Canon adopts MPEG-2 Full HD (4:2:2) file-based recording codec for upcoming cam

I'm sure the Canon's video department is envious of their photo department. They better do something to gain back the authority for video :P
 
I’m usually an optimistic type of person…but I doubt Canon will make that kind of leap. They will probably put this new codec in an XHA1 type of body unfortunately. That would still be cool and all but..a huge sensor with interchangeable lens???…I think they’ll make us wait for that. But…. what do I know?

Here’s to hoping.:beer:
 
This would be a first for Canon if they created a camera that was accepted and suitable for news organizations, higher end productions and rental houses.

While I have always liked certain Canon video cameras overall, they have really been mainly the tool that low/no budget filmmakers and wedding videographers use, not the tools that medium or high end productions utilize much. If the mock up that was discussed here is this new camera, I don't see a stampede of anything but the types of productions that have already used Canons utilizing it much. But if it is 1/4" or 1/3" fixed lens, so what? It won't give them much more market than they already have. And MPEG 2? MPEG 2 is an antique and kind of outdated codec anyway. I am sure that 50Mbps would look decent but MPEG 2 seems to have a limited future.

If and when they introduce a 7D sized sensor with a removable lens mount in a video form factor with this codec, then I think they would have a game changer.

Dan
 
Wow. I'm excited to see more info on this. Kinda shocked Canon went with higher end MPEG-2 instead of AVC-HD.
 
puredrifting said:
MPEG 2 is an antique and kind of outdated codec anyway.
Click to expand...
It is proven. It works. It is accepted by major stations. At this bitrate difference between AVC and MPEG-2 are minimal. This camera will put money in Canon's bank account right away. AVCHD 2.0, or as Sony put it, long-GOP AVC (because it will not be 4:2:0 AVCHD at 24 Mbit/s) will come next for 1080p60 (50). I expected such a camera from Sony, with its massive MPEG-2-based lineup (HDV, XDCAM, XDCAM EX). Instead, Sony rolls out a pair of AVCHD camcorders, while Canon shifts to what is pretty much XDCAM HD422. Interesting turn of events.

puredrifting said:
It won't give them much more market than they already have.
Click to expand...
I don't see why the HPX300 is fine while the new Canon will be not. The HPX300 has 1/3-inch sensor block and 100 Mbit/s intra is considered roughly equal to 50 Mbit/s interframe. Both are accepted by EBU and BBC. And the Canon will not have rolling shutter issues.
 
If and when they introduce a 7D sized sensor with a removable lens mount in a video form factor with this codec, then I think they would have a game changer.
Click to expand...

Am I the only one who doesn't give a flip about seeing a 7d sensor in a video body take over Canon's prosumer camcorder line-up? That just sounds like a horrible combination for documentary, ENG & news footage (which is how I, and most Canon camcorder shooters make a living). It would only benefit a handful of no-budget indie filmmakers who want shallow DOF, and a lot of professionals would leave Canon for companies that are putting out tools that work in the professional market.

Don't get me wrong, I would be thrilled to have 1/2" sensors for better low-light capability, but 1/3" is just fine for me (as long as it's CCD - I need 20x zoom with no jello!). An APS-C cmos sensor video camera (and all the problems and limitations that come with that) would be a slap in the face to most of the folks that use Canon camcorders professionally.
 
Hi Cowpunk:

I am not sure you are getting the point of a large sensor, it is low light capability and huge, beautiful pixels, not just shallow DOF. The actual image is better, more dynamic range, better contrast and lower noise. I actually am not crazy about the DOF on my 5D MKII, it is too shallow for many situations so I find myself typically shooting F5.6 or even F8 unless there is a specific reason why super shallow DOF is needed.

But those huge pixels give you the ability to shoot perfectly usable video in very low light. I shot a doc in France last Summer and can recall shooting in the Paris Catacombs under available light at ISO 2500, looked really good and was only lit by some lousy 60 watt incandescents. Try doing that with a 1/3" camera, CMOS or CCD. Just because a lot of newbies have abused shallow DOF doesn't invalidate the lust for larger sized sensors. Even if Canon put a 2/3" sensor in this new small form factor video camera, a lot of people would be thrilled and it would drive a lot of sales.

Cranky, I don't consider the market for the HPX300 much different than this new Canon. The 300 is a great camera, but I would hardly call it high end for the same reasons we are discussing about the new Canon. The 300 is a great tool for corporate, weddings, etc. but probably not a hugely popular choice for a lot of broadcast, other than news (NBC bought a TON of them for news ops), because of the 1/3" sensors. Small sensors are a limiting factor in broadcast cameras. If you are shooting TV, you always would want a 2/3" camera. My point is, if Canon could figure out a way to make an under $10k retail video camera with this 50mbps codec, removable lens mount and either the APS-C or 2/3" sensor, it would really open up new markets to them.

Dan
 
The video DSLR's make great b-cam options (I actually use a GH1 on a broadcast travel show for shots where very low light and/or extreme small size are needed, and until last December we used A1's as our primary camera). But until the moire, aliasing and jello are addressed, the APS-C or even µ4/3 kind of sensors can't be considered for main video camera situations. At least, not for anything primarily intended for television broadcast.

I suppose one way around it would be to create a full-raster 1920x1080 chip that is APS-C sized. But that wouldn't address the jello, and I would have to give up the motorized 20x zoom lens. For the work I do I typically have to travel as light as physically possible in some pretty extreme terrain, and I use that full 20x zoom a lot, sometimes hand-held (which is why cmos cameras don't work for this show). An equivalent lens for an APS-C camera would be enormous. And carrying enough lenses to cover that range isn't really an option for me.

Maybe I'm in the minority of Canon video shooters, but it seems like I would have to give up a lot of useful features if Canon wanted to shift to APS-C camcorders.

Damn you, physics!!!
 
Large DSLR-like single chip imaging would be considerably less than ideal on the whole, for more or less ENG style shooters - which is the core market for Canon's prosumer camcorders. Among other things, shallow DOF is not exactly desirable for most run-and-gun, live event (no second takes) shooting. There's a small, but very vocal group that would like to see Canon shift focus to building camcorders that essentially imitate shooting with film (major shift!), which is not very suitable for most of their prosumer camcorder customers. Don't hold your breath for that.

Also, realize that for Canon to build a camcorder with larger than 1/3" imaging chips, they would essentially be abandoning their XL lenses. Don't bank on that happening real soon either.
 
If you want a video camera (truly designed for shooting motion pictures, not a cam designed to shoot stills that also has motion picture capabilities) that imitates shooting with film, look to RED, not a company that is in the business of making low-end prosumer video cameras designed purely for shooting straight-up electronic video (not trying to imitate film).
 
I'd be highly surprised if Canon, Panasonic, Sony or anyone else ASIDE from RED put APS-C sized sensors in a "video camera" within the next two to three years. If they do, I imagine it won't be cheap at ALL. We're talking Varicam prices or, at the least, HPX300 prices.

Then again, if they do, ENG and event people could be served well by a simple "WINDOW" option, which allows you to shoot cropped out of the image, may be enough versatility to jump to the system.

The only issue I could see prevailing would be a detachable/interchangeble Full-Auto lens. Which would have to have auto focus, etc.

That would be incredibly expensive, me thinks.
 
Retrospective said:
I'm sure the Canon's video department is envious of their photo department. They better do something to gain back the authority for video :P
Click to expand...

Gain back???

Video cameras, especially prosumer video cameras, have never been anything but a very minor part of Canon's business. Still cameras are, and always have been, a much bigger focus for Canon (pun intended). Canon's biggest business interest in the area of professional video, is in making lenses - to go on cameras made by other companies that really do have a major focus on building professional video cameras.
 
Kholi said:
I'd be highly surprised if Canon, Panasonic, Sony or anyone else ASIDE from RED put APS-C sized sensors in a "video camera" within the next two to three years. If they do, I imagine it won't be cheap at ALL. We're talking Varicam prices or, at the least, HPX300 prices.

Then again, if they do, ENG and event people could be served well by a simple "WINDOW" option, which allows you to shoot cropped out of the image, may be enough versatility to jump to the system.

The only issue I could see prevailing would be a detachable/interchangeble Full-Auto lens. Which would have to have auto focus, etc.

That would be incredibly expensive, me thinks.
Click to expand...

A lot of folks don't realize, that if Canon (or Sony/Panny/JVC) took the guts of a DSLR and designed a camera for shooting motion pictures around it, it would not be a low cost camera (like an XH-A1). There just isn't nearly as big a market for that type of camcorder, but the R&D costs would still have to be recovered - translation: higher R&D cost per camera = higher priced camera to recover the R&D cost).

I seriously doubt that ENG shooters would flock to camera stores looking to buy a video camera designed primarily for imitating shooting motion pictures with film, with secondary accomodations to make it a bit more ENG friendly, when they can buy a camera truly designed for ENG shooting in the first place, and costing a lot less.
 
Comparing older cameras with the new ones, the lens barrel is getting longer compared to the body, and the recording section is getting smaller. Compare the ZX5 and the NX5 for example, the change in proportions is obvious. What I am saying, that a camera can be built around a long (physically) lens, looking pretty much like a grenade launcher, with the sensor in the back of the camera.
 
I don't see any serious barrier to building mainstream camcorders, with form factors similar to the 1/3" chip MiniDV/HDV/AVCHD handhelds ("handycams"), using a bit bigger imaging chips (like 1/2") - and the EX1 is hard proof it can be done. I doubt Canon will abandon their XL lenses though.
 
Kholi said:
I'd be highly surprised if Canon, Panasonic, Sony or anyone else ASIDE from RED put APS-C sized sensors in a "video camera" within the next two to three years. If they do, I imagine it won't be cheap at ALL. We're talking Varicam prices or, at the least, HPX300 prices.
Click to expand...

Kholi,

My sources tell me to expect a large sensor Panasonic prosumer level camera at NAB. Large sensor could be 2/3" or APS-C size. It will not be P2 AVC-Intra, but AVCCAM, most likely. No word on lens mount either. I would expect Panasonic to leverage their AVCCAM and GH1 sensor investments to keep costs down. It would be great if a RAW recording option were available as well, otherwise Scarlet will have that as an advantage. NAB will be interesting.
 
Dino said:
Kholi,

My sources tell me to expect a large sensor Panasonic prosumer level camera at NAB. Large sensor could be 2/3" or APS-C size. It will not be P2 AVC-Intra, but AVCCAM, most likely. No word on lens mount either. I would expect Panasonic to leverage their AVCCAM and GH1 sensor investments to keep costs down. It would be great if a RAW recording option were available as well, otherwise Scarlet will have that as an advantage. NAB will be interesting.
Click to expand...

Did they say whether it was announcement or release? That's the first I've heard of the rumor, m'self, and it seems if they were anywhere near an actual release we'd have so much more leakage going on.

It does sound nice, the other thing that I would shuffle concerns about is price and form factor. And, what sort of glass is going to go in front of this?

NAB isn't far off, so I guess we won't have to wait for long.
 
I seriously doubt any of the majors are going to put out a motion picture camera (indeed designed primarily as a motion picture camera - not a still camera that is able to record motion pictures as a secondary function) combining anything akin to a 35mm, APS-C or 4/3 imaging chip with a recording format like AVCHD (AVCCAM). There just simply isn't a viable market for such a beast.

If Panasonic (or one of the other majors) puts out a camera with a large imaging chip like that, truly designed as a motion picture camera, it's going to be a camera with a price tag well into 5 figures (at least), aimed at real feature film-makers with something at least resembling real budgets for making their films (not struggling ENG-like wedding and event shooters merely wishing they were major motion picture film-makers), and they aren't going to weigh it down with a low-end codec.
 
Kholi,

I'm guessing it won't ship before the fall at the earliest. Curiously, when I asked about lens mount, one source mentioned B4 as a possibility, which obviously means 2/3", and would pit it against the 2/3" Scarlet options. I agree that form factor is key, ditto ergonomics and monitoring. At least we know the camera will have good audio capabilities and image control menus.

Interesting that neither the Panasonic 3D camera or this large sensor camera are P2 based, which must be a cost issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top