Canon Rumors: Canon C300 Mark II will be 4K...

As a side note - one camera that could slip in between these price points is Cion because I think it'll end up with somewhat of a unique IQ compared to the other popular models and not carry too much of a premium.

And, if it ships soon for the rumored $9,000, it will be another reason for C-300 MK II (Canon, not Mercedes) not to be alined too far above it.
 
DLD said:
First of all, Sony will/should/ought to/must have a 4K camera in the $4,000-$5,000 range (and it will have more than one eventually). As will Panasonic (as per the AF-200 discussion). And JVC.

Second, C-300 MK II prices will be kept down precisely due to the FS-7 presence and also the presumed desire to keep C-500 MK II in their lineup. The per model price doubling $7,500-$15,000-$30,000 that was in place three years ago will still be in force but at much lower points due to the technological advances in the intervening time frame. As of now, C 100 MK II is $5,500, so it shouldn't be too difficult to drop it to $5,000. Then they'll have the $5-$10-$20,000 pricing structure.

BTW, it's also not unusual for the middle of the lineup to have the best sales numbers since it usually has the best value of all models. The entry level is slightly crippled, the top of the line is slightly overpriced and that leaves the middle that everyone gravitates toward. Sort of like your C-300 ... with the 300 horsepower engine that sits above the B- and the CLA- but below CL-, E- and S-.

That's my marketing talk and I am sticking to it!
Click to expand...


Sony already has the Z100 and the AX1. Maybe throw in the 4K upgraded X70. Panasonic has the X1000 (prosumer, but close). JVC has the HMQ10, although it is an odd duck.

I still say the next gen C300 will NOT be sold below $12,000. Or $11,995, if you like.
 
DLD said:
As a side note - one camera that could slip in between these price points is Cion because I think it'll end up with somewhat of a unique IQ compared to the other popular models and not carry too much of a premium.

And, if it ships soon for the rumored $9,000, it will be another reason for C-300 MK II (Canon, not Mercedes) not to be alined too far above it.
Click to expand...

The Cion is intriguing.
But coming from the broadcast world, where I do most of my work, the C300 is a very popular camera. I expect its replacement to be as popular.
I just don't see the producers I work with going with an unproven camera maker like Aja. Perhaps in the bigger budget productions, they might be willing to do camera tests and pick their favorite. But for the small staff productions that I do, they go for proven performers. The C300 and the Sony F5/55 and XDCAM formats are still the most requested cameras. In this arena, I see the FS7 making some headroom as well.

I don't know, I can't see the Cion making much of an impact on the C300 Mk II. The FS7, yes. The F5/55, yes.
 
vanvideo said:
The Cion is intriguing.
But coming from the broadcast world, where I do most of my work, the C300 is a very popular camera. I expect its replacement to be as popular.
I just don't see the producers I work with going with an unproven camera maker like Aja. Perhaps in the bigger budget productions, they might be willing to do camera tests and pick their favorite. But for the small staff productions that I do, they go for proven performers. The C300 and the Sony F5/55 and XDCAM formats are still the most requested cameras. In this arena, I see the FS7 making some headroom as well.

I don't know, I can't see the Cion making much of an impact on the C300 Mk II. The FS7, yes. The F5/55, yes.
Click to expand...

+1
 
combatentropy said:
Yes. I for one would rather have anything besides 4K.

- I would rather have 4 times the pixel area, to be spent either on more dynamic range or on circuitry for global shutter.
- I would rather have 4 times the ISO.
- I would rather have 4 times the maximum frame rate.
- I would rather have one quarter the media costs.
- Given the same bitrate, I would rather have four times the bits for each pixel, for fewer picture artifacts.

4K is the 100x digital zoom of the twenty-first century.
Click to expand...
Canon wishes everyone would think like that.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3943/15290953069_1e60a96ed5_o.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFeJILVOTek
 
Last edited:
ntouched said:
And since this is a rumor, may as well guess the price on the C300 Mark II or C400..................I'd say $15K. Remember, Canon is Apple (or they act like they're Apple)!
Click to expand...

Minor point, but I'm not sure why people continue to refer to a Canon 400 naming structure when everything has always been laid out in odd numbers and new versions of current lines are referred as Mark II, III etc. Canon C100 II, as example.
and Canon is Canon. Don't like their product and price, then don't pay for it and move along. Just get tired of all the whining on here. Think I'll move along.
 
greenheron said:
Minor point, but I'm not sure why people continue to refer to a Canon 400 naming structure when everything has always been laid out in odd numbers and new versions of current lines are referred as Mark II, III etc. Canon C100 II, as example.
and Canon is Canon. Don't like their product and price, then don't pay for it and move along. Just get tired of all the whining on here. Think I'll move along.
Click to expand...
Uh, you picked the wrong person to quote for whining. As I just said let's take a guess at what the price would be.
 
Last edited:
vanvideo said:
Sony already has the Z100 and the AX1. Maybe throw in the 4K upgraded X70. Panasonic has the X1000 (prosumer, but close). JVC has the HMQ10, although it is an odd duck.

I still say the next gen C300 will NOT be sold below $12,000. Or $11,995, if you like.
Click to expand...
Z100 and AX1 have small sensors and attached lenses though, so it's a somewhat overlapping but mostly different market niche.

And C-300 was (much like Max Byalostok) the "King of old Broadway". MK II will have to provide as much value as the original did. As you say, FS-7 is making inroads in the same market for $8,000. How much more will C-300 MK II have to offer to be able to charge a $7,000 premium? I'd say, at $15,000, it'd need to include everything that FS-7 curently has , plus the extension unit that will have, at worst, internal 4:2:2 4K ProRes (and, likely, 4444).

But then where does it leave the C-500 MK II?
 
As much as I love the C line, the FS7 is a GREAT camera. Especially when they fix the little firmware bugs. I predict the fs7 will be the most successful camera in Sony's history. So Canon has some very serious competitor. For the C300 mk II to be as successful as the previous one it would need to be as good as the fs7 for the same price or if they kept the price it will have to have something above the fs7.

To be successful it should be a bit cheaper the the C300 and have:

4K 10bit 4:2:2 codec at 60p
1080p at 120p with no loss in quality.

Really that's it the C300 is almost perfect apart from the recording options. I think it won't be easy improving that body as a handheld camcorder,
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Really that's it the C300 is almost perfect apart from the recording options. I think it won't be easy improving that body as a handheld camcorder,
Click to expand...

I agree except those audio pots need be placed in a different spot. The days with an audio op were so much nicer than reacher to adjust myself. lol Maybe I'm the only one but that was the one design thing that drove me nuts when on shoulder or handheld.

I would imagine the C300II will have 120fps especially if the C100 has 1080p60. its would keep the same fps differentiation spec from vrs 1
 
The biggest issue that kept me from buying the original C300 was a non-swappable lens mount. If the MkII is the same pick a PL or EF mount, then I will pass on it as well and just rent when needed.
 
David W. Jones said:
The biggest issue that kept me from buying the original C300 was a non-swappable lens mount. If the MkII is the same pick a PL or EF mount, then I will pass on it as well and just rent when needed.
Click to expand...

The C300 EF exists to help Canon sell more of their ef lenses.

I don't unfortunately see that changing anytime soon.
 
DLD said:
Z100 and AX1 have small sensors and attached lenses though, so it's a somewhat overlapping but mostly different market niche.

And C-300 was (much like Max Byalostok) the "King of old Broadway". MK II will have to provide as much value as the original did. As you say, FS-7 is making inroads in the same market for $8,000. How much more will C-300 MK II have to offer to be able to charge a $7,000 premium? I'd say, at $15,000, it'd need to include everything that FS-7 curently has , plus the extension unit that will have, at worst, internal 4:2:2 4K ProRes (and, likely, 4444).

But then where does it leave the C-500 MK II?
Click to expand...

the $7,000 premium comes from being able to use Canon lenses with some form of Autofocusing. Right now Sony has an E-mount lens problem where most of your lenses only go to F4, while Canon has the whole range from having lenses manufactured over 40 years.

Where else can you go to get autofocus on a 50mm F/1.0?

Also Sony lenses focus by wire, making it difficult to pull focus.
 
Demistate said:
the $7,000 premium comes from being able to use Canon lenses with some form of Autofocusing. ...

Also Sony lenses focus by wire, making it difficult to pull focus.
Click to expand...
That I agree with (mostly).

But Sony isn't sitting around idly either. Alpha lenses seem to autofocus fine with FS-7 and they have new Zeiss labeled primes as well. Plus, more lenses (and more cameras, obviously) are expected to come out in February's CP+ show.

And, by the time the dust is settled - i.e., the actual units are shipped - will the difference be worth $7,000. For some, it will be. For most, there'll be other options (especially, if Panasonic releases the much bandied around AF-200 in the $5,000 range that will have AF with the Panasonic MFT lenses and Sony has a new A99 series pro tier unit).
 
mcgeedigital said:
The C300 EF exists to help Canon sell more of their ef lenses.

I don't unfortunately see that changing anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Canon knows that it can make the EF as the standard and that is why it created separate EF and PL versions of C300.

The Dual Pixel AF in my C300 is far from perfect. However, even now it has been a big help in the work I do in wildlife as well as in other documentaries. Some of the shots that I took in a National Athletic meet while shooting for a HBO documentary would not have been possible without the Dual Pixel AF. With the success of the DPAF and now with the DPAF version 2.0 with face detection, Canon is going to make the EF lenses work most of the times. The use of EF lenses for documentary work has been well accepted. Even Amira now has an EF version.

The resistance to EF mount is slowly going away.
 
William_Robinette said:
It's clout with producers is already plenty to cover that spread.
Click to expand...

Producers do love a familiar brand name even if they know none of the other details. almost 2.5 years ago I was trying to introduce the C300 and large sensor look/cameras to a broadcaster I was working for and the Exec Producer almost kiboshed it all because it wasn't a 5D and she had a friend who told her it was the best out there for broadcast and image Quality. I almost lost my mind. In the end the broadcaster went with 8 C300's but it was a close one. It took demonstrating the value to the post workflow of the MXF's from C300 (we were XDcam based at the time) over h.264 and how much time and money would be saved. Cost of camera was nothing in grand scheme.
 
The C300 mk II can get away with the extra 5K, because of the brand name, trust, reliability in the business, because it takes Canon lenses natively with full control, IS, and even game-changing Autofocus capability. Also because of the superior colour science and look of people's skin, and because of the superior lowlight performance (the C300 mk I is still better than the fs7, the mk II will surely be even better), and the better build quality of the body vs the plastic-ish fs7. Also I imagine some people will prefer the Canon's weight, form and size as a handheld camcorder, also many will prefer the overal button layout and small cobveninces like electronically controlled NDs, cheap CF cards, Cheap batteries that run for hours, lack of several firmware oversights/glitches, etc

the FS7 is great, one of the best out there, but a C300 with improved recording formats and 120p high speed mode will be a very competetive camera under 13-14K for the reasons mentioned above and it will be a strong rival for the F5/F55/AJA/Reds etc

they just need to add 4K 10bit 4:2:2, 120p, better lowlight, a few small body improvements and they almost have the mythical perfect camera.
 
Having held the FS7 and having used the C300 for a few years off and on I don't understand why people keep calling the FS7 plasticky feeling. The C300's handle was always wobbly whenever I would rent and that was from different places. drove me nuts.

Did you really pick up the FS7 and say wow this is plastic compared to C300? FS7 has magnesium body and good looking weatherproofing (unlike C300 dust vent). I just didn't get the same impressions.

Have you seen low light tests between the FS7 and C300? I would love to check those out. I haven't seen any side by sides yet and have only heard that Dan Chung who owns both among many other cams and brands said that the FS7 was just as good in low light. If no samples are out now I'm sure they will in the next months when the camera hits en mass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top