm not saying you can't do it. I meant edit 4k effectively. Most post houses even the smallest guys would never attempt to edit for a paying client based on those specs. I'm sure even Tom has upgraded by now. Hey Its new technology to the masses, most people believe a 3930k, gtx 680, and 64GB ram is all you need. Again, It's way way more than that. Depending on how it's wrappped the CPU isn't even where you see the bottleneck. Go price a 6 drive (WD RE4 totaling 12TB) raid array with a lsi 9271-8i card...that's almost 2 grand alone. Add some SSD on top of it, forget about it. You way passed the 3 grimed mark.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Anthony Marino

Some people here write about possibilites to edit 4K and of course it's much easier with the solutions we have today. But filmmakers need to work with their businees plans. It's not about what's possible or not in editing or what will happen in the future. It's about how time consuming it is. If you can bill more hours then you will earn more. If you have to wait for something or do extra work then you will earn less per hour. That's being realistic. Jump on the 4k bandwagon when it's really affordable and you can make a good profit or buy a 4k camera now if it will make you a good profit now (not in the future). Another advice: start to think like the camera manufacturers. How do I earn more money? Again, it's about business plans not cameras.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

This mirrors my recent comments regarding 4K. It seems premature for a market sector just recently gaining access to cameras with HD minus the lossy compression to make such a huge leap to 4K. 1080P/4:2:2 is still a really good place to be.

I've decided on the Sony FS700 after much deliberation and renting Canon C-series for most of my jobs in the last year (I really do like the footage I've acquired with it), and the C100 would have been my choice if the FS700 did not receive so many affordable accessory options that improve it's value considerably. I can get the quality I need right now shooting 1080P, and I'll have an affordable upgrade path to 4K when the need arises. It also records slo-mo at the speeds for action sports shooting that I need at a much more affordable price-point than a C500.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Marc B

Great post. I agree that the whole 4k thing is a bit out of control right now, especially filmmakers that think they need 4k RAW. I just worked on a show where the Director wanted 5k for talking heads in case he wanted to re-frame - this causes such a massive bottleneck in post, even with Red Rocket cards it's worse than waiting for film dailies from the lab and just as expensive!

In fact I believe the 4k RAW workflow is helping to keep film alive here in Hollywood because the hassle and expense of DIT's, storage, data wrangling and post processing is a bigger pain than shooting 35mm. Look at Oblivion - it was shot in 4k but had to be finished in 2k because they didn't the budget ($120million!) or time for a 4k post workflow!

As far as the C100 - I'd never given it a second thought based on the specs and price until I saw the footage in the Canon theater at NAB. The footage from the short "Bart" on the big screen looked fantastic and totally changed my mind about the camera. It definitely has a very filmic quality and the AVCHD capture is not a deterrent at all. The rich color combined with the Super 35 chip give it a superior quality to other cameras in it's price range.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Lance Bachelder

Yeah! 4k is out of hand. It's pushing the boundaries of the technology currently available! Pushing companies to make it cheaper, faster and easier to edit 4k footage is progress that is just way too hard. I remember when 1080p footage was incredibly expensive, it cost companies millions to switch over and eventually be made cheap, it should have stayed where it was! I watch my films on a 1080p projector in my living room, the screen is huge and I can see every pixel! 4k might make impossible to see the individual pixels at all, who wants that?!

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Tyler

1080p only became feasible when we had high quality compressed codecs like Cineform, Pro Res and DVxHD - before that it was outrageously expensive to edit and store - SD offline to HD online etc. - I know, I lived it.

The problem with 4k is even the first-time indie filmmaker thinks he needs 4k 444 RAW or his film will suck. This is fine for big budget fx driven shows. But there is hope - Pro Res 4k is manageable and new codecs like XAVC on the F55 should improve workflows dramatically.

A 4k projector in my living room would be great, but where/when do I get the 4k content?

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Lance Bachelder

Love it. I own only a basic camera setup as well, and then rent up when the project calls for it. It's a more stress-free way to do it for sure.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply

Thanks for sharing Ryan some great thoughts. I don't know if you saw this post by Jonah Kessel but he took a C100 to Burma and made an excellent write-up about it. http://www.newsshooter.com/2013/05/02/size-matters-jonah-kessel-field-te...

I'm curious about renting out your gear. How do you find renters and does it actually bring in enough money to be worth the hassle & wear & tear on your gear? I've got quite a bit of gear I've collected over the years and would love to find a way to make it work for me.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Tim

"That is why I think this camera should be priced at $4,500. After all, even cameras like the AF100 can shoot in variable frame rates up to 60 fps in 1080p. This is a major oversight by Canon. I think they are working too hard at protecting their higher end cameras. The sensor is capable of 60 fps at 1080p. Why cripple it, other than to make more money?"

The C100 is technically a 4k 30p camera that down-converts that to output 1080 30p. In order to output 1080 60p with no subsampling (to keep the quality), it would need to have the horsepower (and the cooling system) to handle 4k 60p in the first place. Maybe the processors that are in the C100 don't have that ability (handle 4k 60p), and this would be the main reason why the camera cannot output 1080 60p. Just a thought.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
lexicon

This is correct. It's the ASICs that can't do it, not the sensor. It'd be like saying a Scarlet is only software crippled to not be an Epic. It's parts of the article like this that make me baffled by why this post would be republished here.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
MD

Ryan, how often do you pull out the Ninja 2 when shooting with your C100? If you were shooting a short narrative for example and wanted to make it the best you could, but it didn't have green screen or VFX, would the internal codec be good enough for a nice color grade?

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
Clayton Arnall

The C100 look is great for weddings and event coverage. For cinema, not so much. The examples I've seen, some well lit, some naturally lit do not measure up against 10 or 12 bit color.
I enjoy my dslr now. Its cheap. Small and I make money off if it while doing short films to develop my craft.
When I shoot my feature, canon video will not be a factor.

May 3, 2013

0
Reply
vinceGortho

Pages