indiawilds
Veteran
How many of you will buy the 1D C with its present level of specs if it is offered at 10K USD?
1D C Pricing
- Thread starter indiawilds
- Start date
Greyfus Wolf
Active member
I'll buy it at 8K 
dustylense
Veteran
9k my max
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
$8K my max...will probably end up with FS700.
squig
Veteran
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.
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!
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.
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.
Last edited:
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.
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 ...
u can call it first dslr with 4K ... 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
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/produ...CTBNA1000_128GB_CompactFlash_Memory_Card.html
used in The Ticket (but 1dc bigger bitrate makes it same)
and i even dont like to work with red cameras ...
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/produ...CTBNA1000_128GB_CompactFlash_Memory_Card.html
used in The Ticket (but 1dc bigger bitrate makes it same)
and i even dont like to work with red cameras ...
Last edited:
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.
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.
Then your choice is simple...
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
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.
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.
Last edited:
Emanuel
Cross-Examiner
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.