5d2 7d 1d4 - future speculations

T

trez

Well-known member
Can't help discussing some speculations here...
5d2/7d/1d4 are the morning stars of the new era - no doubt. 5d/7d proved it's possible to build large sensor camera with excellent low-light capabilities at ridiculous price. 1d4 is expected to address rolling shutter issues.
Now, that the sensor is there, are there any significant obstacles (besides marketing strategy) that refrain Canon from making new video camera that can compete with paper Scarlet soon?
1. Antialiasing can be cured with proper optical low-pass filter (optimized for video raster size and not full rez stills) or more sophisticated downsampling algorithm (the latter might require faster chips but would be much preffered due to better MTF of such solution).
2. Outputting proper uncompressed full rez signal via HDMI/SDI shouldn't be a problem either. I'm sure they can easily do it with 7d. People could hook up their NanoFlash and record high quality.
3. Implementing better encoding might require faster chips unless one of the chips, which is said to be dedicated exclusively to auto-focus tasks overtakes some computations.
4. Alternatively, Canon could develop some RAW compression algorithm like RED to reduce the bitrate to flash memory speeds and take some load off the camera chips (no debayering/downsampling/sharpening/gamma etc - just compression).
5. If Canon is able to add 24 framerate to 5d by means of firmware update, they could probably develop variable framerate software, too.
6. Adding some useful features like ND filters, dedicated buttons and enclosing it in more convenient chassis and we're there.

Should we expect something exciting soon? Will Canon attempt to dethrone Scarlet before its even born? They definitely have the technology and the benefits of scale allow them to manufacture the beast way cheaper than Red.
 
Last edited:
The main issue is that your proposed camera is a digital cinema camera, not a camcorder in the traditional sense. The digital cinema market is a relatively tiny one. As a multinational conglomerate whose business interests are in major industrial and consumer markets, Canon doesn't seem like a company that would have much interest in competing in what is basically a micro-niche. The broadcast video market is already small (as Barry once said, Panasonic will sell many times more GH1s than any of its pro camcorders), and the digital cinema market is a fraction of that.

Most of the members of this forum are actually not in the digital cinema market. We are a different niche. We are the "use whatever is cheap but looks good, no matter how compromised" market. Example: 35mm DOF adapters. Think about them carefully for a minute, and you'll realize how ridiculous the concept is. They're pretty much useless for anything except guerrilla filmmaking. Canon could release a RED-killer, but it would cost at least as much as any RED. Filmmaking equipment is expensive precisely because the market is so small. DSLRs are comparatively cheap only because they are not intended for the niche filmmaking market.

RED's entire philosophy is radically different from that of any traditional electronics or A/V or photo company. Creating revolutions is part of its business plan. And it's a very small company. As such, it's not as profit-oriented as Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, or JVC are. It doesn't have to answer to shareholders. It's a labor of love and pet project of its billionaire founder. As Barry said, nobody treats its customers as well as RED does. RED is offering 100% trade-in value on all RED Ones. RED's customer service is unprecedented. RED interacts with its customers in ways that no other company does. And yet, RED's products are still priced above the range of many/most DVXusers.

There's a reason why there are very few players in the digital cinema market and why their products are so expensive, even compared to RED.

What exactly is the point of posts or threads like these? What is the use of insisting, without demonstrable expertise or authority, what a company is supposedly able to do, and therefore, should do?

Here's some food for thought: Manufacturing costs for all computer chips within a single product line are basically exactly the same, whether the end product is priced at $100 or $1000 (the difference between budget- and enthusiast-class chips). Companies like Intel and AMD use a practice known as binning to create the different product segments. Within a single batch of CPUs, units will vary in quality. The higher quality (and thus rarer) chips can be clocked higher, so they are delivered as the top-of-the-line chips, even though they are about 98-99% identical to the lower-end chips. Thus, economies of scale have virtually nothing to do with the pricing of computer chips. So why should economies of scale have a whole lot to do with the pricing of cameras? By your logic, Canon could manufacture XH-A1s so cheaply and at high enough volume that they could use it to replace all of their consumer handycams (HV40, etc.). But why would they?
 
Last edited:
One should see it the other way around. The two things HDSLR have over a videocamera is the sensor size and interchangeable lenses. It's easier to just implement these things in an existing camcorder form factor rather than seeing a HDSLR to built a camcorder around.
 
editman said:
It's easier to just implement these things in an existing camcorder form factor rather than seeing a HDSLR to built a camcorder around.
Click to expand...
Not true. You can't just swap the sensor in an existing camcorder with a DSLR's sensor. It would still require substantial re-engineering to get all of the components to work properly. That would cost millions of dollars in R&D, plus more to market the new products. Is there a market large enough for such a hypothetical camcorder to justify the development, marketing, and manufacturing expense? I doubt it. The professionals for whom the "small-chip" camcorders are intended haven't been clamoring to get such huge sensors. They don't really have such a need. I know that we all want such a camcorder, but we are a micro-niche, and most of us don't have the cash to pay for what would probably be very expensive products.

Another problem is that traditional camcorders require powered zoom lenses. Look at how big the lenses are on 1/3" to 2/3" prosumer/professional camcorders. At this point, creating an appropriate powered zoom lens that could cover such a large sensor would be a mind-blowing challenge.

Take away the powered zoom, and we're right back into digital cinema territory. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
You don't need a HDSLR sensor just a bigger one designed for video and a mount for different lenses. Many camcorders already have interchangeable lenses so the only thing missing is a bigger sensor - Not a HDSLR sensor.
 
editman said:
You don't need a HDSLR sensor just a bigger one designed for video and a mount for different lenses. Many camcorders already have interchangeable lenses so the only thing missing is a bigger sensor - Not a HDSLR sensor.
Click to expand...
So now the company will have to spend millions of dollars to develop a totally new sensor and a totally new lens mount and a range of proprietary lenses for the camera system. And if the sensor size is non-standard (i.e. not 2/3" or Four-Thirds, etc.), the company will have to reinvent the wheel with regards to the optics and the mechanics.

The system would cost at least as much as (and probably more than) the Canon XL system, simply because it's non-standard and serving a micro-niche.
 
William_Robinette said:
Dude, it's not a religion.
Click to expand...

The more I read Red forum, the more I'm convinced it is :cheesy: All those announcements saying 'we are happy to inform that we're gonna announce the new approximate schedule on... It will be worth a wait. It's gonna be more expensive. But will have more features. We listen. We change a lot (again). Remember - development is expensive. Everything is subject to change. Count on it'. And people are shouting for joy reading it. I don't count on it anymore. This sounds like religion or Amway meeting to me.
I need to get the camera and can't live with 7d limitations. On the other hand getting small sensor camera and using it with DOF adapter sounds like desperate decision these days. Things were so easy when DVX100 came out. Think I'm gonna send my HMC and rent the camera for projects...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top