As a company, we work mainly in the Corporate world, we do own the Canon C100 both Mark I and Mark II as well as the Sony A7 III, A7S, and A6300 (and I recently bought a Fuji XT30 for personal use, I will write a future blog post about it) we learned to match the image of the Canon and the Sony to 80% in most situations. Since we bought the A7S we fell in love with Sony and the Sony image (other than the harsh highlight roll-off, the colors were pretty accurate, we slightly modified the S-log in the A7s to reduce the infamous green tint), S-Log is also great to play with if exposed correctly, although it requires a lot of finesse to make it look good* (*I'm not a professional colorist by any stretch of the imagination). Long story short, we decided to go for a proper video camera because we were fed up with the “fiddliness” of DSLRs and mirror-less in the video department (that was after a very frustrating job that we almost failed).
The logical Camera was the Sony FS5, but at the time it was a little bit out of our budget and I didn't like its performance in low light situations and we were (and still) doing a lot of low light shooting. So I started considering the C100, I used to hate the camera for the specs that it offered, 1080p at a mere 24 MB/s AVCHD 8 bit 420, no slow-motion option at all (you can only hack the 60i in the NLE, not good tho), even my 5D III did better in the specs sheet, but it has the dual XLR input, the unlimited recording, the ND filters, an amazing battery, good low light, and it was within our budget, so I went for it planning to use it for specific situations, but little did I know it will become the most used camera in our gear arsenal, it just WORKED! The image is beautiful, although you can't stretch it as you please, it does look more expensive than what it is if used properly, the 1080p is very detailed (downscaled 4k capture), the codec is efficient, remember the 24 MB/s? it's actually a blessing and a money saver, especially for the type of work that we do where we tend to shoot a lot and where we do not charge a lot of money. The C100 just makes you focus on the craft and on the story thanks to the ease of use and the lack of shooting options (yes, you can see that as a positive). I also learned to shoot more handheld and on sticks which was refreshing considering these are the heydays of running with gimbals and stabilizers. So last year when I wanted to upgrade our C100 after 2 years of service I went for the C100 mark II even if for the same price I could have bought the FS5, but I went for the C100 Mark II so I can keep the same workflow. The AF is a game-changer and I don't think I can live without a good AF system in my Camera from now on ( I didn't have the AF upgrade in my original C100), the 60p is beautiful, more beautiful than most of the 60p I used in other cameras, the image is slightly better than the C100 (PS, it is not straight forward to match the C100 and C100 II image) and the Screen & EVF are miles better. The image matched the A7 III 4k in a 1080p timeline and for a fraction of the file size of a 4K file. I forgot to mention that the C100 makes you save some money by going for EF-S lenses instead of FF lenses, I sold my Canon 24-70 2,8/16-35 2,8/100 2,8 L (I regret selling this one) and went for a 17-55 2,8 and a... kept the change ;). In short, I was quite happy with the whole C100 system and workflow, until I was not...
This was a frustrating shooting. The C100 codec struggles a lot with scenes that have a lot of details like trees and foliage. Also the dynamic range of the sensor is not the best.
You see, we are looking to upgrade to a more feature-packed Cinema Camera because I think we reached the limits of the C100 mark II, and it is sometimes limiting our creativity in some projects. The C100’s codec is a blessing from a business standpoint, but you can only do much with the file before it falls apart. The Dynamic range in the C100 is ok but not great, thus limiting our options when framing and lighting. Considering these issues, we believe the C200 is the logical upgrade because you have the best of the two worlds (small MP4 + Robust 12 bit RAW) and the C200 is probably going down after the release of the C300 mark III and the C500 mark II.
While this is our current situation with the C100, I believe that the C100 system is underrated and that a lot of filmmakers (especially the ones starting their journey) should really consider the C100 because of how cheap and professional the whole workflow is: Cheap Camera, cheap Cards, cheap storage, cheap computer for editing, cheap lenses, no need for extra equipment, easy to grade image = less time editing= you can work more projects at the same time, etc... Plus it is a proper video camera that won’t let you down in critical situations -no overheating, no recording limit, no need to change the battery every 5 minutes, dual SD recording for backup, dual XLR …
Other than the last slow-motion graduation shot at the end filmed with the A7 III and a couple of GoPro shots, the rest of this collage is shot with the C100 Mark I and Mark II. It’s not amazing by any means, but it is enough for this kind of productions.
So, to answer the title’s question, is the Canon C100 still relevant in 2020? I believe it is, especially the C100 mark II, and I believe that a lot of small productions will benefit more from a C100 than an A7 III for example. If you are doing a lot of Interviews, low budget Documentaries, and Corporate work, low light shooting, and if your clients don’t need 4K delivery and don’t have specific delivery standards, then you should consider going for a Canon C100 Mark II, It is a joy to shoot with, it’s truly an amazing camera.