View Poll Results: Will you buy the 1D C if it is priced at 10k USD?

Voters
81. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    10 12.35%
  • No

    71 87.65%

Thread: 1D C Pricing

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 73
  1. Collapse Details
    #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    723
    Default
    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?


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New Orleans, La
    Posts
    566
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Birch View Post
    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.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #43
    Senior Member indiawilds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    New Delhi, India
    Posts
    418
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Saxon View Post
    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/


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #44
    Default
    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.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #45
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by eperez View Post
    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


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #46
    Default
    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.
    RED ONE @home
    #111
    Emanuel & Co's RED ONE
    #647
    RED ZOOM LENSES
    #156
    #157
    RED 300mm LENS
    #82
    Who am I?

    * LINK *
    ** IMDb **


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #47
    Default
    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? ) 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.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #48
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Graemsay View Post
    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? ) 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.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK / Portugal
    Posts
    870
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Saxon View Post
    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?
    stylecreative.net - Designer/Video/Music bloke


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #50
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by maarek View Post
    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 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.

    Quote Originally Posted by maarek View Post
    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 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.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •