Canon May 'Bring the Might of Its Legal Team' if You Modify 1DX or 1DC Firmware

I think its the concept that the 1dc could have been delivered at the X price or close to but was not for corporate rather than technical reasons

and of course that a hack might be possible

personally I think they, with small HDMI, are both really not professionally acceptable tools

S
 
nothing said:
But... ummm... isn't that the very definition of "different hardware"?
Click to expand...

Heaven help you, man. A heat sink is a pedantically small difference compared to, say, a whole new processor.

For all we know, the hardware difference between a 1D C and a 1D X could be less than the hardware difference between an ASUS GeForce 680, an EVGA GeForce 680 and a Zotac GeForce 680. A heat sink difference doesn't affect that possibility.

Before EOSHD's article, folks thought that Canon had a bunch of fancy chips on the 1D C that weren't on the 1D X.

After that article, they realized both cams used pretty much the same hardware. That's huge.

Please stop being so damn critical of people actually going out and reporting new and very useful information regarding filmmaking products in the pipeline.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
The 1DC comes with a mini HDMI lock, a headphone jack, a heat sink, a firmware update, a $5000 red sticker, and a lot of nerve from Canon marketing. Price gouging is a perfectly acceptable business practice under our wonderful capitalist system. pulpfiction007 has presented the best evidence, the specs are 99% the same! This isn't like a C300 (almost) designed and built from scratch, it's a rebadged 1DX with a firmware update and a heat sink. Simon asked how would I feel? Well ripped off of course, but at the end of the day it comes down to does it work for me? Canon have a proud history of regurgitating hardware, their APS-C cameras have been using the same sensor and processor for the last 5 years (updated processor in the 7D).

The stills division have created some monsters that scare the crap out of the video division, marketing are just doing what they do best.
 
Seems to me that a lot of people have forgotten the point of this thread.
If Canon threatens to bring the might of it's legal team against anyone who modifies their firmware to turn a 1DX into a 1DC, then by deductive reasoning it seems to me that are pretty obviously saying that it is entirely possible.

So people can argue whether or not it's different hardware, but that is a moot point in view of this aggressive statement.

Further, I think we all know who this is aimed at. Magic Lantern.
I don't doubt for a second that ML forced their hand for HDMI out on the 5D MIII. Why else would they announce so far in advance? Only 3 days after ML announced they were working on it I might add. Clearly Canon figured, throw everyone a bone and ML will leave it alone long enough for some of our other competing lines to make a little scratch. I also have no doubt that I would be waiting around a lot longer for this added functionality if a little pressure hadn't been applied.

I for one am glad that Canon is being challenged by these kind of issues. I think they have need a swift kick up the rump for awhile and I don't think it has hurt the marketplace or competition one bit that people say, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it probably is a 1DX in disguise...let's see if we can't push the envelope a little bit more on this one.
 
Last edited:
dustylense said:
Question????? Are any of you posting considering buying either of these two cameras? If not, why do you care?
Click to expand...

Because it's interesting. Many people have 1 camera they own, doesn't mean other cameras are off the table for discussion. EVEN if we aren't planning on buying one, it can still be a good topic.
 
yoclay said:
if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it probably is a 1DX in disguise...let's see if we can't push the envelope a little bit more on this one.
Click to expand...

And whoever decided to flog it for 12k is a real goose.

Anyone got a sugar daddy who can donate a 1DC to Magic Lantern?

Canons threat (if it is actually for real) is an insult considering if it wasn't for us tinkering with their cameras they wouldn't have a DSLR video market. If they were to take legal action against anyone for hacking the 1DC (which is highly unlikely to be successful) I for one wouldn't have anything more to do with Canon and I'd be very public about it.
 
I remember when the DVX100 came out and a company called Andromeda came out and started to unlock the cameras high definition capability. At the time consumer high definition cameras were available but they lacked the manual controls and the low light performance of the DVX-100.
 
To believe that there would be huge visible differences like a heatsink but no other functional physical differences is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is true only if they were different hardware. However, you say it's true even if they weren't, so here's why I disagree:

If they're the same hardware, Canon could've made one camera at the lower price point with the more advanced firmware and let the people who didn't need the advanced features just not use them. One set of firmware to code, one round of support training, one warranty program, one blah blah blah.

Canon chose to separate them to squeeze out more profit. Theychose to take on the extra work of doing two sets of firmware, training multiple teams, blah blah blah. They don't get to turn around and use that extra work as justification of the second camera's obscene price.

It's not just Canon. All the Japanese camera companies love to barely-differentiate similar-cost-of-production models solely by artificial firmware limitations and profit margin. Nikon has about 3x too many overlapping DSLR offerings, for example. "No, no. They're totally different cameras. One has seven 'scene mode' presets and the other only has six but adds mirror lock-up." It's incredibly obnoxious practice and I hate hearing people defend it.

Barry_Green said:
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?
Click to expand...

Do you really think that the 1D C firmware cost significantly more to develop than the 1D X firmware? I don't. I think developing just the 1D C firmware or just the 1D X firmware would've cost the same amount, and where they added cost was in make both.

Barry_Green said:
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.
Click to expand...

Granted, but the fact that this is the only one of their cameras they're terrified of having hacked sure is suspicious.
 
Last edited:
You just have to ask yourself what else would a 1DX need to do 4k mjpeg (hardware wise). It can do it with the processors it has on board = again, it does 14 fps stills at 18mp which is 20% more to deal with than 4k video at 24 fps....other than being able to handle that heat for prolonged periods of time (enter a new heatsink)
 
pulpfiction007 said:
again, it does 14 fps stills at 18mp which is 20% more to deal with than 4k video at 24 fps....other than being able to handle that heat for prolonged periods of time (enter a new heatsink)
Click to expand...

I'm a proponent of the theory that they're the same camera, but to be fair this isn't totally accurate. The stills mode is a burst/buffer mode, storing to RAM and then writing out to storage at a much lower speed. Not just the heat production but the required processing power of writing out to storage continuously at that rate would be significantly higher. That it can do the former isn't proof it can do the latter.
 
I'm sure you are right...but it's just one example of the speed achieved with both cameras having Dual Digic V, which allow for that insane 18 mp full frame 14fps speed and allow the 1DC to do 4k video.
 
nothing said:
To believe that there would be huge visible differences like a heatsink but no other functional physical differences is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It's not ridiculous at all that it's the exact same chip with the exact same functionality.

Look at graphics cards - often you get an underclocked passively-cooled version and an overclocked version with a huge fan. But it's the identical chip underneath. Identical circuit board, everything. Just sold at different prices for different markets. And if the passively-cooled version were artificially limited to a horrible degree and the version with the fan was really high price, sure people would complain. Or better, just buy something else if it fits their needs better.

Anyway, here's the fact: we don't know.

However... you are the one saying "AWESOME! This FACT proves that those guys spreading rumors are wrong!"

Personally, I think it is quite likely that it's the same Digic processor under there, based on the multiple very credible rumors that point to this.

But I'm not saying anything is a fact I and certainly don't feel like insulting the rumor sites based a heat sink. I'm just thankful to get information.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Well the way I see it - one is set up to shoot 4k video. Weather you think its worth the increase price or not thats they way it is. Personally Ive seen enough of the rumour sites blow enough hot air to float a flotilla of zeppelins. Someone saw, then someone said ... Theres absolutely nothing substantive here, its all rumour.

Lets say its purely firmware that makes the C able to deliver 4k, is canon not justified in setting their own market price based on development of said firmware? Of course they are, people will buy ... or not and that quite literally is their business.

Lee Saxon said:
They don't get to turn around and use that extra work as justification of the second camera's obscene price.
Click to expand...

Absolutely they do. They can do whatever they please. It might mean you or someone else wont buy the product, but again they have absolutely every right to set their own pricing.
 
Noel Evans said:
Lets say its purely firmware that makes the C able to deliver 4k, is canon not justified in setting their own market price based on development of said firmware? Of course they are, people will buy ... or not and that quite literally is their business.
Click to expand...

Sure. But what's interesting to me is what it bodes for the whole market.

I was guessing 4K would hit Sony's DSLR-ish cams for under $10,000 before the end of 2014. Now, with it seeming likely that Canon's current level of Digic chips can do 4K... I think my guess is likely conservative.

I thought Canon was going to need another level of Digic chips for the 4K stuff. The fact that it's possibly here now already, successfully mass-produced is really interesting.

If Canon already has cheap mass-produced 4K chips that can produce 1D C-quality images... likely Sony has, and Panasonic has too. So yeah, this rumor just builds on a pile of things and give you a good hint of where the industry is going.

For me, it pretty much wiped out any temptation to stop renting and buy an expensive HD camera. Because if Canon's current chips can do 4K... chances are in less than 2 years, you'll be able to get a cheaper 4K camera that wipes the floor with your fancy HD cam once the 4K cam's images are downsampled to HD.

Anyway, that is why all of this is interesting to me.

I was also wondering what frame rates will be likely in future cams. The Japanese companies always like 60p so I was thinking that they'd go for 60p 4K but this Canon thing threw me for a loop because it only does 24p. O was, like "I guess 60p is hard to do at 4K, since Canon's flagship $15,000 4K DSLR can't even do it"

But again, this rumor provides a clue: Canon's flagship $15,000 4K DSLR is possibly based on the current Digic chip. No wonder it can't do 4K / 60p!

So yeah... I'm pretty certain of what's coming:

Sony (hey and Blackmagic and GoPro and a ton more :), interchangeable lenses, 4K, 60p, HDMI 2.0, under $10,000, before Dec 2014

That helps A LOT when planning camera purchases. Really puts everything in perspective.

I know this is extrapolation but I think it's pretty sound, based on not this rumor (though someone looking inside a 1DC and a 1DX and seeing very electronics seems a little higher-grade than a rumor to me!) but the whole spectrum of what's happening (look at CES!).

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
As someone in the software industry... It saddens me (but doesn't surprise me) the small monetary value placed on the firmware.

I'm guessing not too many here are camera software developers... So how can you possibly decide the price of safely allowing the recording of 4K video onto a tiny camera, using CF cards? How many man hours of writing and testing went into this... Making sure that no frames were skipped... Or cameras went up in flames?

Most other companies would be praised for taking a gamble to bring out the world's smallest, cheapest, largest sensor 4K cinema camera.

In a world that places very little value in software though, entitlement reigns supreme.
 
Last edited:
Jay Birch said:
As someone in the software industry... It saddens me (but doesn't surprise me) the small monetary value placed on the firmware.
Click to expand...

I think the suspicion (correct or incorrect) is that while the FW in the 1DX is an appreciated part of the price of the product that some where in the code is a section that goes..

"image - write size =1920px"

and in the 1dc it says

"image - write size = 4000px"

So its actually just a parameter in the firmware that is being oversold, not the actual FW

hence canon saying - "dont go there" very loudly

S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top