Is Canon getting ready to release new cinema camera/s? Big C200 Price reduction
- Thread starter Ken1212
- Start date
At some point, the non-ultimate high end - i.e., not the niche where the cost of the camera is irrelevant to the overall budget - will be quite content with a sub-$10,000 unit, both on the image quality and the operational logistics (codecs, IBIS, ISO, HFR, weight, AF, etc.). It probably won't bother ARRI much but will effect Sony and Canon. And, while Sony and Canon will try to recoup their business on the consumer end, this will likely eliminate Red.
As to glass, I am thinking that the externally powered non-mechanical AF might make its entrance sooner or later.
PS. I meant "bridge too far", obviously. Spelling rules.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
IMO, $20,000 territory is a bridge to far for Canon in 2023.
I dont get the obsession with shooting 'Jules et Jim' skipping through a field of clover through a golden blur filter with a near medium format sensor.. thats 10% of the market.
Canon need blazing AF, blazing HFR, 600 f4 and to be at the winter olympics getting nazal hair on the cresta run.. at night
then $20k is a barigain
A bit like that 50-10000 lens.. its not a drama thing.
I dont get the obsession with shooting 'Jules et Jim' skipping through a field of clover through a golden blur filter with a near medium format sensor.. thats 10% of the market.
Canon need blazing AF, blazing HFR, 600 f4 and to be at the winter olympics getting nazal hair on the cresta run.. at night
then $20k is a barigain
A bit like that 50-10000 lens.. its not a drama thing.
Are we disagreeing here. I don't think we're disagreeing here. (I'm gonna get the papers. Get the papers)
My point is that, both Canon and Sony - since neither Nikon nor Panasonic seems to be interested in making a "cinema style" body - will soon release cameras that have both the features for a one-man-band operation as well as sufficient cinematic/drama image quality for under $10,000. That camera may not be a mirror reflection of Alexa 35 but it'll be more than good enough for everything. Star Wars sequels included.
NorBro
Major Contributor
We're now going on year 7 of you saying that and no one's using anything else but ARRIs.
Cameras have been sufficient forever now; it's just hard making something worthy.
The prices shouldn't be about image quality anymore but about improving everything else (like I guess Sam is saying) to make the camera worth a higher price.
Cameras have been sufficient forever now; it's just hard making something worthy.
The prices shouldn't be about image quality anymore but about improving everything else (like I guess Sam is saying) to make the camera worth a higher price.
And they won't. Not on the very top level, where talent has the say. But, on lower levels, it would take Sony coming out with (the super-perfect $10,000) FX-13 and insisting that a program that it owns and distributes uses it on a set. Or else. That's the cost of doing business.
Or maybe Canon wises up, contacts the elite talent agencies and offers to fund (partially or completely) an independent production a la Rust.
But without Alec Baldwin. Or guns. Or Alec Baldwin with guns. You know what I mean.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Sony already does that; half the Venice motion pictures are produced and/or distributed by Sony Pictures Entertainment.
Regardless they do look good and you have to muscle your way into these things.
I'm a Canon guy but they have no chance in hell at this point, it's just too late at that level and three's a crowd.
Regardless they do look good and you have to muscle your way into these things.
I'm a Canon guy but they have no chance in hell at this point, it's just too late at that level and three's a crowd.
Run&Gun
Veteran
And they did the same with the F55. My particular copy came from a rental house that provided the cameras for a Netflix show that was produced by, or at least heavily associated with Sony, they had and insisted that they be used to shoot the show, despite the DP wanting otherwise. After that season wrapped, the rental house owner decided he didn’t need as many F55’s, anymore. Which worked out well for me…
Venice is an elite tier camera. James Cameron used a two-piece Venice Rialto to shoot Avatar 2. But no one tells James Cameron what camera should be on his set.
I am talking something like this -
And Canon is still in the game. And so are technically Nikon and Panasonic too. Because they have full frame.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Z9 AF is supposedly improved with the most recent (yesterday?) update. Panasonic will need to release its high end camera to replace S1R.
ND can be external and not every clip needs audio.
The real problem here is that some models may have some but not all of the needed features because the cartel wants to keep its fan base with different brand names. But, as with the S5II auto focus, these features get there sooner or later.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Everthing said is true.. but also total BS.
If you are going to run a production co. you are buying a 16-35, 50, 24-70 (or 24-105), 100mm marco, 70-200 and renting a 400 2.8 or 600-4 when needed (or is it a 200-400 nowadays?)
You are gonna spend $2k on batteries, and dont want more then 3 chargers in the hall or the wife will put them in the trash
You are gonna buy these lenses once or twice in your life - not swap systems when nikon put in 11 bit.
You are also gonna do jobs that need ND today without messing with some bag full of filters and sandwhich crumbs.
You are also gonna borrow kit from your mates if you need more, or something broke. Noone can lend you a spare Panicsonic apart from Andrew Reid and hes in Germany.
And need you sound.
Even when you do a job when no sound was booked the MD pops out and wants to do a 3min testimonial.. 'er we have not got a mic' doesnt make for a re-booking whatever the emails say.
So it is sony or canon. End of. Unless you want to p_ss your money down a pot.
Last edited:
ahalpert
Major Contributor
There's little point in posting something that looks nice. You can post something from an iPhone that looks nice. The material questions are how does the camera/codec reproduce bad/mixed lighting; will it work with your lenses/accessories etc (and will the mount flex when you need it not to, etc); does it have all the features/IO you need; and is it reliable. Nobody wants to bend over backwards for their camera when there's money on the line
and as a proportion of the overall budget, camera rentals might not be much. Especially with the rock bottom rates available these days
The Venice 2 body only costs as much as a new mid-tier car. and if you need to fully kit it out with accessories, you'd also need to do that with a cheap camera.
so you're not talking about saving that much money for anyone who is already working with an arri budget. And anyone who isn't is already using a cheap sony/canon/whatever. So how much of the market is going to shift from here on out?
A) There's a lot of reasons to post something that looks nice. That's how sample/highlights/product reels/demo rolls work. That's how all camera manufacturers advertise. Because not many like crap.
B) I did mention the features but since different videographers shoot different types of footage, you have to pick whatever works for you. My point is that modern cameras are fairly capable of shooting under a wide variety of settings. The guy in the video mentioned the benefits of an APS-C size sensor. He could have also mentioned a center-crop on the full frame sensors, especially of the 6K/8K variety.. But FX-30 is an $1,800 model. It's not for everyone.
That's your $64,000 question (although, as pointed out previously, no one is buying $64,000 cameras anymore, aside those shooting on Alexa). Back when C300 and DC1 came out and all the way to Venice, companies paid various directors and cinematographers to make their showcase presentations. At this time, companies need to get more engaged. "Blue is the warmest color" was shot on C300 and won a ton of awards. The Japanese camera manufacturers need to get more aggressive on that front to move the market away from Alexa and Venice.
PS. Back when I first joined this site, I posted a link to an article off CNet, "A major film shot on D810". Barry corrected me that it wasn't a "major film" but a small independent flick. But it was indeed shot on D810 and Nikon paid for the privilege.
As to SMM, you are correct, if you look at everything from your own perspective. But your work is not necessarily a replica of others' work. Furthermore, you entered the market at a certain time and found yourself a certain niche with a certain camera class. Which led you to purchase certain brand and type of lenses. Others will end up in different niches and different locations while shooting under different settings and using different cameras. And, as I wrote above, no one knows the exact direction the market will take. In that Sony ad, the director mentioned shooting on the manual Helios glass. I reckon you don't take his advice to heart.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
As to SMM, you are correct, if you look at everything from your own perspective
This is indeed true - I do think about that perspective and if it even fits today.. I do think about why I find work hard and kit intensive. I get tied up in tedium like having enough battereis or a wide enough lens to show the location if asked.
Indeed how do others survive? - I wonder that (but then again maybe they dont survive.. Ive kept head above water for 20 + years just)
--
Do I have a certain type of work? not just me but my chums; everyone I know who makes a living. Property developers, rail companies, food and med companies.. any companies (and broadcast).. all the clients with some money and some expectation of being able to tell clearly thier story, which often needs wides, telephotos and good audio in the sun.
Maybe that is a niche - I always thoght filming folk singers with a helios was a niche.
I dont mind a helios, I have my scratched 50 1.2, blurry 28 2 and ready to whak mamiya 80. Im up for dangling some crystals off the matte box or using my 2002 interlaced handycam.
But thes fun items are on the margins to business I guess?
I still think a video business is usually built around a system.. canon or sony
(broadcast and drama less so of course)
This is indeed true - I do think about that perspective and if it even fits today.. I do think about why I find work hard and kit intensive. I get tied up in tedium like having enough battereis or a wide enough lens to show the location if asked.
Indeed how do others survive? - I wonder that (but then again maybe they dont survive.. Ive kept head above water for 20 + years just)
--
Do I have a certain type of work? not just me but my chums; everyone I know who makes a living. Property developers, rail companies, food and med companies.. any companies (and broadcast).. all the clients with some money and some expectation of being able to tell clearly thier story, which often needs wides, telephotos and good audio in the sun.
Maybe that is a niche - I always thoght filming folk singers with a helios was a niche.
I dont mind a helios, I have my scratched 50 1.2, blurry 28 2 and ready to whak mamiya 80. Im up for dangling some crystals off the matte box or using my 2002 interlaced handycam.
But thes fun items are on the margins to business I guess?
I still think a video business is usually built around a system.. canon or sony
(broadcast and drama less so of course)
Some of his shots look better than others. I am shocked, shocked I tell ya. It's like watching TV and thinking, "They're probably shooting on Alexa with Zeiss Supreme Primes, their cinematographer/s is/are first class ... but the footage may as well be shot on a $1,200 Olympus in 8-bit at 5.6".
Anyway, it surely does look like Canon will present a couple of cameras before the NAB. Sony is unlikely to rain on their parade at this time and will probably wait until CineGear in June. FX-30 was announced in late September but FX-9 will be 4 years old by then and is the most likely candidate for a replacement.
But Sony has been known to throw curves too.