Just out of curiosity, are you using Premiere on a Mac or PC?
This is a legitimate question. How is Avid's media management better in this case? I have limited experience with Avid but in general I've had the most headaches with missing or offline media (when receiving projects from out-of-house) etc.
I'm asking partly because I'm trying to get myself more into Avid for work purposes, but really don't enjoy the interface etc, and in general everything feels very slow. (lack of experience/muscle memory mostly),
Most people who are into Avid simply say it's better, it's faster, etc, without really giving much in the way of how/why. So for instance:
1. How is media management a pain in Premiere, and not in Avid?
2. What's superior about Avid's shared projects vs what Premiere is now doing?
3. What do you mean by Adobe developing a compositing package?
4. Do you really think Premiere is 5 years behind Avid?
Right. There are instances where ProRes can work better on the C100, for keying, etc, but the reality is that motion is a bit better on AVCHD because it's not quite as crisp, so it looks more natural.
It's not like transcoding the 24mbps to 100mbps is going to somehow make... the image BETTER, at least not fully. It WILL make the file size larger.
This is the comparison video I'm talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E92jDQpou4Q
I still got an external recorder after watching this, but found the overall quality to generally be exactly what the video said it would be: more or less the same either way. And AVCHD is a smaller file size and doesn't require more batteries and more weight. That was my finding anyway. I ended up selling the recorder because I would pull up my edit, sync the in camera clips to the prores, and then in the end just use the in-camera clips.
I'm just saying you should take that money and put it towards another lens, etc. That's what's going to really make a difference.
Cheers and good luck with the project! :)
Food for thought too. As some have mentioned, external recorders don't actually give you 8-bit. And in my experience with with an AtomOS external, there is actually no difference between the two images. ProRes has some strengths over AVCHD and vice versa. The external recorder is more batteries and weight to worry about. It's nice to have a screen but maybe go for a lighter monitor.
Someone can correct me but I've actually seen some thorough comparisons outside my own experience and it's about the same quality.
To weigh in as well, I'd just do a few tests. If you have access to the camera now do some test shots and see what you think. I own the C100 and personally love the image. Yes, it's not 10 bit, and yes it's not 4k, but its sensor is 4k which means the images you get from the sensor are beautiful and much more crisp than say, 1080 from a full-frame 5d. Also the amount of hassle you won't have to deal with, compared to the GH5 in terms of audio and ND filters, etc etc, will be something during production that will make using the C100 a real pleasure.
I haven't shot a feature on my C100 yet but having shot a feature and a number of shorts and music videos on my 5D, I can't wait. The difference is pretty mind blowing.
Also as others have said, don't let the tech get you. Sure certain distributors are demanding certain resolutions, etc, but remember that the film 28 Days Later was shot at 720p or something like that. Sure it doesn't look as sharp of AMAZING as some people have come to expect, but it's a good film (in my mind) and shot really well despite the tech, and that's what makes it worth watching.
I'd say take the money you'd put towards the GH5 and pay your actors, pay your crew, rent some lenses and other gear that'll really help you make the film better and enjoy the C100.
haha I was thinking something similar as well. The video is great but the song is uh...