Canon EOS C100 review – an underestimated cinema camera

For this video specifically: All sponsoring income from this video will go to the “rainbow of hope” children’s home in Moldova.

The most affordable of Canon’s “cinema cameras” the EOS C100, has been around since late last year when I had a chance to test it in a real world environment (see video above).
In the light of recent camera announcements at NAB and the current C100 price drop I’d like to share my experience and tell you why I think the EOS C100 is one of the most important and underestimated cameras of 2013.

Canon EOS C100 reviewEveryone tells you that each project requires a different tool. Well that’s certainly true and sounds very professional, but if you’re interested to read about the C100 your budget probably limits your shooting style and choice of camera to only very few valid candidates currently available.

In this price range you are like so many others still looking and waiting for a camera that truly supports and helps you express your filmmaking ambition, be it documentary or fiction or anything in between.

Here’s a camera I can truly recommend. It has no big red labels screaming things like 4K, 12bit, or 3D for that matter (that was last year’s hype), in fact it has nothing too fancy about it: It’s HD, it does 30p max and has a mediocre file compression system. But don’t be fooled by technical specs, because this camera is superb within its boundaries and a surprisingly strong, well rounded tool from top to bottom.

Let me give you some examples:

Lowlight, lowlight, lowlight
I’m thankful that manufacturers like Canon and Sony keep pushing the lowlight capabilities of their cameras even though they don’t get as much attention for it as others who can show off pixel count.
A camera that delivers nice images in very low light conditions is the low budget filmmakers best friend. I can bring a lighting crew or I can bring a C100, and in many cases the C100 (natural lighting) will do a better job.
Sony’s FS100 and FS700 show very similar lowlight capabilities as the C100 and offer many of the same features on the surface. In my opinion the C100 is stronger in providing an organic, filmic look and as an intuitive & ergonomic working tool.

C100 natural lightFor the “rainbow of hope” video (seen above) we were working without budget and without a light crew and had 1 day to get some shots. I made sure to switch off all artificial light sources in all rooms and used the natural light coming in through the windows.

This also worked quite well for an interview (screenshot above) that I decided not to use. The C100 is strong enough to bring out the beauty of even small light modulations and makes lighting with very small units possible. This is a big money and time saver.

If I had shot the same subjects with one of the Blackmagic Cameras, or a RED, I would have ended up with an extremely noisy or even entirely dark image. The C100 with a F/1.4 lens can sometimes actually see more than the human eye.

c100_grainIf I remember correctly I shot the sequence as seen on the left at about ISO 3200-6400 and pushed about 1 stop in post. The noise is apparent, but I think it looks quite organic. No noise reduction was used on the film except color reduction here on the left.

File compression
noise croppedImmediately noticable on the screenshot is the 24Mbit file compression which has a hard time to handle the noise. For this project I didn’t mind the slight artefacts.
The only shot that fell apart due to too much structure, where compression was too noticeable to me was the shot at 3:36 where the girl says “It’s better here than at home.”

To solve the compression problem (which is really the major disadvantage compared to the C300) many people are using the Atomos Ninja 2 harddisk recorder which gets the 4:2:2 uncompressed signal out of the hdmi port of the C100 and stores it to ProRes or another good codec of choice. This also helps in the editing process later on as you have immediately available formats.

c100_dr2Dynamic range is terrific
I underexposed all shots in order to preserve the highlight details and give an organic and naturalistic feel.

roh_c100_scr-12The camera’s dynamic range was extremely helpful to achieve that and serves with a beautiful highlight rolloff at the top range. This is what makes the images look so filmic. I had sufficient room in post production and didn’t miss RAW at all. I think RAW is very overestimated, many people don’t need that much information in their shots.

My advice on this point: Get the shots right while you’re shooting and in most cases you’ll have sufficient information on a C100 to get that look you like.
Also don’t forget: Small, sharp HD files help in a quick and efficient workflow. Don’t shoot 4K RAW if your target is HD Vimeo and you don’t have any special needs! Or do you go camping with your whole kitchen in your backpack just in case? No, you just take what you need.

Color Grading
I’m a big fan of filmconvert and I use it to grade everything I edit, I barely ever switch over to DaVinci anymore unless I have something to do in detail. Filmconvert emulates specific film stocks very realistically and while it still has some glitches in usability it has become invaluable to me.
It is simplistic and limited, but effective and helps me to be creative in color grading within well placed boundaries.
It’s compatible with many current cameras. The C300 and Alexa R709 profiles work very well with the C100, but I hear it will receive an update with a dedicated C100 profile soon.

cinema5D readers can benefit from the price reduction as seen below:

8bit and 12bit
Grading with filmconvert is where I first noticed that there’s actually not too much noticeable difference in my desired end result between 12bit coming from an Arri Alexa or Blackmagic Camera or the 8bit image coming from a Canon C100.
I must say I’d prefer a lowlight capable 8bit camera any day now over a more light hungry 12bit tool, because filmconvert will get it close to what I like. 12 bit IS smoother, slightly more organic, but the difference is not as heavy as I had thought.

That’s definitely personal preference, but I urge you to evaluate how much 10 or 12 bits can actually really do for what your viewer sees at the end. More attention to the craft will actually get you a lot further than using your time on gathering pixels and data in my opinion.

C100 image stabilizedLower cost lenses are often enough
I admit I’m a convinced unexpensive lens user. I have learned to avoid ever shooting wide open. I don’t like too shallow depth of field and any lenses quality improves drastically when stopped down one or two stops so that’s what I always do.

Stopped down 2 stops a $20000 lens looks only slightly better in HD than a $200 lens and in today’s time of color correction to think a more expensive lens will get you a nicer picture in my experience is an illusion. Certainly there are numerous reasons to use expensive lenses on high grade shoots, but if you use a C100 you most probably don’t need these features. Spend your money elsewhere.

Again lowlight capable cameras make expensive lenses obsolete. If you’re a low budget or run & gun shooter, save money by getting a camera that is strong in lowlight. I can’t stress this topic enough.

Canon EF-s 55-250mmThat said if I’m not using a tripod I’m a fan of image stabilization lenses for documentary and there are few that have the kind of IS that really works for moving images. Be careful, because many lenses’ stabilizer can destroy your image as they’re laid out for stills. Canon’s own lenses usually perform well.

For this project I used mostly the EF-S 55-250mm F/4.0-5.6 and a little of the great EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 for the wides.
For full frame cameras I can recommend the EF 24-105mm F/4.0. This one also comes as an affordable bundle with the C100 that saves you $500.

It’s hard to hide that I think this is a great camera. Here are the points I like:
+ great ergonomics / handling.
+ long battery life.
+ XLR connectors and mic holder / controls convenient.
+ built-in ND filters.
+ dual SD card recording (for backup), brilliant.
+ good menu structure.
+ great lowlight capabilities.
+ great dynamic range & highlight rolloff.
+ very neutral color response with C LOG profile (even slightly better than C300).
+ uncompressed hdmi out.
+ very crisp & clean HD image from 4K sensor.
+ great price for a lot of quality.

Certainly the C100 can be improved and the crippled high compressed codec and AVCHD format are among the more annoying things about this camera.
Here are the points you might want to look into when you make your buying decision:
– position of LCD is not ideal.
– LCD resolution is not ideal (you need another monitor or EVF to focus).
– hdmi connector is not ideal (that’s for telivision sets. For a camera we want SDI).
– 8bit color space might be insufficient for your application.
– lack of slow motion or 60p mode.
– strong image compression & inconvenient AVCHD container.

If this review helped, if you have a question or concerns please leave a comment.

Thanks to our sponsor B&H for the help in building this platform. Please make sure you buy their gear through our links.
For this video specifically: All sponsoring income from this video will go to the “rainbow of hope” children’s home in Moldova.

The Canon EOS C100 is currently -$1000 on the B&H website.


Production & Camera Assistance: Jason Hoffmann (Comfilms)
Editorial: Rachel Donald (ADRA Swiss)

Music licensed from:
Brooke Wagoner - Ruminate (Instrumental)
Brooke Annibale - Tryin' (Instrumental)

Watch it on Vimeo

Leave a Comment

You are not subscribed to this post. Follow new comments

Login to comment

todd crites May 8, 2013

not sure i agree with this review and or not sure what you see versus what i did while demoing this camera. i had i hopes for it as it was a much easier camera to shoot run and gun over c300 or 5d mark 3. low light winner? maybe if you took the clips and re-processed them inside some box before editing with them or did a tape to tape off the master files, but for me i judge compression, low light grain, image and all other, by how well it does in Avid. and this camera blew dot com in avid as compared to 5d. what i mean is the c100 file was very grainy at times and or the compression artifacts were easily seen. i had to perform extensive grading to get the image to match 5d, and at times couldn’t even come close. i shot the c100 in that c-log format. anything with low light, or inside looked muddy. 5d for comparison transcode into avid great and holds up very well to grading… that is if i shoot flat. i am big fan of 5d for this fact alone. i work with alexa and red and mix and match 5d all the time and in avid i press anyone to notice the difference on a variety of shots. not all clips and footage compares especially when that alexa has an 80k lens on it. and GLASS is so way important. i have no idea what you’re talking about with your comments about expensive lenses versus cheap lenses. you’re so wrong it almost de-values your review.

whatever the case, c100 is a fine camera, as long you’re not mixing it with 5d or other better cameras in your edit timeline. and lastly, something that gets ignored a lot with all this hype over HDSLR shooting and such, is the vast majority of reviews and demos are for vimeo video makers and not real broadcasters. what i mean is the vast majority of TV is cut and finished on Avid, using their DNX codec. nobody every takes that under consideration. in the real world of TV, budget are tight and time is a premium and you don’t alway have the opportunity to run your clips thru a magic box where you de-noise, sharpen, and other before editing with them – which a lot of vimeo videos are doing, ESPECIALLY when you are shooting hours of footage. broadcast TV is 1080i.59.94. compressed. 720p for ABC, FOX and ESPN, compressed. it absolutely helps to master with highest resolution possible, but at the end of the day, content prevails, and the c100 enables you to do that, for sure.

Chris Giles May 9, 2013

I have to agree with Todd, there is no way a cheap lens competes with expensive stuff, you always get what you pay for. Your subtitles are not in title safe, and that just turns me off as being professional but I really like your content and the use of lowlight, the artifacts are very obvious to me from shooting Hi ISO’s, not good. I really like that you tried to shoot natural light, but the weird compression artifacts take away from the lowlight scenes, aesthetically.

Sebastian Wöber May 9, 2013

Hi Chris,
This version is targeted for web distribution, no need for title safe, except for those few browsing on a tube tv ;) I prefer to see more of the image. Sebastian

Tom Jenkins June 27, 2013

When you shoot video with DSLRs it’s recommended to lower in camera sharpness. Expensive L series lenses and other expensive glass are very sharp and made for stills in mind. Lower cost lenses do work very well shooting with these HDSLRs and can provide a nice softer image that complement a sharp camera like the C100 – I think Sebastians video proves this.

 Mark Tierney Reply
marklondon May 8, 2013

Nice video. I think the C100 is terrific. If it did even 48fps I’d buy one.

Sebastian Wöber May 9, 2013

Thanks Mark, and yes I agree, slow motion functionality is missing.

 Mark Tierney Reply
marklondon May 9, 2013

Forgot to mention – isn’t filmconvert one of the greatest pieces of software ever made for video? I can’t get enough of it.

Finally, i’m with you on inexpensive lenses for most projects. I have a matched set of Roks, and another of Nikon AIS (I’m mainly a D800 shooter). I’d put them up against the Zeiss ZFs no problem.
And while its nice to use great cinema glass, I prefer to shoot solo and low-profile. I find using Panchros or Optima Zooms I seem to always need an assistant. That’s probably only 10% of my shooting.

Alexander May 27, 2013

Hi Marklondon, although quite a few inexpensive lenses are pretty good for many applications, I would never put any Roks or Nikon against the Zeiss in any situation. Sure they are good enough,but not up to the Zeiss.

Bernard May 17, 2013

The Canon cinema line of cameras are getting a bit of flack for not have higher frame speeds… do people really do that much slow motion??

Bill June 28, 2013

Yes – just take a look at any number of art and music videos, TV ads, etc… it provides a smoothness that Canon can’t match in that regard… very useful tool – slo-mo and 60p… also, many like the 60p ‘look’ more than 24p/30p just in general…

Don May 9, 2013

Thank you so much for the great review.

I find my self getting caught up in the camera hype as I think it is hard not to specially during these times right now.. and if you are a creative head like me and less of a tech. It is easy to get swallowed up in numbers, titles and hype.

I am still on my 5dmkII I want to upgrade but have held off just to see how things pan out. But its getting more and more urgent for me to make a move.

What I personally feel that I lack with my mkll is how it falls apart in the color grade and post production. I really enjoy the process of coloring and editing almost more so then shooting, I love to see it all come together.

But at the same time most (no all) my projects are shot more or less as a “one man band” so the low light capacity is very appealing..

I dont know what direction to go in…?

My main goal was BMPC.

But then I would really like to know how the Ninja + camera X actually performs?

The firmware update for the 5dmkIII + ninja? …how would those files rate for coloring and post production compared to the BMPC camera?

And now after reading your post I am also considering the C100 + Ninja.. but again how does those files rate?

All I can compare is to coloring and editing my 5dmkII files straight out of camera… how do these other options compare.. would say the C100/MkIII + Ninja compared with my usual 5dmkII files how do they compare?
And then how do those files then compare to like 4k and ProRes from the BMC’s?

This is my big dilemma.. anyone care to shed some light?

Kind Regards


Sebastian Wöber May 9, 2013

Hi Don,
Interesting questions. I don’t know if I can answer to your satisfaction, but maybe I can share some experience that helps. The first thing that comes to mind is that most if not all cameras when underexposed too much perform very badly no matter how much color information they provide. I have ran into this problem with the Alexa, with the Scarlet and with the Blackmagic Camera on different projects too. When underexposed about 2-4 stops you start to loose the information necessary to hold the picture, no matter what codec you use, the sensor just can’t take it, just like our eyes can’t render color at night. So what happens is that even though you see something when you pull it up there’s little color information, lots of grain and the image gets very soft. I only say that to tell you that color information does not make up for bad lowlight capabilities.
When shooting with the Blackmagic I learned I cannot work the way I’m used to. I did a documentary style thing and the first day of shooting was very bad, and on the second day we planned a lot less and brought some lights to brighten everything up, then it worked. I would not go out with a BMCC or BMPC for that matter without a lightkit and sufficient time planned anymore and would only use it for specific projects. It needs special handling, it’s time consuming and requires accessories. If the sun is out it’s easier.
You certainly get more juice out of a well exposed BMCC image than a C100, but you also get more juice out of a C100 image than a 5DmkII or mkIII. Reviewing this is not much help, you need to feel the images yourself to see if you like it.
I have exported a well exposed C100 still for you and uploaded so you can play with it a little and see if it is satisfaying for your grading needs:
In this image the codec wasn’t so stressed so it should be closer to what you’d get from a recorder. Really the recorders don’t make the images so much better, it just helps where the codec really fails like in some of the grainier or wilder shots and also for greenscreen for example cause it’s 4:2:2 instead of 4:2:0. But the difference is not so apparent with many applications.
I recommend you test some footage from different cameras, get a feel for their capabilities and decide how you like it and don’t expect miracles from harddisk recorders.
As for mkII vs mkIII I think the biggest difference lies in the heavy heavy aliasing the mkII does. I personally can’t stand it, but in many shots it can be overlooked. So it only depends how much it bugs you. Aside from that I’d say the difference is neglectable, Mk III is better in lowlight, but it really shines with its great clean image. C100 is then a lot sharper on the other hand. Try before you buy, cheers.

Flemming Nielsen May 9, 2013

Hi Sebastian – I enjoyed both the quality and the story in this little piece!
Can you tell what settings you used with FilmConvert?

Sebastian Wöber May 9, 2013

Thanks. For this piece I went with the Vision 3 250D stock (That’s the first one, the second is 200T). 100% color, 0% grain.
What I like to do is first get the correct exposure and color temperature and then I play with the wheels (standalone version). I gave a blue/green tint in the lows, corrected a bit with plusgreen against purple in the mids and added some warmness in the highs adequate to the shot. Then I added some saturation, between 1.05 and 1.25 depending on the shot and made sure the blacks and highlights were stretched nicely on the levels meter. I’d finally add or remove some contrast depending on the shot by sliding the mids in the levels meter.
Hope that helped.
UPDATE: As a camera profile I partly used the Alexa R709 profile as the CLOG is not entirely accurate for C100 at this time. Both work though with some tweaks on the wheels.

Flemming Nielsen May 9, 2013

Thanks for the in-depth explanation :-)

5mars June 20, 2013

Is Filmconvert needs to be used only because of Mac use? (I’m a Windows-C100 owner)

5mars June 20, 2013

And where can I find the Alexa R709 profile? I really like your video, I think I will buy a 18-135 EF-S lens after reading your article. Thanks!

Mick Partlett May 9, 2013

In your review of the C100 you state ‘It’s HD, it does only 30p” surely this is not the case as I shoot 24p with my C100.

Sebastian Wöber May 9, 2013

Hi Mick, the wording… What I meant to say was “maximum 30p”. I have changed the article accordingly.

Patrick Zadrobilek May 9, 2013

Great review Sebastian!
Exactly my thoughts ;-)
I miss the 60p too, but I’m experimenting on a good 60i -> 60p conversion with kind of a line-interval shifting in post-processing to get rid of the jumping lines.

Sebastian Wöber May 9, 2013

Thanks Patrick,
I was also thinking about that solution for people who need 60p. I once did a project where I recorded 50i and turned it into 50p. There was a plugin for final cut that would “guess” the content of the lines in between. If you really need those 60p bad this might be an option and it worked very satisfactory with the downside of a little bit more softness. Don’t recall the name of the plugin though, but it worked surprisingly well.

Dylan Saliba June 13, 2014

Philip Bloom shows how to do this quite nicely with PP CS6. It isn’t as good of quality as actual 60p, but it does allow a trick to get slow mo out of this wonderful camera. I am in love with my c100.

filmersblog May 9, 2013

Thanks for the review. I’ve seen the 5D Mark iii compared to this camera and I have to say the C100 seems to be much sharper and seems to show much better range between dark and light areas when shooting high contrast (ie sunlight). Is that your experience as well?

Another question: it seems like such an odd camera- can you use this handheld for longer periods of time or do you use a rig? Do you use a Hoodman or such?

filmersblog May 10, 2013

One more thing: your short about the children in Moldovia looks great and is moving. (sometimes it’s an advantage to have very limited time, which this piece is a perfect example of. The sobriety and the use of natural light works beautifully. And that ‘painting in the wall’ was a gift…)

Pacing was also great- well done!

@ Todd I just bought a 5D Mark 3 and shot some video in London while on a short holiday trip. Admittedly, I have a lot to learn about working with a DSLR (after working with a Sony EX3) and used it as a run ‘n gun but contrary to what you said, I found the footage very hard to color correct or to bring back details in overexposed highlights. I can’t imagine that the C100 -as a proper videocamera- does worse… (Maybe Sebastian can offer some C100 footage for download..?)

Sebastian Wöber May 10, 2013

Thanks, I’m glad to hear my decisions worked for you.
Here’s a well exposed screengrab with 100% quality. It should give you an idea how the footage performs when there’s not much movement and details:
You can play around with it in your favourity grading suite.

CMP May 10, 2013

Nice vid! I like the c100 too. Used it with a Ninja2 and this works really well. I did notice a big difference when comparing to the avchd codec. Especially when grading underexposed shots. The midtones fall apart very easily in the avchd footage and the prores from the ninja stays nice and smooth.

The only reason I’m not buying the cam is because I would feel Canon screwed me too hard by not adding 60p and BNC connector for my evf.

Did see a dead pixel in the upper left side of the image though.. Hope it was a rental:-)

Sebastian Wöber May 12, 2013

Yes the dead pixel. It was a loan from Canon before the camera was out. Unfortunately I didn’t get to finish the thing sooner, but therefore I had more time to edit.
Thanks for the insight in using with the Ninja!

Don May 11, 2013

Thanx Sebastian for your reply and for uploading the file for me!
Appreciate that.. I will definately have a go at it but also take your advice into consideration and try and get my hands on as much footage as possible.

Kind Regards


Sebastian Wöber May 12, 2013

Glad I could help.

Al May 12, 2013

Great read, thanks for putting in the effort!

Excellent reductions on Canon Cameras & accessories here!

Frank Janssens May 13, 2013

Nice Article. Great shot mini documentary!

Michael Williams May 14, 2013

How difficult is it to get focus with this camera in low light and extreme bright light?
The reason I ask is that some of the shots I see from people filming with this camera have difficulty with keeping focus.
Is there a focus lock option like there is on a Video Camera if you want?
I think the pice you did for this organization is great.
Michael Williams

Thanh Long May 16, 2013

Love the dynamic Range ! You just make me decided to buy a C100 tomorrow !

I wanted to know what microphone did you use and did you put it on camera or on external recorder ?


Thanh Long from France

Sebastian Wöber May 16, 2013

I used a shotgung mic on camera. The brand is not available in the us, it’s an affordable T-bone mic.

Jonathan Park May 28, 2013

Great video and even better review. I’ve read all the comments as well. I can’t seem to decide if I should buy C100 or 5D MkIII + ML(RAW capability). I am an one man band and like the C100’s ergonomics but worried about the inferior codec and EVF. Can’t afford another EVF or monitor for now. Is C100 worth paying $2k more than 5D3? Which one would you recommend me to get? Thank you in advance for your help in this matter.

Vlad May 25, 2014

get 5DIII with ML (RAW). I rented C100 to see how it perform. No miracles here. 5DIII is definitely the winner.
C100 is worth $1000 nowadays. for $5000 I would better get Sony A7S with external recorder. Same money , huge difference in footage quality.

Luca Pastorino May 28, 2013

Hi Sebastian! I have a C100. I shooted in 1080p 25fps a doc film. I want to edit the material in Avid MC Could you explain me (you or somebody else) why the material look so bad into AVID ? When i play it with VLC everything is ok. I know that the Canon c100 make 1080p in PsF modus. Avid seems NOT to be able to interpretate it correctly. I’m desperate… Which is the correct workflow ? THX for the help.

Duy Linh Tu May 30, 2013

Best C100 footage I’ve seen yet. I own both the 5D Mark 3 and the C100 and, even though the C100 has all the convenience of a proper video camera, I still lean towards the aesthetics of the Mark 3. But this piece really shows how the C100 can shine.

John Mitchell June 26, 2013

I agree with Todd. While the DR looks great and you’ve preserved highlights nicely, the overall result is full of “blocky” artifacts that don’t look “organic” to me at all, especially on solid surfaces, but noticeable across the entire image.

That’s the problem with underexposing on a camera that doesn’t have 14 stops of latitude using an H264 codec.. check out the difference with the Sony F5 shooting s log 2
(admittedly a different price bracket)

I think if you tie the C100 to an inexpensive recorder like BMD’s Hyperdeck Shuttle 2 it becomes a much better proposition for Avid users. Record directly to DNxHD. However the HDMI output is less than ideal for production work. And expose maybe 1-2 stops under at the most on a camera with only 5-6 stops.

Overall I’d say the C100 sits nicely between Sony’s FS100 and FS700 and gives you some really nice lens options. But like the two Sony cams the ergonomics suck for any kind of handheld use.

Thomas August 23, 2013

Hi Sebastian, I loved your video and really respect your use of only using available light. I use this method for all of my docs.

I wanted to ask if you used C Log indoors? Outdoors in the bright snow I would expect C Log to perform best, but did u also always stick to C Log indoors?

Chris Lawes September 23, 2013

Nice article, very good summary of the pros and cons of the C100, with good practical examples to demonstrate.

But more than that, thank you for sharing the short! What a beautiful little film, the mixture of bites with footage from their lives, such nice color and lighting, really first class job with the video. Thoroughly enjoyed watching it a couple times.

My main reservation about C100 is lens selection for documentary.
What do you think about the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens? I’d love to use a Canon 24-105 on a 5D3, or the Sony Zeiss 16-70 on a FS700, but I don’t know what to use docu-style on a C100. I actually blogged my confusion here if you care to weigh in! :)

Thanks again for the post.

Sebastian Wöber September 24, 2013

Hi Chris,
Thanks for the nice comment on my work.
You shouldn’t have spent all the money on the Lamborghini man, but now that you have, I agree the 15-85 seems like a good option (on paper). I haven’t worked with this lens yet, but I suspect the IS is similar to the 55-250mm that I used as well as mediocre sharpness wide open. The problem I see here is that on wide fov a slow lens will not look very nice. Generally you will want to look for a fast lens in the wider segment so you still have visibile shallow dof in the wide shots. I’d even go as far as recommending a good wide angle prime for that. Unfortunately not many are really good wide open. I recently saw the Canon cine prime 24mm shooting wide open at T/1.5 and it was stunning how good it looked. The wide open aperture gave each wide angle shot the cinematic touch. Unfortunately most of us can’t afford the Canon cine primes. The Bower 24mm 1.5 might be an alternative there.
And I think I’d still prefer the 17-55mm among wide angle zooms. Everything above that will be covered by the 55-250.
I know it’s a compromise, but unfortunately there IS no cheap cover-it-all zoom. The Fujinon looks great though.

หลังคาเปิดปิดได้ March 17, 2014

Way cool! Some extremely valid points! I appreciate you writing this article
and the rest of the website is extremely good.

Jota Navarro May 9, 2014

Beautiful video, content is more important than a camera.

Saludos desde Chile, Southamerica.