1D C Pricing

[indiawilds]

How many of you will buy the 1D C with its present level of specs if it is offered at 10K USD?

[Greyfus Wolf]

I'll buy it at 8K :)

[dustylense]

9k my max

[Simon Shasha]

$8K my max...will probably end up with FS700.

[yoclay]

Yes, price it at FS700 levels and I might be in.
$15k is madness.

Oh, one other thing. Like every other European and PAL user on this planet:
We will not buy this camera until they add proper 25p support!

[squig]

I don't have a simple answer. I buy cameras based on projected need and available funds. I bought the MKII to get me through film school and to learn cinematography. I shot short films with it and some commercial projects. I bought the MKIII to replace the MKII as it is better in all aspects for shorts and commercials and is worthy of shooting a short teaser for the feature I have in development. For my current needs the 1D C is overkill and exceeds my budget. However when I get funding for the feature 2 of these bad boys are on my radar and with funding in place I wouldn't have a problem paying 15k for each of them even though I think they're overpriced. The 1D C is a specialist tool for feature film acquisition and in that context it is worth it but for most tasks the 5D MKIII is very capable.

[ChadN]

Yeah, $8k is about the most i can afford. For that price, i'd even take the C300. I probably don't need 4k, and the images coming from the C300 are really nice. I'd probably enjoy it more than the FS700 at the same price. Keep the 1D C priced higher, drop the C300 and i'd be happy!

[Jay Birch]

Yes, I think I would (I'm seriously considering it anyway, if it drops at $12k street price).

Ticks all the boxes for my work (mainly nature/landscape.... stills and motion).

Small, lightweight, high DR, good codec, low light, large sensor, 4K option, 1080/60p... and, of course, an amazing still camera.

My only gripes... 1080p is 4:2:0 and, most importantly, no 4K/25P (if they don't change that, they don't get my money.. simple). I'd love a RAW option and more overcrank modes... So will sit back for a while until the FS700 4K details are out (I don't need to shoot anything major until October).

But, overall, I think the 1D-C is a really great product that people are misjudging because it is in a DSLR box. If this was in a stripped down C300 body, people would hail it as the 2nd coming.

[squig]

No 25p is a pretty stupid omission especially given that just about every camera including Canons other offerings do 25p and more than half of the world watches 25p content.

[Jay Birch]

Hopefully, they will get the message when they don't sell one unit in PAL land.

[vladszp]

even if we get 25, 30 fps...1dc price is less than 9000$...that is how much 4k 8bit 422 camera should cost....

[Jay Birch]

1dc price is less than 9000$...that is how much 4k 8bit 422 camera should cost....

Says who? can you list me all these other 4K 8bit 422 cameras out there? Can you list me even one 4K camera that uses an APS-H sensor size? Or is half the size of Epic? Or half the weight of Epic?

This product has no piers.... It is currently unique, so why people think they can pigeon hole it into their price point is beyond me.

[vladszp]

all that first 4K dslr marketing hype is so ridiculous ...then lets call RED SCARLET first mirrorless 16bit 5K@12fps APS-H RAW photo camera (because it share simmilar price tag)...wow so unique and revolutionary ....This product has no piers...
:)
u can call it first dslr with 4K ... but what i see is camera with worst 4k spec in the class ...

[Jay Birch]

but what i see is camera with worst 4k spec in the class ...

Which is why it is the cheapest.

It has as many plus points as negatives, compared to it's only real competition (price wise) the Scarlet.

Pros:
Better low light
Better still images
Cheap media
Cheap Batteries
Straight to broadcast codec
Scaled 1080/60p
Ability to shoot almost anywhere unnoticed (a huge selling point, for some)
Size/Weight

Cons:
Slightly less DR (unconfirmed)
8 Bit
No RAW
No 3K options
No HDRx (A gimmick, for most)
No direct upgrade path

[vladszp]

for me all that cons outweigh pros...
by the spec 1dx is already 1.5 stops less DR (in the raw mode) ...
8 bit vs 16 bit (no coment)
Scaled 1080/60p resolution as 5d3 (not good)...
Size/Weight not that big difference(i'm 6.5 and have no problem with scarlet ) ...
all that puts 1dc in 9000$ ...
cheaper media (not cheap) ...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/841569-REG/Lexar_LCF128CTBNA1000_128GB_CompactFlash_Memory_Ca rd.html
used in The Ticket (but 1dc bigger bitrate makes it same)
and i even dont like to work with red cameras ...

[Graemsay]

If it comes in at the rumoured $12K / £8K price point then I'd be interested.

In terms of the shortcomings, if people who shoot video and film for a living are OK with 8 bit, then I can live with it. A higher bit depth means more compression to hit a given bit rate, and more artefacts, which include as banding. The Canon outputs at 500 Mb/sec, versus 440 Mb/sec on the Scarlet, so despite the lack of RAW I wouldn't be surprised if it generates better results.

3K strikes me as a gimmick. 2K / 1080P is the standard, whereas 4K is the emerging standard. And if you need 3K then it's not that hard to downsample an image.

[Jay Birch]

for me all that cons outweigh pros...

Then your choice is simple...

[Jay Birch]

Scaled 1080/60p resolution as 5d3 (not good)..

As far as I know, that has not been determined.... The only comment I have heard about the 1080p mode was when it was intercut with the 4K footage.... That is gonna be noticable.

But, if you have, say, a web video to do (or 720p) then it is a great addition to have. For Scarlet, you'd have to shoot in 4K/RAW and downscale.. Not a plus point

[yoclay]

Chuck Westfall pretty much says that the 1DC is not much better than the Mark III when shot at 1080p in his video with Dan Chung.

So basically you get 3 things: 1080/60p, 8 bit 422 on clean HDMI out only (meaning you need an external recorder - which defeats the purpose of the small form factor) and 4k (at 24p only) for an extra $12000. Sound worth it ?
Not to me.

Under $10K yes. Over $10K forgettaboutit. Time for a reality pill at Canon.

[Emanuel]

Yes, price it at FS700 levels and I might be in.
$15k is madness.

Oh, one other thing. Like every other European and PAL user on this planet:
We will not buy this camera until they add proper 25p support!It is overpriced, yes. But not every PAL user won't buy it because of lack of 25p once there are two workarounds: post conversion like every movie coming from theatres ;) 1/50 180º shutter in order to avoid 24p flickering with street lights, displays, etc, i.e. anything into 50Hz electrical frequency.

[Emanuel]

Chuck Westfall pretty much says that the 1DC is not much better than the Mark III when shot at 1080p in his video with Dan Chung.
Well, granted we have higher res sensor (5DIII) and aliasing/moiré under control in both models, I guess 5DIII might even be sharper, shouldn't it be? ;)



So basically you get 3 things: 1080/60p, 8 bit 422 on clean HDMI out only (meaning you need an external recorder - which defeats the purpose of the small form factor) and 4k (at 24p only) for an extra $12000. Sound worth it ?
Not to me.Not to anyone else, unless there are other interests to not post about ;-)

[Emanuel]

As far as I know, that has not been determined.... The only comment I have heard about the 1080p mode was when it was intercut with the 4K footage.... That is gonna be noticable.

But, if you have, say, a web video to do (or 720p) then it is a great addition to have. For Scarlet, you'd have to shoot in 4K/RAW and downscale.. Not a plus pointJay, I think you guess I like your posts either on dvxuser or reduser : ) And it is true the first part of your post. But as I already could say to you before, let's not to confound camera companies. Canon had part of their 1D/C's R&D previously paid spread along their DSLR line.

[dcloud]

Kudos to the people supporting this product.

[Emanuel]

Kudos to the people supporting this product.Jay and me, we're both supporting the product, yes. Both see the product as unique indeed. Funny the fact both of us even use the same adjective to call it, earlier and today. Even though, as you see, we don't share necessarily the same POV on the facts.

1D/C is unfairly overpriced. It is a steal, no doubts. But not exactly in the same use the word is meant to be written through the forums. I guess Jay has no connection with Canon unless as customer, well, not only guess but am convinced of that. He just comes from reduser where everything is priced differently. In any case, as posted, we should remind ourselves Jannard/Jarred are building a company from scratch. Canon is only taking advantage from RED price list.

[Gabrobot]

In terms of the shortcomings, if people who shoot video and film for a living are OK with 8 bit, then I can live with it. A higher bit depth means more compression to hit a given bit rate, and more artefacts, which include as banding. The Canon outputs at 500 Mb/sec, versus 440 Mb/sec on the Scarlet, so despite the lack of RAW I wouldn't be surprised if it generates better results.

Have you seen Jpeg vs Jpeg 2000 tests? I'll give you a hint, one of them wins by a mile...

Edit: Also, the Canon is saving an RGB file, so that's 4k x 3 compared with RAW which only has to save one value per pixel.

[Emanuel]

Have you seen Jpeg vs Jpeg 2000 tests? I'll give you a hint, one of them wins by a mile...

Edit: Also, the Canon is saving an RGB file, so that's 4k x 3 compared with RAW which only has to save one value per pixel.Indeed. But according to the reports, it is 100% free of visible artifacts on big screen, sharp enough on 4K side, so anything enough to be considered as... enough to be considered to ;-)

[dcloud]

Emanuel how do you see this compared to the c300

[Simon Shasha]

I can't help but conclude that the 1DC is the 1DX with a different/added set of low-level drivers - even at $10,000 it seems over-priced. I think $8000 sounds reasonable.

[indiawilds]

The kind of project that I am planning, the 1D C would be suitable. 15K USD is a lot for me. If it is brought down to 10-11K USD, then I am definitely in. Some say that the price may come down to 12k levels but not 10. What bothers me more is that this camera will chew up cards like an elephant gobbling up bananas. So 4K acquisition is not for everybody, even if you just want to future proof your work. A Lexar 128GB professional 1000x UDMA card is 799.95 USD and is out of stock in B&H. So the overall cost of memory cards for a wildlife guy like me has to also go into the buying decision.

I guess Canon knowingly priced it at 15k USD, else a few guys would have bought it out of lust and gone bankrupt buying memory cards, upgrading their editing systems... :) However, if you are shooting on the sets, then definitely you can download and can do with less cards.

Jokes apart, I saw Shane Hurlbuts blog and he has said that he was using a hand assembled camera where the high ISO was limited to 1250 or so and he was not able to go beyond f2 or something. So very shallow depth of field in low light had contributed to the apparent difference in quality between the 1080p. He has also said that he was thinking that since it was a dream sequence, people won't mind. However, we should accept that there may be a big difference in quality between the two. Hope to see a sample from a post production camera. The problem is unless you see it in the big screen in a 4k projector, one won't know how good it is.

In the BTS footage of Ticket, the way the 1DC is handed by Shane Hurlbut to his assistant in the ramp, I feel that is huge. Else you would need a crane or something to film from the first floor to the ground floor level. I think this camera is a no brainer for large production houses to buy/rent. I am sure Canon will do the necessary tweaking of firmware to add features and this camera is going to work well.

In this forum, there were initially lot of people who disliked the price of C300 and now we see a big and ever growing owner base of that camera. I feel it will be a similar case with the 1D C.

[Jay Birch]

The massive plus point , to me, is the DSLR body.

When I shoot with the HVX or, on occasion, a Scarlet/Epic... I get hassled by the general public, this is distracting and can affect the shot I am after (especially nature stuff). A DSLR rarely brings this problem.

I imagine this is way down the list for most people.... But as I have pointed out before... Not everyone on this forum is doing narrative or even broadcast. Image acquisition serves many industries these days.

Of course, stealth shooting will be a huge plus point to most here too.

[vladszp]

before people decide to spend 15000$ they should learn what same spec mean....
RAW image is 3x smaller than debayer image ...4k 16bit frame is 16MB and uncompressed 4k 422 jpeg is 24MB...
for the same compression RAW video will be 30% smaller....
1dc compression is not beter than red scarlet....

[Jay Birch]

Do you really think that anyone interested in the 1D-C will not have spent hours researching (or using) the Scarlet?

Both have pros and cons.... I'm interested in finding the one that ticks the most important boxes.

You have clearly already made your mind up, so I'm not sure why you are so concerned. I can guarantee you that whichever 4K system I buy into, I will make my money back... So don't feel sorry for me if I make the "wrong" choice.

[szimmer]

Do you really think that anyone interested in the 1D-C will not have spent hours researching (or using) the Scarlet?

Both have pros and cons.... I'm interested in finding the one that ticks the most important boxes.

You have clearly already made your mind up, so I'm not sure why you are so concerned. I can guarantee you that whichever 4K system I buy into, I will make my money back... So don't feel sorry for me if I make the "wrong" choice.

+1

[vladszp]

im not having problem with people who knows what they want....but there is lot of wild guesses and false data..so lets put things straight...i just dont want to see people who are not good in understanding spec get false image and waste money....
and i dont see how blind brand loyality can do any good ...it just keep prices high for mediocre products....

[Emanuel]

Emanuel how do you see this compared to the c3004K is future proof. But not all shooters need it. You won't need such for an ad as for instance, if your goal didn't reach the 4K standard yet. Benefits of downsampling (see Nyquist theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem)) aside.

Narrative? Well, it is a whole different story.

Even if C300 is perfect for doc work nowadays, 4K can give you the extra bucks at some point later in time.

Pictures work out as same as a property even decades later. Like a house to rent where the audience(s) is(are ;) a tenant of ours. The better a product we have to offer is, the higher number they are and longer their stay with us is. And by consequence, with the primary investment.

Emanuel

[squig]

The massive plus point , to me, is the DSLR body.

When I shoot with the HVX or, on occasion, a Scarlet/Epic... I get hassled by the general public, this is distracting and can affect the shot I am after (especially nature stuff). A DSLR rarely brings this problem.


I had the opposite once shooting with the 5D in a nightclub....people kept standing in front of me wanting their picture taken....I didn't have a flash so it was hard to make them go away.

PS good point E...it would be nice to shoot my feature @ 4k to future proof it. I'm aiming to make it a cult classic...don't see any point making a film that fades into obscurity.

[Jay Birch]

alot of cult classics (and blockbusters) are shot on s16 though... i'd say films like black swan are pretty darn future proofed.... Purely because people will want to watch them in the future and a 2K scan is just fine! I think the future proofing notion is more apt for things like nature documentaries... Those will really shine at 4K.

That said, if you can afford the 4K workflow, go for it.

[leteeci]

"I had the opposite once shooting with the 5D in a nightclub....people kept standing in front of me wanting their picture taken...."

hehehe.. same thing here.. I am thinking of getting the T-shirt with sign: " VIDEO, NOT PHOTO " :))

[stefancolson]

I have an alarming amount of footage of people posing for pictures before I have to chime in "it's a video, not a photo". Seriously hours of footage...

[hendosan]

Actually this happens to me when I use a small-chip camcorder as well, so the only conclusion you should draw is that people are daft.

[RatLabProductions]

I find the response I get to camcorder format like EX-1 is the '(waving hands) Hi Mom' like I am on some sort of live newscast. Is their already a thread about cameras/camcorders and the funny responses we get?

[Lee Saxon]

But, overall, I think the 1D-C is a really great product that people are misjudging because it is in a DSLR box. If this was in a stripped down C300 body, people would hail it as the 2nd coming.

Not me, I'd think it was overpriced warmed over technology from 2006 just like the C300.

[indiawilds]

Not me, I'd think it was overpriced warmed over technology from 2006 just like the C300.

Really?

In 2006 I was clicking with Canon EOS 1D Mark II. ISO 200 in the 1D Mark II was fine. ISO 400 used to give noise. ISO 800 was a lot. Only couple of times I had used ISO 1600 just to document a scene. I have some fine images with that camera, however, to say that the technology of 1D C is same as 2006 era makes me speechless. I am giving the link of one article title Tiger Intelligence and it has a few images. http://www.indiawilds.com/diary/tiger-intelligence/

[eperez]

7k and an apology from Canon for turning their back on indie filmmakers. Good thing Red and Sony are around... FS700 looks good to me.

[vladszp]

7k and an apology from Canon for turning their back on indie filmmakers. Good thing Red and Sony are around... FS700 looks good to me.
+1

[Emanuel]

Well, these days there are a lot here in the real world saying to me: «Good thing Canon and Sony are around».

No kidding. The proprietary media price policy out there, has been a PITA in order to convince other investors to put money with the rebels.

[Graemsay]

The FS700 is expected to be $8K, but the 4K recorder isn't likely to be cheap, and there's speculation that it'll be around $5K. I suspect that the total will come to a similar sort of figure to the EOS 1D C.

The Scarlet is more expensive than both of these.

So for a large sensor 4K solution, and not that we really need that just yet, I think that you're looking at a starting price of around $12K or $13K.

I think that the FS700 is a very interesting camera, and it's got some nice features. (Is it wrong that having access to autofocus appeals? :D) At the same time there are omissions:


The internal codec records at 27 Mb/s, which is lower than the 50 Mb/s mandated by major broadcasters in the EU, so an external recorder would be necessary. (The C300 shoots at 50 Mb/s internally.)
The FS700 has a 4:2:2 / 8-bit output. The F3 has 4:4:4 / 10-bit with the S-Log upgrade.
S-Log is absent on the FS700. The 1D C has C-Log, or at least "Canon Log Gamma". OK, C-Log isn't as capable as S-Log from what I've read, but it's better than nothing.


Furthermore, spec sheets don't tell you if the camera suffers chromatic aberrance, moire, rolling shutter or other artefacts. The FS100 suffered from some of these (at least according to Philip Bloom's review). The C300 and F3 are where these kinds of things disappear or become significantly less intrusive.

What I'm trying to say (in a roundabout way) is that something like the C300 is slated on forums for missing certain fashionable features, and being too expensive, but it works very well in a broadcasting niche. If the 1D C captures clean 4K video without any nasty artefacts, gets approved by broadcasters like the BBC (and with a max 500 Mb/s throughput, it should), and Canon add 4K at 25 fps (they seem to have realised that's an omission, so it should turn up sometime) then it becomes a very attractive proposition because there are fewer shortcomings to work around. It might not do 300 fps, or 10-bit RAW, but it should get the basics right.

[maarek]

I think that the FS700 is a very interesting camera, and it's got some nice features. (Is it wrong that having access to autofocus appeals? :D) At the same time there are omissions:


The internal codec records at 27 Mb/s, which is lower than the 50 Mb/s mandated by major broadcasters in the EU, so an external recorder would be necessary. (The C300 shoots at 50 Mb/s internally.)


Though the encoding on the FS100 is mpeg-4 with a surprisingly good quality. C300 is mpeg2.






Furthermore, spec sheets don't tell you if the camera suffers chromatic aberrance, moire, rolling shutter or other artefacts. The FS100 suffered from some of these (at least according to Philip Bloom's review). The C300 and F3 are where these kinds of things disappear or become significantly less intrusive.

F3 has the exact same amount of rolling shutter as the FS100. Also moire and aliasing is pretty much 95% the same on the F3 as on the FS100. Chromatic aberrations are a feature of the lens.

[Jay Birch]

Not me, I'd think it was overpriced warmed over technology from 2006 just like the C300.

Really? I think you would struggle very badly to get a C300 quality image in 2006 for less than $100k and nowhere near the size/weight. And the sensor is beautiful and very upto date.

I assume you are fixated on paper specs rather than images?

[Graemsay]

Though the encoding on the FS100 is mpeg-4 with a surprisingly good quality. C300 is mpeg2.


But it's not acceptable to the major broadcasters. I've heard of internally F3 footage (at 35 Mb/s) being sneaked into a Channel 4 (http://www.channel4.com/) production without complaints, so it might be more of a checkbox thing.

I haven't managed to find a comparison of MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 compression, and I'd really be interested in doing so. I'm not convinced that you can go from 50 Mb/s in the former to 27 to 35 Mb/s MPEG-4 in the latter and not lose image quality.



F3 has the exact same amount of rolling shutter as the FS100. Also moire and aliasing is pretty much 95% the same on the F3 as on the FS100. Chromatic aberrations are a feature of the lens.

I was referring to the Philip Bloom mini shootout (http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/27/minishootout/) that he posted about a year ago, when he mentioned some. I think that it's probably a compression artefact, as he was shooting on the same lenses. I'd expect the F3 and FS100 to be pretty similar on Moire and rolling shutter as they use the same sensor, and probably quite a lot of the same electronics.

[maarek]

I haven't managed to find a comparison of MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 compression, and I'd really be interested in doing so. I'm not convinced that you can go from 50 Mb/s in the former to 27 to 35 Mb/s MPEG-4 in the latter and not lose image quality.

It's not so simple. Different encoders are different. For example, the Sony Nex-5n has a not so good AVCHD implementation. Eventhough the bitrate is the same as in the FS100, it loses badly to it. So even if the bitrates and the primary encoder are the same (mpeg4 at 24mbps 1080p) the encoding quality can still be quite different. Canon always had a better MPEG2 encoder in it's HDV cams than Sonys mpeg2.

[indiawilds]

Really? I think you would struggle very badly to get a C300 quality image in 2006 for less than $100k and nowhere near the size/weight. And the sensor is beautiful and very upto date.

I assume you are fixated on paper specs rather than images?

I agree with Jay. I am quoting from an article by Philip Bloom which I saw just now while browsing. In his article "The Tale of Lucasfilm, Skywalker Ranch, Star Wars and Canon DSLRs on a 40 foot Screen" he says "Rick and Mike had seen what these cameras were capable of and wanted to really know just how much you could push them. They had seen mine and others work online but really wanted to see how well they performed projected. The joy of these guys is they have a great attitude. If it looks great on the big screen then that is the most important thing. Not codecs, limitations, bit rates etc... all those are very important but the most important thing by far for them is how it actually looks and it passed with flying colours. That is what they really care about. "

So guys chill a bit. Lets think what all we can do with a camera, how to unleash its power rather than crying over limitations.

[Graemsay]

It's not so simple. Different encoders are different. For example, the Sony Nex-5n has a not so good AVCHD implementation. Eventhough the bitrate is the same as in the FS100, it loses badly to it. So even if the bitrates and the primary encoder are the same (mpeg4 at 24mbps 1080p) the encoding quality can still be quite different. Canon always had a better MPEG2 encoder in it's HDV cams than Sonys mpeg2.

I can appreciate that.

The difference between the FS100 and 5N might be down to the sensor, and how video is pulled off it. I wouldn't be surprised if both used the same encoder (chips are expensive to design, but cheap to fabricate) though. Unfortunately I can't find a photo of a tear-down of an FS100 to confirm. :)

[pat1]

For the price of a 1dc or a c300 you could buy, with VAT in the uk, the BMC camera along with a Sony FS700 and almost cover the cost of a 5Dmk3 to go with it. Seems a bit disproportionate, but I understand why people want these cameras, it's the same as paying for a name like BMW, Mercedes etc...

[trez]

For the price of a 1dc or a c300 you could buy, with VAT in the uk, the BMC camera along with a Sony FS700 and almost cover the cost of a 5Dmk3 to go with it. Seems a bit disproportionate, but I understand why people want these cameras, it's the same as paying for a name like BMW, Mercedes etc...

Welcome to dvxuser. You started with very bold statement. Disproportionate? What's your measure here? You need one to speak about proportions, don't you? Is it just your subjective sense of value? Without such measure all you can say is that one is more expensive than the other. What about Alexa? F65? These are "disproportionate"! The attempts to quantify the esthetics just don't make sense. What for you is imperceptible or marginal, for someone else is huge. I'd much prefer to have one C300 for my job than dozens of 5Dmk3s and the only reason is the image it outputs. Sometimes, depending on job, I'd even prefer to have 1/3'' cam with DOF adapter than 5Dmk3! I don't agree it's paying for a name. It's paying for a car. If all that matters for you is fuel consumption and the ability to get from point A to point B then go drive Toyota - it's "as good" as BMW or Mercedes. Or walk!

[pat1]

Hi Trez, my point is that with these cameras you are buying into a certain amount of hype, when there are other options that cost a lot less that can get the same job done.

[Graemsay]

If it's too expensive then buy something else. :smile:

I saw a comment over at No Film School pointing out that for the price of an FS700 body it's possible to buy a Panasonic AF101, some glass, and an Atmos Ninja. That'll give you a decent 1080P shooting set-up that would be acceptable for the BBC. Or you could pick up a cheap FS100, and build a similar package for a little more.

For example, since you're in the UK, an AF101, Voigtlander Nokton 25 mm, Leica Summilux 50 mm plus the Ninja would be around £7,500. CVP are quoting £7,200 including VAT for an FS700. I find that a compelling argument.

In the unlikely event that you need a large sensor 4K camera, then the options in the next few months for less than $15K / £10K are a Sony FS700, Canon EOS 1D C or RED Scarlet (with the caveat that you really need to spend more). But I expect that you're going to be looking at a minimum of $10K to $12K for a 4K solution.

On top of that you're going to need some decent glass, and cinema lenses make Leica look cheap.

[Jay Birch]

Hi Trez, my point is that with these cameras you are buying into a certain amount of hype, when there are other options that cost a lot less that can get the same job done.

Which options? If you want 4K, there is 1 option that is cheaper and that is the small sensor effort from JVC.... FS700 doesn't count, as there is no info on the 4K mode

[Emanuel]

Actually, 1D/C is the most affordable 4K capture device on the large size sensors' side. Therefore, its price. RED/Scarlet price range. Overpriced for a DSLR, but cheapest 4K solution. Until Nikon will come.

[Lee Saxon]

Really? I think you would struggle very badly to get a C300 quality image in 2006 for less than $100k and nowhere near the size/weight. And the sensor is beautiful and very upto date.

You're right, the $18k Red One didn't come out until 2007 (2008 if you're not Soderbergh, I guess). My bad.


I assume you are fixated on paper specs rather than images?

I'm fixated on how much Sony, Canon, etc rip us off.

[Jay Birch]

You're right, the $18k Red One didn't come out until 2007 (2008 if you're not Soderbergh, I guess). My bad.


With the exception of 3.2k resolution.... The R1-M didn't come anywhere close to the C300, for image quality.

[Graemsay]

I'm at a BBC technology event today to do with their home page. There's a guy shooting it on a Canon XL, and we got chatting.

He made the point that a few years back a broadcast quality camera cost £100K, ($150K for USAnians) and they're now a tenth of the price. Regardless of all this bitching about what Canon are charging, the price of a professional grade device has fallen massively in a very short time.

Besides, give it two or three years, and I'd expect that the EOS 5D Mark IV will be 4K capable. :)

[fde101]

This discussion would have been about HD cameras a few years ago.

Rinse and repeat.

[Simon Shasha]

These guys here in Australia have put the 1DC up for $9999AUD on their site: http://www.techrific.com.au/canon-eos-1d-c-digital-slr-camera-body-only-1dc-free-gift-12mth-local-warranty-p-2956.html

They're known for grey-market imports though.

[Greyfus Wolf]

Meh, seeing how the FS700 is about $8000 , I hope Canon will price the 1D C relatively :)

[mico]

Meh, seeing how the FS700 is about $8000 , I hope Canon will price the 1D C relatively :)

Why? To shoot 4k with the Fs700 you'll need to but a Sony recorder of which we do not know the price, but it will certainly not be cheap and the $8000 will only get you regular 1080p avchd.

[Graemsay]

These guys here in Australia have put the 1DC up for $9999AUD on their site: http://www.techrific.com.au/canon-eos-1d-c-digital-slr-camera-body-only-1dc-free-gift-12mth-local-warranty-p-2956.html
Assuming that the price is about right, relative to the EOS 1DS, then you're looking at a street price of around:


US: $9100
EU: €8400
UK: £7100

(That's based on a 1DC costing a third more than the 1DS.)

If it arrives in that sort of ballpark then it'll be a very good buy.

[Jay Birch]

yea, $9K and i'm in........ 4k, broadcast level codec, 12+ stops DR, amazing low light, small, light and wont bring attention when filming. Add to that a top of the range stills camera and it is a bargain.

[Greyfus Wolf]

I hope the final price ends up to be around 9K like what we're seeing here, then it'll be worth considering :)

[vincent thomas]

If it was out today i guess it will be. Now it will be out in October and at this price i still think it could hard for him to meet a huge success. If you are an indie filmaker you may prefer find the FS700 more in your need, or the Black Magic Camera more in your budget with as well other advantages, then if you make serious money , i would prefer a C500 or in the soon to be released Scarlet Dragon and Sony F4 ...


v*
__________________________________________________ ________
Vincent Thomas
Artist for Film / Photograph & Creative Director
http://www.stranger-than-paradise.book.fr/

[vincent thomas]

I have to say, if i admire the C300 or C500 body design, personnally, im not attracted by a 35mm DSLR body design at this price...

[Simon Shasha]

Even though my main buying point would be for the video function, at $9K, I'd be reminding myself that I am also getting an awesome still-camera too.

[Emanuel]

I have to say, if i admire the C300 or C500 body design, personnally, im not attracted by a 35mm DSLR body design at this price...To me, it is rather the opposite... The form factor complaint is actually the most common charge but also the silliest I've ever heard in more than 20 years of scope in this business. Sorry to have to say it : ) before the facts: an open door. The other way round?