1DC: Canon 1DC's big price drop!...in Hong Kong = $7K

[AndreeOnline]

Perhaps "suck" is a bit of an over exaggeration, but when compared with other 4K codecs from the competitors, I can hardly say it is among the best. Sony's 4K XAVC is remarkably efficient and does not require a transcode. Red's 4K raw is absolutely brilliant as well. Both also produce very reasonable file sizes. Though I do realize the price differences as well.

The 1Dc uses an intra frame compression. It's not quite "fair" to compare its data rate to that of a inter frame xavc implementation. I don't know that much about xavc, but I think that in an intra frame flavour, it too will produce hefty file sizes. Surely better than mjpeg, but there is a large difference between saving 25 real frames per second compared to just a few keyframes in a GOP.

Checking Wikipedia, I see that xavc supports up to 12 bit, 60 fps and 4k up to 4:4:4. It can be both intra and inter frame. Very nice. Such a codec would be a welcome addition to a Canon camera.

I also agree that RED raw is nice. To me, it is probably the main advantage to the RED system: an efficient way to record raw "internally".

 

[Edry]

red is nice but a what cost though... I think if the 1dc really drops would be the camera for me, its is not perfect no camera is but i think people like to under estimate things by just looking at specs.

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

That is effectively the same as saying that since you can buy a camera like the GH4 at $1600 the 1Dx at $6000 is too expensive. As if they had any similarity what so ever.

It's strange, but since 4k has been pretty rare before, now all of a sudden it has become the great equalizer. As if all cameras with 4k capability stand on even footing with each other.

What has happened now is that it has become possible to buy entry level cameras with 4k. You get them at entry level prices, with entry level sensor sizes, entry level picture profiles recording to entry level codecs.

I admit that this is a gross over-simplification, but I think you all understand my point.
.

Couldn't have put it better! It'a a really interesting change. All of a sudden people believe that if two cameras shoot 4K they are equal, that thinking is the reason why most of the community thinks the GH4 is the 1DC killer, they are completely different cameras . They shoot the same resolution, that's it.

I don't remember that type of thinking existed in the HD days, I mean nobody believe that a t2i is equal to an alexa or a C300 of an F35 just because they shoot HD.

And also not in the stills world. I don't see many believeing a t3i is equal to a 1dx just because they shoot the same 18mp resolution.

Resolution is only ONE factor of what makes a high quality image, and perhaps one that's low on the list of priorities especially after exceeding a certain acceptable level (1080p)
there's noise performance, amount and pattern, DR, sensor size aesthetic, lack of artefacts (aliasing/rolling shutter), highlight rolloff, codec compression quality, colour performance (bit depth and colour science), there are many other factors than mere resolution. Not to mention the cameras build quality, usability, stills quality, speed of use, and many more.

Two cameras are not equal just because they shpot at the closely similar resolution. They're just not.

 

[ade4all]

I think youre right Ebrahim, Andree did say it better :tongue:

 

[ade4all]

The used price for 1d c will hopefully come down to much more accessible levels, there's one going on this site for 4500 euros, suddenly this camera has my interest

 

[DLD]

Couldn't have put it better! It'a a really interesting change. All of a sudden people believe that if two cameras shoot 4K they are equal, that thinking is the reason why most of the community thinks the GH4 is the 1DC killer, they are completely different cameras ...

Well, GH4 killed off a lot of cameras. 1D C is just one of them.

And, of course, they are not "completely different". There's a lot of overlap, as they both provide still and moving images. One can argue that Canon provide a far superior 4K image but, in right hands and in a right setting and with decent grading, GH4 can get pretty close to 1D C. And then the question becomes whether there's $10,000 worth of difference between these cameras to your average shooter.

And so, 1D C shall ride into the sunset to be replaced by something cheaper and better ... and, if not a lot better, than definitely a lot cheaper.

PS. Odds are is that a C500 replacement will slide into the $15,000 1D C range. If so, it should perform similarly to 1D C in the video mode but with newer codec and a bunch of other things too.

 

[cane141]

Well, GH4 killed off a lot of camera. 1D C is just one of them.

And, of course, they are not "completely different".

Also, don't forget at the time the 1DC was released maybe the price was valued correctly considering no other 4K DSLRs were out, back then it was expensive ( still is expensive now i guess) but doesn't mean that technology is still of the same value today.

This sensor technology is progressing at a faster rate yearly and I wouldn't be surprised to see 5K/6K on cheaper cameras by next year going into 2016 considering the 5K iMacs have already landed on our laps today.

Go back and release the GH4 at the same time as the 1DC and I pretty much bet the GH4 would be of a similar value.

It's like when the 1DC was first released and people where comparing it to a RED ONE, they don't really compare at all but someone will go make an award winning feature or documentary on it and all of a sudden it becomes the benchmark until the next one.

These days I even get blown away by some FS7 and A7s clips along with some beautiful Blackmagic raw clips, these cameras all stand up very well against the likes of the 1DC at away cheaper, I would argue that it would be very tough battle to tell between the image of a BMPC 4K and 1DC and to some extent even a GH4 with expensive glass.

Yes the 1DC is still an amazing camera but the truth is, the GH4 is as good it just hasn't earned a reputation yet

 

[Jay Birch]

I can't think of a single area, image wise, where the GH4 comes close to the 1DC, video or stills.

 

[cpreston]

Well, GH4 killed off a lot of cameras. 1D C is just one of them.

I'm not even sure what you are referring to here. I don't think you can argue that the GH4 created some type of upheaval in the camera market, and I don't think the 1DC and GH4 are even targeted at the same market.

In any case, the single biggest problem with the 1DC is firmware related. If the Cinema EOS group had taken the time to add even a little of the functionality of the CX00 line to the 1DC or even given us the same firmware update that the 1DX got, I would defend the 1DC as a viable product. As it is, I'm bitter and convinced that Canon has abandoned the camera.

 

[DLD]

... I don't think you can argue that the GH4 created some type of upheaval in the camera market, and I don't think the 1DC and GH4 are even targeted at the same market...

Like I said, there's overlap.

To go even beyond 1D C, I was told about people selling their Reds when GH4 came out. Are they the same thing? No one has claimed that. But quite often, GH4 was good enough for the job at hand.

And now, folks go gaga over A7s+Shogun combo. Is it Alexa or Red Dragon? No. But the images this combo produces are superb - except for when there's motion involved - and that is good enough for most users. And when you can purchase this for ~ $5,000 with the media included, how many people will want to invest $12K on !D C?

Not enough to warrant its production. That's for sure.

 

[lightstrum]

Also, don't forget at the time the 1DC was released maybe the price was valued correctly considering no other 4K DSLRs were out, back then it was expensive ( still is expensive now i guess) but doesn't mean that technology is still of the same value today.

This sensor technology is progressing at a faster rate yearly and I wouldn't be surprised to see 5K/6K on cheaper cameras by next year going into 2016 considering the 5K iMacs have already landed on our laps today.

Go back and release the GH4 at the same time as the 1DC and I pretty much bet the GH4 would be of a similar value.

It's like when the 1DC was first released and people where comparing it to a RED ONE, they don't really compare at all but someone will go make an award winning feature or documentary on it and all of a sudden it becomes the benchmark until the next one.

These days I even get blown away by some FS7 and A7s clips along with some beautiful Blackmagic raw clips, these cameras all stand up very well against the likes of the 1DC at away cheaper, I would argue that it would be very tough battle to tell between the image of a BMPC 4K and 1DC and to some extent even a GH4 with expensive glass.

Yes the 1DC is still an amazing camera but the truth is, the GH4 is as good it just hasn't earned a reputation yet

I have both, The GH4s reputation with me is that it is nowhere near as "good" as the 1DC. That is my truth.

 

[cpreston]

The thing about Panasonic and the GH4 that people that are only focused on video seem to forget is that has a very low market share. Most people use cameras to shoot photos. I saw an article that Panasonic was so surprised about the success of the GH4 that they raised production from 2500 to 5000 units a month. This article (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/30/us-canon-results-idUSTRE80T09Q20120130) from 2012 states that Canon expected to sell 31 million cameras in 2013 and Nikon expected to sell 20 million. About 1/4 of those are DSLR's. I'm sure the 1DC numbers are also miniscule, but it was targeted at high end wedding videographers and photojournalists based on most of the press I saw. Maybe the GH4 killed Red's sales numbers, though I've never thought of them as being in the same market either.

 

[cane141]

I have both, The GH4s reputation with me is that it is nowhere near as "good" as the 1DC. That is my truth.

I am sure you are right and I don't disagree about the image at all, as a shooter we all pixel peep and we have our higher standards in place but the truth is, the GH4 for what it offers, it is unfortunately "good enough" for most projects, everyone has different needs though and different standards.

It is no RED but then again, it shouldn't be compared to RED in the first place, its a DSLR and in today's DSLR world it's a very competent 4K 10bit output capable camera with a lot still to come. I can't see how Canon would not follow suit with a mirrorless 4K cam and maybe that will be a better comparison but for now the 1DC is overpriced 8bit and out of date and doubt Canon will carry on updating it in the current market.

 

[cpreston]

Well, the GH4 is not technically a DSLR, but that's just getting nitpicky. The C500 right now is Canon's mirrorless 4K camera. In any case, I can almost guarantee that Canon is not going to release a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera specifically targeted at the GH4 for video shooters. First, it's a small market. Second, C500. Third, there foray into the market was a disaster with the EOS-M. By the way, the EOS-M is a wonderful little camera for video with Magic Lantern installed. A nice little plant camera for time lapse and events. Much smaller than the GH4. Brilliant little lenses with amazing image stabilization. And, then Canon basically started giving them away. I've got two!

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

I think youre right Ebrahim, Andree did say it better :tongue:

Yes he did! What is it you don't agree with me ade?

My point is 4K seems to have started a new type of thinking that if two cameras shoot 4K they are similar, and the advent of 4K budget cameras "kills" all the higher-end 4K cameras.

When comparing the gh4 to the 1Dc, for starters the 1dc has all the advantages of a 1dx over a gh4!

4K doesn't equalize cameras, HD never did too. Resolution is one aspect of IQ and one aspect of a camera evaluation among tens of other aspects.

 

[indiawilds]

everyone has different needs though and different standards.

That is the only truth. So let's not argue that GH4 is better than every other camera.

 

[ade4all]

Sorry Ebrahim I actually agree with the sentiment, it was a joke - those smiley things are never enough to convey light hearted tone....anyway was just pulling your leg as you seemed to be repeating what Andree had already said, now i feel silly explaining myself

 

[DLD]

The thing about Panasonic and the GH4 that people that are only focused on video seem to forget is that has a very low market share. Most people use cameras to shoot photos. I saw an article that Panasonic was so surprised about the success of the GH4 that they raised production from 2500 to 5000 units a month. This article (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/30/us-canon-results-idUSTRE80T09Q20120130) from 2012 states that Canon expected to sell 31 million cameras in 2013 and Nikon expected to sell 20 million. About 1/4 of those are DSLR's. I'm sure the 1DC numbers are also miniscule, but it was targeted at high end wedding videographers and photojournalists based on most of the press I saw. Maybe the GH4 killed Red's sales numbers, though I've never thought of them as being in the same market either.

The interchangeable lens camera market is not weighed equally in the sense that the sub-$1000 camera are more prevalent and, the further the price rises, the fewer bodies are sold (not different from the automotive market where Camry or Civic sell over a quarter mil units a year while 911 may sell around five thousand). So, the major portion of Canon DSLR's are in their Rebel line while the higher end 6D, 5D and beyond are sold in much smaller numbers. GH4 being a high end hybrid (price wise, in the same neighborhood as 6D and D600/610) wasn't expected to sell a bunch of units but the expected 2,500/mo production line was still better than FS-700, as an example. Someone once told me that Sony shipped around 500 of those units a month globally.

And when you reach the very top of the market, each camera can almost be individually named. Arri, as I'd read, is only expected to produce about 40 of their new 6K cameras for the time being. F65 isn't sold in large numbers either.

 

[cane141]

That is the only truth. So let's not argue that GH4 is better than every other camera.

Well, I definitely did not say that

It's not better, it's "just as good" for the likes of the 1DC

GH4 has 10Bit 4K output and 1DC has 8bit but lets stop the geek right there and yes I totally agree that the 1DC has a much more aesthetically pleasing image but a slightly better image alone doesn't make for better films as a whole.

The GH4 is "as good" a camera as the 1DC in the right hands and with variable frame rates and 4K 10bit out, is very hard to ignore.

Some clips out there can be just as cinematic and with great detail if tweaked.

 

[cpreston]

And when you reach the very top of the market, each camera can almost be individually named.

Well, the very top end of the market is pretty much just rentals.

Honestly, I just don't get the excitement over having a relatively cheap 4K camera. A single high end lens costs more than the GH4. I finally just picked up a 4K monitor and that costs the same as a GH4. Saving money is great, but the costs to actually produce video efficiently far outweigh the costs of a body. If the GH4 requires a bunch of tradeoffs on efficiency to get to that price point, than it isn't worth it. This is not a defense of the 1DC. The trade offs on the 1DC are huge, but when you need a DSLR to capture a variety of high quality images with a vast array of available lenses, it's hard to beat.