Why the downer on the 1D C?

[Simon Shasha]

How do you guys think Canon will be in regards to offering improvements via firmware updates for the 1DC? Do you think they will constantly try and improve the power of the camera the way RED does via their firmware updates? Or do you think they will treat it more like the EOS stills line with firmware updates appearing only every so often?

I wonder if they could do 4K 48FPS @ 250Mbit? Or 4K 72FPS @ 166Mbit? I think this camera will sell a lot more if there is potential for "bonus" features via free firmware updates, like how it is with RED's line of cameras.

If the 1DC's street-price comes in at $10K or under, and there is potential for at least 48FPS @ 250Mbit, or something like that, I'd definitely be in.

[Amr Rahmy]

the red company releases there cameras unfinished without the proper firmware and then uses the members as guinea testers. they don't "add" or "improve" the capabilities of the camera through free firmware upgrades per say. as a matter of fact canon actually released firmware upgrades for there hdslrs on request from some cinematographers.

and that's not how firmware works, if the camera hardware is not built for something, it can't be added through firmware later. it's not magical.

[Simon Shasha]

the red company releases there cameras unfinished without the proper firmware and then uses the members as guinea testers. they don't "add" or "improve" the capabilities of the camera through free firmware upgrades per say. as a matter of fact canon actually released firmware upgrades for there hdslrs on request from some cinematographers.


and that's not how firmware works, if the camera hardware is not built for something, it can't be added through firmware later. it's not magical.

Well, that wasn't condescending...


Anyway, RED does add and improve their cameras through free firmware upgrades (the most recent being the REDcolor3 and REDgamma3). That's a well known fact, and something RED prides themselves on.


Virtually no camera is released "finished" with "proper" firmware. The 5DMK3 is about to get it's second firmware update in as many weeks (http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/n...nd-of-may-cr2/).


And yes, that's how firmware works. If you actually read what I wrote, I said "4K 48FPS @ 250Mbit? Or 4K 72FPS @ 166Mbit" - I specifically used half the bitrate used at 4K 24FPS for 48FPS, and a third of the bitrate for 72FPS - the dual Digic 5, if capable of processing 24FPS @ 500Mbit, theoretically could do 48FPS @ 250Mbit - the obstacle, from my experience with electrical-engineering, will most likely be with cooling the processor efficiently enough to stop the camera from crashing/shutting down/melting the processor. Firmware is low-level software - it serves the very purpose of controlling and manipulating the hardware (e.g. GH2 hack, Magic Lantern for Canon DSLRs, Canon's adding of 24P/25P to the 5DMK2). How do you think Nvidia and ATi/AMD get more frame-rates out of their video-cards with every generation of firmware they release? - They find a more efficient way, via low-level firmware, for their hardware to process data.


Neither of us have seen what is under the hood of the 1DC, but given the information about the specs of the bitrate and dual Digic 5 processor, I wouldn't necessarily consider it ridiculous to spectuale double the frame-rate at the sacrifice of half the bitrate (or half the resolution even - i.e. RED Scarlet X crops the sensor to deliver more frames).


Anyways...I guess I believe in "magic"...

[Amr Rahmy]

the hardware needed to increase frame rates goes beyond the processing power needed.

and even at that doubling the frame rate and half-ing the bit-rate is not a balanced processing equation if that. and happens in a different part of the process.

and not mentioning the additional requirements in sensor and hardware to be able to achieve better frame rates.

actually half-ing the bit-rate alone may require more processing power not to have the image brake apart.

you are talking about magic that you do not understand.

[Kholi]

Damn no MKIII....I was really looking forward to munching on popcorn and watching the MKIII blitz the competition.....it being the most popular camera (the camera you own being the most popular camera) and therefore the best.....ahh well GH2 winner!

#26

xD It very well may be the winner.

But on a more serious note: "it that shall not be named" isn't out-resolving C300 by any measure. The aliasing etc may make it appear to be in the same league, it is not. It still looks pretty good, but again, it's not doing that kind of work.

I agree with CP, and at the same time am glad that CPC (lots of PC) is dropping information that's very interesting to read. Real world results are the best results, but some understanding of how things work is great. Neither should be bemoaned. Well, to me, anyway.

Just look at the response to "it that shall not be named", there's a WHOLE mess of flaws in that image but it's really turning heads every where the footage pops up. The responses I've heard coming out of the Zacuto revenge screening are kind of surprising, I imagine that a lot of people will be surprised when it hits the net as well.

[Graemsay]

I agree with what Amr says.

The bottleneck on the EOS 1D C with respect to frame rates could be the bandwidth between the sensor and the Digic processor, the downsamping / de-Bayering of the raw image data, compression into the JPEG format, or writing it to the CF card.

If you wanted to go from 24 fps to 48 fps then you'd need to double the maximum data rate between the sensor and processor. Unfortunately there are no shortcuts here, as it's an issue of pumping the raw data through the camera. I'd expect the processing of the image to take around the same time, but it's hard to say about the compression step. I don't know the workings of the JPEG algorithm, but would guess that more calculations would be required to optimise an image for a lower quality setting. However, memory IO is expensive, and a smaller file would reduce this.

The only part of the chain where a lower quality JPEG would lead to a performance boost would be actually writing the file onto the CF card.

With regards to the bitrate, you've got your numbers confused Simon. The 500 Mb/sec number is the amount of data that it can output. That works out at around 2.6 MB per exposure. If you wanted to support 48 fps then the bitrate could remain constant, with the size of each frame falling to 1.3 MB.

I suspect that Canon can up the framerate to 25 fps, particularly as there have been mutterings about its absence being an oversight, but they might not go a lot further than that. A lot depends on whether they've overspecced the system, and it's possible that it could be pushed further, but whether or not it would be stable is a different matter.

[derek7]

Does 1DC have continuous AF in video mode like the new cheap models from Canon (650D/70D/7D MKII)? or is the 1DC already obsolete?

[Michael Vera]

Does 1DC have continuous AF in video mode like the new cheap models from Canon (650D/70D/7D MKII)? or is the 1DC already obsolete?

At $10,000+ I think many pro users of the body (I say "many" and not "all", so as not to be dogmatic), won't consider using a first generation "autofocus" feature, but will likely surround the camera with a rig and follow focus, etc.

That sensor based continuos AF is on the perfect bodies for the right demographics (parents wanting to film kids at the beach, etc), I cant see it being a highly desired feature by the demographic the 1D-C is aimed at...

[deltoidjohn]

Does 1DC have continuous AF in video mode like the new cheap models from Canon (650D/70D/7D MKII)? or is the 1DC already obsolete?

Most proper Cinema cameras and lenses do not have AF - DP's on real film sets need to be able to control their focus selectively, and this is the job of the focus puller.

Also, you're talking about cameras that have not even been announced yet (apart from the 650D). How do you know these cameras will even come to market with continuous AF?

[camarade]

4k in a high-end DSLR body + a 1DX to go with it? I'm game... If I had the money. Also, from my understanding this beast is actually decent in low light... don't know many other 4k cameras that are...