Side By Side Comparison Of The Canon C100 & Panasonic GH4
I normally don’t like these shoot outs because the method is usually flawed. This one is well done so I wanted to share it. They used one lens the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM and the Atomos Ninja 2 to record the C100 as well as internal AVCHD while only recording the GH4 internally at 4K. Thats might be considered a flaw but lets not worry too much about it. It’s practically impossible to have a level playing field doing this. Thats why I won’t do these. I leave it to others.
I have both cameras and I really like both a lot. The GH4 in 4K is crazy good for such an inexpensive little camera. However I wouldn’t sell my C100 to get one. It has features that make my life as a DP so much easier. Built in ND and on board XLR for audio are two big ones. One bummer with the GH4 is low light. Go past 800 ISO and it gets noisy. Not film like grain noise like the C100. It’s the dancing RGB kind. Yuck!
Check out my first impressions post here on the GH4.
Interested in the C100? Here is my hands on review.
I like the look of the C100’s S35 sensor more too. The shallow depth of field in the shot with the park bench for example is just a nicer shot with a little more separation from the background. This could be fixed with a really fast lens like the Voigtlander 25mm .095 or others that get to around f1.9. I do really love them both and wouldn’t consider one over the other. Instead I want to use the GH4 for over cranking, on a jib, Stabilizer, or just as a B-camera to the C300 and C100. Matching them will take some work but the samples in the video looked pretty close. Shoot a gray card with both cameras and make life in post easier.
Something to consider is how the C100 uses it’s 4K sensor. It actual devotes 2K pixels of the sensor to to 2 shades of green. This improves the noise and also improves ISO performance. I’m assuming this could be partly why the GH4 is sharper in 4K downsampled to HD. The C100 does this in camera before it gets recorded as HD on the card. Here is a quotit from DVinfo.net that pretty much sums this up.
Canon says that their Digic DV III processor reads this new sensor differently; it does not use the line-skipping method found in high-res HD-DSLR sensors. Instead, every four pixels (two green, one red, and one blue) are sampled for each final output pixel. In other words, color is assembled the same way as a traditional three-chip sensor block… two megapixels of red, two megapixels of blue and four megapixels of green (twice as much green as red or blue, since green carries the luminance info). Each primary color sampling off of the sensor is native 1920×1080, each color value alone is equal to the final output resolution. Canon claims that the processed signal has 1,000 lines of TV resolution, and the moire, diagonal line stair-stepping and other artifacts are greatly reduced in this chip compared to HD-DSLR cameras.
The GH4 having the ability to shoot at 96fps is also a little mind blowing. Again a great companion to the C100 since it doesn’t do any over cranking at all.
I shot this test with the GH4 at 96fps. This one above is ungraded.
Here is the graded version. Check out this review on how I graded it.
One more GH4 sample I shot. This one was for broadcast. It’s a news sweeps story promo. I also recorded the reporters on camera audio directly into the GH4 with a Sennheiser 2000 wireless. Sounds pretty good right? Speaking of audio (pun intended) The GH4 does have a shortcoming with some microphones. I hope this issue can be fixed. I don’t think it’s a deal breaker. Check out the article for the buzz. (Okay that was a bad one).
If you want to see C100 samples in the menu click on Cameras then Canon Cinema EOS. Lots of spots and also how I grade C-Log.
I wish I could use my EF mount lenses on the GH4. Metabones has one for the NEX cameras but not for MFT. At least not yet. They even announced one then pulled back. Please make this happen!
Here are my key pros and cons on the GH4 and C100.
GH4 Pros.
- 4K looks great. Practically moire and aliasing free with less rolling shutter in 4K
- Way better EVF.
- Way better LCD
- Over cranking up to 96fps. Even if a little mushy it still looks amazing.
- price
- High bitrate options
- Outputs 10 bit 4:2:2 from Micro HDMI
GH4 Cons.
- HD isn’t very exciting.
- ISO over 800 is noisy and not film like compared to the C100
- No internal ND
- Dynamic Range
- Probably need new SD cards for 4K
- Menu system is awful. Never liked the GH3 either and it’s the same.
- Micro HDMI. I hate HDMI now I hate Micro more.
- No simple EF adapter that works with Canon lenses.
C100 Pros.
- It’s a proper video camera with XLR and built in ND filters
- Uses EF lenses and IS
- S35 sensor gives more shallow depth of field without shooting wide open compared to MFT
- Sharp crisp image in HD
- Dynamic Range
- Log mode and Wide DR profiles
- AVCHD actually is pretty darn good
- ISO is amazingly clean.
- Base ISO is 850
- Easy to use right out of the box
- HDMI out will trigger an Atomos external recorder
C100 Cons.
- No variable frame rates
- Doesn’t shoot 4K. (compared to the GH4)
- HDMI out as opposed to SDI. Did I mention I hate HDMI?
- EVF is awful
- LCD color is off
- Records in AVCHD only. No 4:2:2 option unless using an external recorder.
- Audio integrated into the handle.
Big thank you to Steve Chan from DSI Pictures Entertainment 2014 for doing the comparison. If you’re interested the original file is available HERE for download.
This one was just released. GH4 VS Canon 5D MKIII with and without Magic Lantern.
Again the GH4 resolves a sharper image when downconverted to HD. I like it better. It still surprises me how soft the 5D MKIII image is.
Follow me on Twitter @eriknaso and check out my page on Facebook.
Thanks for coming by! Please help support my site by using the links on this page or bookmark these from my favorite retailers, B&H, Adorama, Zacuto, Amazon.com & Think Tank Photo. Using the links cost you nothing extra, but it helps offset the cost of running my blog. Thanks again for coming by eriknaso.com!
Filed in: 4K • C100 • Canon Cinema EOS • GH4 • Micro Four Thirds
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
I think anyone serious about 4K wouldn’t be looking at one of these GH4s for anything but a novelty. Seriously, Panasonic’s equivalent in a production camera sees price tags of 30 to 60 thousand dollars and up and there are many important reasons for this huge of a price variant.
You’d really have to be crazy I think to buy 3 or even 5 of these GH4’s with the YAGH and think you can go film the next Transformers, or even the next big feature at Cannes. It might be a fun challenge, but nothing serious to my thinking. Even if there were options to kit it out with studio and shoulder rigging, integration with the sound department and solid media storage and workflow solutions, and let’s not forget some cinema primes, it would still be a nightmare I think. It makes more sense to say “screw it” and go with an F65 in 8K and down sample to 2K or 4K delivery for theatrical releases.
Simple fact is as Erik states he, “wouldn’t give up the C100 for a GH4” This is because there are a lot of differences in the real world production realm where a camera like the GH4, kind of leaves you lacking in a lot of key areas. Yes, Erik has done a few TV spots that have looked good on the GH4, but would it handle the rigors of daily news gathering? I think not. I can’t even find color space specs for the camera, but I am guessing it isn’t broadcast approved.
The footage to 1080 down sampled from 4K on the GH4 is nice sure, but was ISO so low on the GH4 comparison with the bridge at night?. And why this comparison. I thought it was going to be a head to head 1080 HD test. What’s this 4K sample down stuff? If it is to compare in HD that’s one thing, but to go 4K on the poor old C100’s ass, is just not nice. Lets see how it stacks up with the F55, the F65, the C500, hell the FS700 for that matter. Canon has kicked serious ass in recent years with low light ability in DSLRs and short of SONY’s higher end F5 and F55, or their own C300 and C500 have not really been touched by any another DSLR offering in terms of competition for low light (to my knowledge).
The ability for the GH4 to do 4K and do it moderately well, to me will mean a descent rental camera to keep on hand at a super low day rate to offer the indy film maker with little budget a nice option from the traditional DSLR lineup of the 5D or the 70D.
On the whole, good for what it is, but it is what it is.
P.S. Erik has done the best footage and pieces with the GH4 on the web. I really appreciate the info he shares with us all here and would like to again thank him! A lot of work he doesn’t have to do but does with the same vigor and passion that we all share. Thank you Erik!
Wow! Your comment is longer than my post. LOL! Good stuff.
Thanks for the kind words and support Christopher.
> “What’s this 4K sample down stuff? If it is to compare in HD that’s one thing, but to go 4K on the poor old C100′s ass, is just not nice. Lets see how it stacks up with the F55, the F65, the C500, hell the FS700 for that matter.”
The reason is because down sampling 4K to HD is perfectly viable and easy enough method to do for 1080 delivery.
And it makes more sense to compare the GH4 with the C100 than any other the others you then mention, because the C100 is a *lot* closer in price! (but even then, the C100 is *waaaay* more expensive than a GH4! Which is a rather unfair comparison leaning the playing field *against* the GH4! lol, yet it still can favorably come out on top)
I don’t understand why you seem to be complaining about the GH4 so much when you’re yourself showing with you comments reasons why many people would consider and love a GH4! Not everybody has a budget for a C500… so the fact you can even put them in the same sentence is quite amazing.
> “Canon has kicked serious ass in recent years with low light ability in DSLRs and short of SONY’s higher end F5 and F55, or their own C300 and C500 have not really been touched by any another DSLR offering in terms of competition for low light (to my knowledge).”
The Sony A7s has seriously kicked Canon’s ass when it comes to low light.
Thank you Erik for your post you sure make a lot of sense, very balanced and fair.
And I have to agree with Christopher Taylor as well re the GH4 v C100 test, to mirror what he says, is the C100 that good that they had to load the test in favour of the GH4 by down sampling 4K to 2K to come near the C100? Is that an admission of how good the C100 is or what?
I shoot with a C100 for daily news gathering and have to say it’s a brilliant work horse, reliable, great colour, sharp, excellent handling, the ND’s and XLR audio make it a proper professional video camera plus long long long battery life.
And then there’s the Dual Pixel full time AF, WOW! how amazing is the AF, just incredible how reliable, fast efficient it is, it shames everything else.
One comment re the comparison test (which is excellent), I would bet if I used my C100 with the custom profile I have set up, the colour and sharpness might just trump or even better the GH4 4K down sampled to 2K.
I use a variation of the EOS profile, mixed with the Wide Gamma and I have messed around with the sharpness, skin sharpness, black and other variables, noise reduction and am very happy with it.
For the record I’ve also been shooting also on GH2’s GH3’s & 5D2s and 5D3s plus Sony and JVC HM series camcorders.
All the best!
@frank Shooting news I am sure you shoot outside alot, would you share that custom profile with us that your using? and I am new at this whole video thing but moving up to the C100 from a 5D Mark III is like night and day. This camera is really amazing to use in every day settings as well as production environments.
Was waiting for an article that compared the both…! So Im currently aiming to purchase one of these, and im really confused, which one should i get if i hadnt got either? But I do have a few L Glass, thats kind of a thing thats still making me delay on getting a GH4… but the 4K…the 96 fps… I still cant make a choice…
Personally I would rather have the C100 because it performs really well in low light with high ISO. The image is very sharp and to me looks great. The GH4 is a fun camera but I’m concerned about the noise I’ve seen even at ISO 800. The 4K thing and high frame rates are what’s special about the GH4. Those L lenses wont work without an electronic adapter unfortunately. The new Sony A7s looks like a great camera but to expensive. I would need a $300 adapter to use my Canon lenses so just to get in it would cost $2800. Add a 4K recorder like the Atomos Shogun and now it’s at $4800 Did I mention a rig? Cha-ching!
Hi Erik!
I’m editing now some footage from C100 and I love it!
It’s a multicam edition and someone footage are recorded directly with AVCHD an other one with Ninja II
attached, really I Can’t see the diference in most cases.
OK, My question:
If the C100, C300 and C500 have the same sensor and C100 can record outside via his HDMI clean… It’s possible to record 4K in C100 with an external recorder from Atmos or other one????
Thanks for your time and work!
Aymar.
I wish the C100 and C300 could be 4K but they are HD cameras.
Hi Eric,
I have stumbled across your site and you indeed have great info here – thank you!
I also have been reviewing both the GH4 and the C100 and after all the footage I have seen online i came to a conclusion that they would definitely make a great combo to shoot with, with their pro’s.
Now that the C100 mk2 is out with a new processor also [even though i do not agree with Canon’s pricing], i think that these two cameras would compliment another well in a multicam setup, with a little work matching the profiles for some grading..
What is your view now that the C100 mk2 is out and having the GH4 as a B camera?