The same way I feel about Red with regards to the Scarlet and Epic - same hardware design, different firmware, yet fully justified price hike.
How should we feel about it? Developing firmware isn't free.
Canon May 'Bring the Might of Its Legal Team' if You Modify 1DX or 1DC Firmware
- Thread starter Simon Shasha
- Start date
The same way I feel about Red with regards to the Scarlet and Epic - same hardware design, different firmware, yet fully justified price hike.
How should we feel about it? Developing firmware isn't free.
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
I think it's the other way around; Epic and Scarlet have the same firmware, but it's their hardware that's different - Scarlet is made from Epic sensors and ASICs that didn't make the grade.
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
And also, I feel that companies like RED care more about the actual filmmaker, especially the cinematographer - they seem to lean more towards giving the filmmaker/cinematographer as much quality and flexibility as possible in order to help the filmmaker/cinematographer make their images as beautiful as possible - Canon tends to cripple things on purpose and recycle old technology (like the Digic processors in the C300) or omitting certain things, like 1080P @ 60FPS on the C300, and the complete omission of any slow-motion on the C100, to protect profit-magins. I doubt RED's profit-margin is very high (I'd love to know though haha).
I guess the reason you'll never see firmware hacks, or the need for firmware hacks, on cameras like Epic, Scarlet, and even the BMCC, is because those companies and their respective cameras are giving all they've got - they're not crippled in anyway by their creators - they're raw - literally.
I guess the reason you'll never see firmware hacks, or the need for firmware hacks, on cameras like Epic, Scarlet, and even the BMCC, is because those companies and their respective cameras are giving all they've got - they're not crippled in anyway by their creators - they're raw - literally.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Who's to say that's not the identical same scenario with the Canons?
Who says they're identical?
Who's dissected them (not glanced at them) and verified that all the chips are exactly the same?
Who's gone through and actually dissected the firmware and found that they're interchangeable? Of COURSE there's similarities in the firmware, why wouldn't there be? But to hold that out as a smoking gun is profoundly naive. As an ex-professional computer programmer, I would be floored if there wasn't substantial similarity between the two products for much of, if not most of, the firmware -- it should only be different for those places where the hardware is actually different.
But let's say they were absolutely identical in hardware, and they only differ in software. How would I feel about it? I would feel -- SO WHAT? Buy the product that does what you want. It doesn't matter if it's capable of other things that require software to unlock, because think about it -- so's a computer. A $599 Best Buy laptop is capable of running NotePad, or it's capable of running Microsoft Office Professional Suite. What's the difference? Well, with one of them, you have to PAY to Microsoft to BUY the Office suite. That's the only difference -- software. And software costs money to develop, and a lot of money to support.
Canon's going to sell tens of thousands of 1DC's. They're going to sell tens, maybe hundreds, of 1D X's. Seriously, what's the worldwide global appetite for a $15,000 DSLR? A couple hundred rental facilities? Maybe 500 worldwide? Wild guess, but come on, it can't be that many. So if they went to the effort to develop custom hardware (presuming there is some) and custom software, and training for their employees and developing a warranty support program, for a very limited-run product, then yes, it's going to cost a lot more.
To use the vernacular of kids today: Duh.
To demand that a 1DC just "get" for free, all the features of the 1D X, because the hardware is "capable", is akin to demanding that the buyer of a $599 laptop get all the Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office, and whatever else software there is in the world, for free, just because the hardware is "capable". Surely we all recognize that that is not a reasonable expectation?
And, until actually proven otherwise, as far as I know, there is no actual EVIDENCE that the 1DC and the 1DX are the same hardware, or that the 1DC is capable of doing the additional things that the 1DX is, hardware-wise.
bruceallen
Well-known member
Four thoughts:
1. I think you just made an excellent business case for Canon's 1D C pricing being a really bad move. They chose to sell hundreds more $15,000 cams vs thousands more $6,000 cams...
EDIT: no hang on, I'm confused. You said DSLR. Don't fully understand, sorry.
2. There may be no hard evidence but based on the circumstantial information... can we agree that they quite likely (eg greater than 50% chance) appear to use the same processor (or a close variant thereof), plus a beefed up heat sink, plus maybe a few minor component changes?
3. I was pretty certain we'd get a sub-$10K 4K video shooting DSLR from Sony before the end of 2014. Now I'm convinced. If Canon's about-to-ship DSLR can do it without a lot of extra beefed up processing chips (and we can all agree that they appear to use either identical main processing chips or very close variants thereof)... I'm sure Sony will do it for less.
4. Why are people so weirdly antagonistic towards other folks who bring good info? To me "we looked inside both a Canon 1DC and a 1DX and the chips seemed to be the same except for a heat sink" is interesting info that affects my purchasing decisions. Thank you to people who keep posting this info despite the barrage of negative comments they receive.
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Last edited:
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
Nobody is, Barry. It's all speculation and hypotheticals.
The only concrete facts so far are; they both have Dual Digic 5 processors, both have full-frame 18.1 million effective pixels CMOS sensors, both have 61 AF points, both have working temperature ranges of 32-104°F/0-40°C, and working humidity ranges of 85% or less, both weigh approximately 1545g, both look physicall identical.
Orther than that, nobody knows anything contcrete.
Kenneth Fisher
Active member
I believe "Duh" is the vernacular of kids in 1985.
Maybe today kids would say that is: "Like, Totes Ridic".
?
Outside of that I agree with what Barry wrote.
Maybe today kids would say that is: "Like, Totes Ridic".
?
Outside of that I agree with what Barry wrote.
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
+1!
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
Sorry, but I think this is kind of off - the software makers aren't the same people making the laptops. I see the point you were trying to make though.
And I don't think anyone is demanding it for free, I think people are just wondering if, assuming they are identical in their hardware, it's fair for Canon to charge an extra $5200 for 4K MJPEG.
So when presented with a first hand report that the hardware IS different between these cameras, some choose to ignore the facts and persist in claiming they are the same? Interesting blinders in use around here.
The only FACT reported in this thread is that there is a very visible hardware difference between the cameras.
This whole issue is more than a little silly, especially considering the unreliable source that started this whole "identical hardware" BS (now fully debunked IMHO).
The only FACT reported in this thread is that there is a very visible hardware difference between the cameras.
This whole issue is more than a little silly, especially considering the unreliable source that started this whole "identical hardware" BS (now fully debunked IMHO).
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
I scanned through all the posts, what report? Can you link? Thanks
The canonrumors link in the first post (the report that started this whole discussion) is a first hand report of a look inside the 1DC revealing hardware differences which are apparent to the naked eye. Everything else in this thread, including the nofilmschool link, is just a rehash of that information.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
All one can do is use deductive reasoning since no actual breakdown has been done. They have the same sensors, the same triple processors(Dual DigicV Single DigicIV), the same stills shooting abilities and modes, the same standard HD video modes, the same weight, body, battery, LCD, viewfinder,400,000 shutter....99% of the system is the same according to the spec sheets that are readily available. The 1Dx can shoot full resolution 18 MP stills at 14fps, that is roughly 20% MORE data intensive than MJPEG 4K video at 24fps.
The 1DX processors and hardware are up to the task.....BUT can they manage that data rate for a long period of time without overheating? Probably not... one has to conclude Canon added something in the 1DC to disperse heat.
So moving backward - Let's say you are Canon, you are looking to develop a Cinema DSLR for professionals to use alongside the C300 and C500...or for them to use on jobs where a small footprint is required. Do you A: Build a brand new camera, or B: modify an existing design to fit the bill. Like Barry said, you(Canon) full well know that the sales will be limited to those who NEED 4K. These people will pay top dollar for a 4K camera that has uncompromising build, excellent low light abilities and a small footprint.
Enter the 1DX. Add a heat dispersion solution, reconfigure a jack for headphone output, modify the firmware, slap a big red C on the body and you are off and running. That's way more cost effective than to build a whole new camera AND it meets the needs of who you are building it for. If you NEED the 4k, the price difference won't be a question- The 1DC is the model that has it AND it will be guaranteed to work the way it's supposed to. If you don't need 4K, the 1DX is quite a value by comparison, considering it is a world class stills camera and shoots full frame HD video that is sharper than the MK3 and doesn't have the moire/aliasing of the D800.
Could someone change the firmware and give the 1DX 4K shooting? Maybe, but I imagine it would be a less reliable version than the 1DC.
The 1DX processors and hardware are up to the task.....BUT can they manage that data rate for a long period of time without overheating? Probably not... one has to conclude Canon added something in the 1DC to disperse heat.
So moving backward - Let's say you are Canon, you are looking to develop a Cinema DSLR for professionals to use alongside the C300 and C500...or for them to use on jobs where a small footprint is required. Do you A: Build a brand new camera, or B: modify an existing design to fit the bill. Like Barry said, you(Canon) full well know that the sales will be limited to those who NEED 4K. These people will pay top dollar for a 4K camera that has uncompromising build, excellent low light abilities and a small footprint.
Enter the 1DX. Add a heat dispersion solution, reconfigure a jack for headphone output, modify the firmware, slap a big red C on the body and you are off and running. That's way more cost effective than to build a whole new camera AND it meets the needs of who you are building it for. If you NEED the 4k, the price difference won't be a question- The 1DC is the model that has it AND it will be guaranteed to work the way it's supposed to. If you don't need 4K, the 1DX is quite a value by comparison, considering it is a world class stills camera and shoots full frame HD video that is sharper than the MK3 and doesn't have the moire/aliasing of the D800.
Could someone change the firmware and give the 1DX 4K shooting? Maybe, but I imagine it would be a less reliable version than the 1DC.
Simon Shasha
Well-known member
Oh, sorry, I thought you we referring to another report other than the CR article, my bad! - I need sleep - 9AM here in Sydney and I still haven't slept from yesterday haha :O
bruceallen
Well-known member
I dunno. You sound like you have some kind of weird point to prove.
The source gave advance info (based on an interview with a Canon engineer) which seems to be mostly correct. The core hardware appears to be identical or very similar.
Let's say someone does some sleuthing and reports "hey, this upcoming Mac costs $6000 and this upcoming PC has identical hardware and costs $3000".
Later, someone else looks inside and sees that yes indeed they look very similar and seem to use the same circuit design and chips.
Except the Mac had a different HEATSINK and maybe a few chips on the motherboard were different.
How on earth do you come to the conclusion that "well that rumor is DEBUNKED!!! What an awful source!!!"
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
The rumor was that they are identical hardware, only differing in firmware. Well the hardware IS different - so where does that leave the rumor?
bruceallen
Well-known member
Still very informative.
The core point is that they didn't need to add a bunch more Digic chips... or special 4K PJPEG chips... or special expensive 4K video handling chips.
The processing chips on the 1DC seem to be the same as the processing chips on the 1DX. The functionality is added by firmware!?! That's nuts, super interesting and the core information I gleaned from the rumor.
Calling a different frikkin' heat sink and minor changes "factual evidence of different hardware"... is silly, pedantic and completely missing the point.
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
But... ummm... isn't that the very definition of "different hardware"?
Last edited:
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Surely the hardware is different . Maybe the questions are should be is it 'significantly different' or 'is the difference worth the money'
If I had been canon Id just have made one camera, and enabled everything, its not like the X is cheap
S
If I had been canon Id just have made one camera, and enabled everything, its not like the X is cheap
S
Kenneth Fisher
Active member
I think this fixation on the 1DX and the 1DC being identical is born out a desire to be able to buy the cheaper model and have all the benefits of the more expensive model.