Canon EOS 70D Announced

I think that what is lost in all this discussion of headphone jacks etc. is that this is a photo camera, not a video camera. Video is an add-on. They are not making this camera for videographers.

Our complaints about headphone jacks are akin to a photo enthusiast complaining that a camcorder that is able capture a still frame should have a 7 fps burst-mode to capture stills.
 
Sorry, video hasn't been an add on since 2009 when they discovered people were shooting films and music videos with these low end cameras. My HV-20 has a headphone jack and 1080 HDMI out 8 bit 422. ML is able to unlock crippled features, they aren't creating new features. I do want them to skip to the 140D because I have already skipped to a BMCC as my A cam and still have no reason to give up my 7D as my B cam, 4 years later.
 
Kenneth Fisher said:
I think that what is lost in all this discussion of headphone jacks etc. is that this is a photo camera, not a video camera. Video is an add-on. They are not making this camera for videographers.

.
Click to expand...

That's where you're mistaken. Canon doesn't see it that way at all. That's apparent by the fact that they overhauled the sensor specifically to deal with the AF problem they had in live view. And they produced a video demoing this new AF. Watch the making of sequence after the demo video where they tell how each shot was dealt with by the new AF. This cam can rack focus by tapping on the screen with the finesse of a focus puller. Many of these AF problems appear to be solved. It is a video camera, and Canon is gearing it's performance to more serious cinema use. It's not a haphazard add on, and it seems apparent that Canon doesn't see it that way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tf0BBNr6Epk



Kenneth Fisher said:
Our complaints about headphone jacks are akin to a photo enthusiast complaining that a camcorder that is able capture a still frame should have a 7 fps burst-mode to capture stills
Click to expand...

Again, GH3 and D7100 has this feature at this price point. It's not a exotic or high end feature by any means. The cheapest Ipod has one. It's rudimentary at this stage of the game. We're talking about a $1,200 piece of gear here. Charge me $1,400 to add this .25 cent piece of hardware, and I'm happy. The 70D is aimed at the more serious photo/video user.

But whatever, fine if they're not going to add it to the 70D, they damn well better make the 7DII announcement and soon because after this 70D announcement, nobody is going to buy a 7D unless they're completely uninformed.
 
f64manray said:
Really? You think something like a headphone jack should be reserved for a $5-10K camcorder when D7100 and GH3 already have demonstrated that this high tech wizardry can be put in a $1,200 DSLR. Hell, even the Samsung S4 Zoom has a headphone jack
Click to expand...

No what I'm saying is that its irrelevant, even with a headphone jack this is still an image capture device. Good working practice dictates that a camera op captures the pictures on one device while a sound recordist captures the audio on a seperate device, either as a dual sound system or as a line in to the camera.the only situation where this isn't true is in run and gun, news or documentary work, in which case you should ideally be using a dedicated camcorder, not a stills camera.
 
Kenneth Fisher said:
I think that what is lost in all this discussion of headphone jacks etc. is that this is a photo camera, not a video camera. Video is an add-on. They are not making this camera for videographers.

Our complaints about headphone jacks are akin to a photo enthusiast complaining that a camcorder that is able capture a still frame should have a 7 fps burst-mode to capture stills.
Click to expand...

This argument is getting old. These types of ideas are the reasons point and shoot cameras are DEAD AND prosumer camcorders are dying. If a feature doesn't take away from the stills (which a simple headphone jack does not) manufacturers should be giving consumers what they are asking for IF they want to remain competitive in this new "one device to do it all era". Yes, we don't have to buy the camera that doesn't have what we want, but what many of us are saying is that Canon is a bit clueless...nothing more.
 
Joshbalti said:
No what I'm saying is that its irrelevant, even with a headphone jack this is still an image capture device. Good working practice dictates that a camera op captures the pictures on one device while a sound recordist captures the audio on a seperate device, either as a dual sound system or as a line in to the camera.the only situation where this isn't true is in run and gun, news or documentary work, in which case you should ideally be using a dedicated camcorder, not a stills camera.
Click to expand...

Most of these cameras sold are going to be used for run and gun or documentary work. In other words, home videos. People who want an all-in-one camera for photos and videos because it's easier that way. For those people, it's easier to mount a Rode videomic on the shoe, put in a pair of earbuds and record everything as one file they probably won't edit anyway.

From that perspective, a mic and headphone jack actually make more sense on the lower end cameras than they do on something like a 5DmkIII where the pros that buy those are more likely to have a separate audio recorder or hire a sound guy.
 
pulpfiction007 said:
This argument is getting old. These types of ideas are the reasons point and shoot cameras are DEAD AND prosumer camcorders are dying. If a feature doesn't take away from the stills (which a simple headphone jack does not) manufacturers should be giving consumers what they are asking for IF they want to remain competitive in this new "one device to do it all era". Yes, we don't have to buy the camera that doesn't have what we want, but what many of us are saying is that Canon is a bit clueless...nothing more.
Click to expand...


Pulpfiction, you can say the fact that video is an addon to a DSLR gets old, but the facts are in favor of my point of view.

If Canon is treating video capability in DSLRs as an addon, release after release, I guess you can either believe that Canon is way more focused on photography for their DSLR (Photo camera) portfolio, and video is at best a secondary feature, or you can believe something else. I'll go with the simplest and most obvious answer: The great bulk of the DSLR buying public doesn't care about the video features, so adding a more robust video capability (As well as adding expense to the cost of the camera.) is not worth it to Canon's cost benefit analysis.

Additionally, I have observed with my very own eyes, how much more popular DSLRs are for photo than for video.

Living here in Manhattan, I see people snapping away with their DSLRs constantly. Every day over here in Riverside Park and Central Park, and on Broadway, the train, etc. About 1 out of 100 of those that I observe handling a DSLR are shooting video. And I know what video shooting with a DSLR looks like.

Further, let me tell you a quick story. I am sure you are familiar with B&H Photo Video, biggest camera store in the world.

About a year and a half ago, I was shopping for my first DSLR, to shoot video with.

I went over to the photo floor at B&H and asked the salesmen who sell dozens and dozens of Canon photo cameras every single day about how the Canon DSLRs video capabilities compare, specifically the 60D and the T3i.

They knew absolutely nothing about the video capabilities of the cameras! Nothing! They read me the video specs off a piece of paper. I knew faaaar more than they did about DSLR video. On the other hand, they could tell me anything I wanted to know about photography with the equipment, which is by far the primary use of DSLRs, regardless of what anyone wants to believe.

They even told me straight up that the majority of the DSLRs they sell are sold to people who are into photography.

By the way, I had the same exact experience at Adorama, another huge camera retailer.

***

No, the fact is that we cinematographers/videographers make up a very small minority of the DSLR purchase pool. We are the one percent.

I assume that the video capabilities will "get there" for us, but by then we will want more.

Meanwhile, I also wish the 70d did have a headphone Jack. My suggestion: We all pick 5 - 10 pseudonyms, and commence a letter-writing campaign to Canon, then we will give the impression of a larger audience, and maybe we'll get some results! :laugh:
 
Last edited:
huh, it was the 5d that inspired canon to open a cinema line, if you think people shooting video on a dslr is only 1%, then your far removed from any reality.
 
Joshbalti said:
What's all the fuss about no headphone jack? This is a 1k slr with video tacked on, not a 5 - 10k dedicated camcoder. if you're serious about audio you should be recording into an external device with decent pre amps and balanced xlrs anyway, something you will never get on an slr: they are image capture devices, not audio recorders. For the money this looks pretty good to me, intraframe codec, timecode, hi res LCD, and the image quality looks good based on the demo video. If the bitrate is right and they've got rid of the dreaded Canon Moire, aliasing and softness this could be the best slr for video this side of a gh3
Click to expand...

I agree with the above quote 100% (except I prefer the hacked GH2 to the GH3).

Using a DSLR for production audio can result in nothing other than mediocrity on so many levels. And, expecting pro audio on a DSLR/DSLM is as ridiculous as expecting 14 bit, 22 megapixel RAW stills from an HVX200.

If Canon killed moire and aliasing on their next generation APS-C sensor -- that's huge. And, if the reported noise ("grain") improvements are real and not marketing junk -- that's huge too. Note the "if" qualifications in the above two sentences.

Finally, the Zoom people are claiming "very clean pre-amps" on the new H6 that appears to be designed for video production (and not musicians -- as the previous models). If (note "if") the H6 is as good as they're claiming at this point -- it's a a stunning solution that mounts to the top of your DSLR/M that you can plug your headphones into.

 
While I agree that not including a headphone jack is pretty darn silly in 2013, the 70D seems like it could be a nice camera for us Canon shooters who haven't yet stepped up to a 5Dmk3 (too much for me to spend now and I can't handle RAW video footage just yet). Although, I still plan on picking up a G6 soon, and don't need a 70D that badly except for the fact that I want to upgrade my T2i to a better stills cam. So I can see why people are annoyed by no headphone input if looking at a 70D as their primary HDSLR video option.

On a positive note, I'm liking the autofocus stuff I saw in this clip.


With a new sensor I'm curious to see how the 70D fares against the Panasonic GH3/G6 and Nikon D7100/D5200 lines.

I might replace my T2i with this in the fall if all goes well once I can take a look at some tests and more footage to see how it stacks up.
 
Last edited:
Kenneth Fisher said:
Pulpfiction, you can say the fact that video is an addon to a DSLR gets old, but the facts are in favor of my point of view.

If Canon is treating video capability in DSLRs as an addon, release after release, I guess you can either believe that Canon is way more focused on photography for their DSLR (Photo camera) portfolio, and video is at best a secondary feature, or you can believe something else. I'll go with the simplest and most obvious answer: The great bulk of the DSLR buying public doesn't care about the video features, so adding a more robust video capability (As well as adding expense to the cost of the camera.) is not worth it to Canon's cost benefit analysis.

Additionally, I have observed with my very own eyes, how much more popular DSLRs are for photo than for video.

Living here in Manhattan, I see people snapping away with their DSLRs constantly. Every day over here in Riverside Park and Central Park, and on Broadway, the train, etc. About 1 out of 100 of those that I observe handling a DSLR are shooting video. And I know what video shooting with a DSLR looks like.

Further, let me tell you a quick story. I am sure you are familiar with B&H Photo Video, biggest camera store in the world.

About a year and a half ago, I was shopping for my first DSLR, to shoot video with.

I went over to the photo floor at B&H and asked the salesmen who sell dozens and dozens of Canon photo cameras every single day about how the Canon DSLRs video capabilities compare, specifically the 60D and the T3i.

They knew absolutely nothing about the video capabilities of the cameras! Nothing! They read me the video specs off a piece of paper. I knew faaaar more than they did about DSLR video. On the other hand, they could tell me anything I wanted to know about photography with the equipment, which is by far the primary use of DSLRs, regardless of what anyone wants to believe.

They even told me straight up that the majority of the DSLRs they sell are sold to people who are into photography.

By the way, I had the same exact experience at Adorama, another huge camera retailer.

***

No, the fact is that we cinematographers/videographers make up a very small minority of the DSLR purchase pool. We are the one percent.

I assume that the video capabilities will "get there" for us, but by then we will want more.

Meanwhile, I also wish the 70d did have a headphone Jack. My suggestion: We all pick 5 - 10 pseudonyms, and commence a letter-writing campaign to Canon, then we will give the impression of a larger audience, and maybe we'll get some results! :laugh:
Click to expand...
Let me ask you... What does the camera excel at best? I would answer "taking stills photography. Oh, and it does video too". Is that hard to understand.

To think that this camera or any recent release of a DSLR (digital single lens reflex) meaning it HAS a MIRROR in it is geared more heavily towards video is just plain ass-backwards. Yes, Dslrs have all had video functions in them since 2008. Imagine if Nikon, canon, sony, panny took out the video function of a new release of a stills camera? It would not sell. Because many people would see that the other camera has a video function and buy that.

Now, what is the issue with these cameras? Well, they are 20+MP cameras trying to do video. They are awesome for what they do in taking stills right? That is what they are meant to do. "Oh, and it can do video too".

Canon learned that taking a 22mp camera and giving you a super detailed 1080p output was and issue. Enter the C cameras. Now can the C300/100 take a 20mp still photo? NOPE. But they have to keep putting video in the DSLR because if they don't IT WON'T SELL. Especially the lower end DSLRs like the Rebel and the 60d/70d.

Look at the MK3. The way they made it free of moire is a strong OPLF. It's not tuned for the high detail video that the C cameras are capable of. (Forget the RAW hack for a second).

HDslrs "TO ME" have peaked. They might make minor improvements here and there in the future and they are good for certain styles of shooting (full frame look, guerrilla shooting). But the day of HDslr being the A cam is over for me. THere are just too many compromises such as audio, ND, exposure aids, peaking, zebra, XLR, ETC. That is why Magic lantern exists. They filled the holes and evolved into a RAW hack. Even so, it's not for everyone nor the perfect solution. Just another tool.

I shot a BTS of a shoot for my buddy today and the client wore a stripped shirt. 2 years ago I would have cringed at knowing that the shirt was going to fail my HDslr video miserably. I used my C100 and never even thought of the shirt. I just shot and the camera did its job. I'm pretty sure even the BMC would have failed on this shirt horribly (which is why I sold my BMC. Not a hater of the BMC, but it's 2013 and time to not have moire, PERIOD). If you want a highly detailed image with good DR and the workflow ease of the HDslr, buy a C100 or a Sony FS700.

pin shirt 1.jpg
pin shirt 2.jpg
 
Does the 70D have peaking? Zebras? False colors? Limiters? Can you turn off AGC?

While the GH3 has a headphone jack, you can't use it if the screen is flipped out. It also doesn't have peaking and by all measure, probably never will.

Peaking, zebras and others are basic video features and found on camcorders cheaper than these hybrid cameras. Not every shoot deserves a dual system for audio and the extra expense and complexity it demands. There's plenty of uses and users where the in-camera preamps are just fine. And a dual system won't get you peaking or zebras.

This is a consumer camera not a pro one. The lack of headphone is either a amateur mistake or intentional design flaw. Can't have it both ways. I doubt it's an amateur mistake by stills camera designers like the 24p fiasco of the 5DMII. Canon knows better now. They are protecting their product line hoping you'll buy UP to get a pro camera with pro features or get an additional camcorder for your non-dual recording needs. These restrictions are what you get buying consumer gear. As long as you keep buying it with the flaws, they'll keep selling it. If you do buy it, the least you can do is give it a crappy 1 or 2 star review instead of the bogus "this camera is going to change my life (as soon as I figure out how to use it)" reviews that bump up the 5 star ratings.
 
maranfilms said:
huh, it was the 5d that inspired canon to open a cinema line, if you think people shooting video on a dslr is only 1%, then your far removed from any reality.
Click to expand...

What do you base your observation on?

Hanging around a board where everybody uses a photo camera for video?

Hanging around with video enthusiasts?

Or the reality of what most people actually use them for?
 
DigitalUser1 said:
The lack of headphone is either a amateur mistake or intentional design flaw. Can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

Or they don't care because it is a stills camera. It is only a mistake or a flaw if they are trying to produce a video camera. Which they aren't trying to do with the 70d. Because it is going to be used as a photo camera (Which is what it is) by the vast majority of buyers.
 
maranfilms said:
huh, it was the 5d that inspired canon to open a cinema line, if you think people shooting video on a dslr is only 1%, then your far removed from any reality.
Click to expand...

I have two 5D mk3s, 1 MK2, and 1 MK1. I use them all to take still photos. Once in a while I will do multicam interview with them. I have a group of buddies that all have MK2's and 3's that shoot stills with them and never shoot video. Keep in mind that there is still professional photography still taking place and lots of it.
I'm not saying that the MK2 didn't effect the video/film world. But that ship has sailed and I think it headed to the Bermuda Triangle. HDslrs are still useful. But it's a C100, BMC, Fs700 world now if you are taking moving images if you are in the sub $10K market.

Think about it. For the price of a Canon MK3 and after all the items you need to make it a video cam (ND, Z-finder and EVF, sound, and simple rig) you could have a C100.
 
Last edited:
dustylense said:
I'm not saying that the MK2 didn't effect the video/film world. But that ship has sailed and I think it headed to the Bermuda Triangle. HDslrs are still useful. But it's a C100, BMC, Fs700 world now if you are taking moving images if you are in the sub $10K market.

Think about it. For the price of a Canon MK3 and after all the items you need to make it a video cam (ND, Z-finder and EVF, sound, and simple rig) you could have a C100.
Click to expand...

Perhaps - for the MK series. But it's 100% false for HDSLRs in general, for the simple reason that's ALWAYS been the reason the HDSLR revolution happened in the first place: price point. So if the MKs are pricing themselves out of the market segment, there are plenty others who will step in (and already have stepped in: panasonic, sony, nikon) at a lower price... and note, we are not discussing the MK here, were are discussing the 70D - a different price point entirely... this is what the thread is about, not the MK series. As long as you can get better video out of a <$1500 HDSLR than dedicated video cams out available today, the HDSLR will have a place. So that ship has sailed nowhere - in fact it hasn't even been built, let alone hit water or sailed to the Bermuda Triangle. The price/performance is what launched the revolution - as long as that ratio persists, it will continue on, with a side dish of form factor for some users (while the form factor alienates other users).

As to the headphone jack, it's all about who you are addressing yourself to. There will be those one-man band guys, or eng for whom the jack will be a factor. But there will be many for whom it won't. If I'm doing narrative work, and I have a dedicated sound person, I'd be insane to want to have them tethered to the crappy camera sound system - of course you will have a dedicated sound solution. Which is why for me and my use scenarios, a headphone jack is a big 'meh', because there are (to me and my situation) easy ways around the lack of a jack, but I care a whole deal more about the image acquisition, because there really are no ways around it. So what should I care about - a jack that I can easily get around with a superior solution, or IQ which is the whole reason we buy the camera in the first place and which there are no solutions for except a different camera? To me, the jack means less than jack. To others, of course, this seems like it really gets them going. Different strokes for different folks.
 
1. Never said they weren't being used for photos more than video.
2. Still silly for them to work so hard on VIDEO auto focus, and not include a headphone jack for multi media people. That's just my opinion based on what is happening in the camera world.
3. Point and shoots and a lot of camcorder sales got killed by cell phones.
4. DSLRs are slowing while more innovative mirrorless cameras (with lots of features) are increasing share.
5. A headphone jack does not make it or break this camera for me, but it's part of a bigger picture with Canon and Nikon losing sales based on any number of features they could easily add. Their loss...don't really give a flying f... ;)
 
My take: I don't care about the reasons, the only important thing here is what they give us, and what other options there are on the market. And there are some very awesome in the market already.

Or, if you want to put it another way: it is no longer acceptable that a camera doesn't do all it could do
http://prolost.com/blog/2013/5/15/space-monkeys-raw-video-and-giving-us-all-youve-got.html

If it is their decision so leave out the features I care about, good for them. Just don't expect me to buy the camera.
And btw, I absolutely don't care about in-camera audio: I either record with the H4n, or don't record audio.
But I want clean and detailed images with great DR and a good codec.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top