Canon should resurrect the Pro1 camera

tnle2

tnle2

Well-known member
Anyone remember Canon's Pro1 digital camera? This was way back in 2004 when they were still making really good advanced non-DSLR cameras. Here's a review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonpro1/

This camera had a 2/3" sensor! The lens was also amazing: a fixed, "L-Series" 28-200 f/2.4-3.5 with ultra-low dispersion and fluorite lens elements. It also had an ultrasonic motor driving the zoom. It was relatively small and only weighed 1.4 lbs, had an EVF and a flip out LCD screen.

Can you imagine if they updated the Pro1 today with video, a 2/3" fast readout CMOS, and a high resolution OLED EVF? Holy crap, that would be FREAKIN' AWESOME!! A camera like this would be great competition against the micro 4/3 cameras and be very bad news for the 2/3" Scarlet.

C'mon Canon bring back the Pro1 series!! I'm giving you free design advice! No charge!!

pro1frontback-001.jpg
 
The new micro 4/3s cameras have the advantage of interchangable lenses. I don't think Canon could pull it off without being grilled over that.
 
True, but if you have a fixed 7X 28-200 lens, maybe you don't really need another lens. Many people are OK with getting a fixed lens 2/3" Scarlet. If you do need to change lenses, you could step up to a 7D. This camera would more of a companion camera. It would undercut the micro 4/3 guys in price and size and weight. It would become the new era of HV20 low budget filmmaking...except now you have 2/3" DOF.

Granted, a 2/3" sensor is bit smaller than micro 4/3 (11mm diagonal vs. 22.5mm) but focusing would be easier. I'd buy one if it was $700.

Yeah, I noticed the no HD video when the G11 and S90 were announced. I've been waiting for the S90 since 2006 when they stopped making S series cameras. But word is the Sony sensor that is used in those two cameras is optimized for high sensitivity still photography and is not fast enough to do HD video. So it's probably a technical issue.
 
Last edited:
And remember, the 4/3 sensor is four times as large as a 2/3" sensor. I don't think it'd be quite the competition you're thinking it would be.
 
Barry_Green said:
And remember, the 4/3 sensor is four times as large as a 2/3" sensor. I don't think it'd be quite the competition you're thinking it would be.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be a direct competitor. But I could imagine this scenario:

Suppose it was $600-$700 and you didn't have to buy a lens? That would convince a lot of people to buy it when RED is proposing to sell more or less the same sensor size and lens for $3000.

Then what if Canon updated the 50D to the 60D with lower still photography specs but the same video specs as the 7D and priced it at $1300. Now micro 4/3 is caught in the middle. The competition has bracketed them in price. The price conscious might migrate to this 2/3" camera and deem it good enough and the performance conscious might step up to APS-C if it's only $1300 for a body. If I were Canon, that's how I would attack micro 4/3.

Jeebus Canon, now I'm even giving you free marketing strategy!!
 
As a former Pro1 owner, I'd say in short "Oh dear god no. Sweet sanity, no!"....hahah. Form....I dont know. I hated that thing.
 
NoxNoctus said:
As a former Pro1 owner, I'd say in short "Oh dear god no. Sweet sanity, no!"....hahah. Form....I dont know. I hated that thing.
Click to expand...

Really, you hated it? What didn't you like about it? I have to admit I never owned one so I don't know. I read it was slow to start up and the lens vignetted a bit. But the user reviews on DPReview seemed more or less positive.

I guess my point of this thread is that the Pro 1 was a 2/3" camera with a pretty decent and fast wide angle zoom lens. Showing it here gave you an idea of how small a camera like this could be. If they updated it with today's technology, added full HD video and priced it for around $700 I think it would be a good alternative to micro 4/3 without having to get into another whole lens system. Right now Canon doesn't make anything like that except the G11 but that has a smaller sensor. At some point Canon needs to address this enthusiast-but-non DSLR market. Even Sony realizes it: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...geable_camera_system_news_288858.html?aff=rss
 
It was worse than my older Powershot G5 and rediculously overpriced. The lens was slower than necessary, AF was not impressive at all. Something at that price and with a "Pro" badge on it, you would've expected something better. Thankfully I traded it back in and got a D70 for the same price. No comparison at all of course.

I know you're not specifically asking for the Pro1 back, but still...bad memories and all :p
 
Canon has already found a good way to attack the micro 4/3 format and it is called the Canon 7D. They don't really need to do much else at this point. If you have about $3k and you want a camera chances are you will end up getting a Canon 7D. Unless you are shooting long takes. Everything else now for under $6K doesn't impress most buyers.

Don't get me wrong a lot of these vid cams have some amazing features that the 7D doesn't have but the 7D has a lot that they don't have. I would take a EX1 for $3K but that is about it right now. The whole prosumer video industry is up in the air right now.

Canon may still do something similar to the Pro1 and incorporate 2/3 mount for there highend prosumer cameras. Or maybe they will enter the highend film camera business. They have the technology! They can create a 2K 4:2:2 camera that records to a 100Mb h.264 codec with no real development costs.

It would be great if they created a Scarlet competitor that shot.

APS-C sensor
2K image
100Mb h.264
8bit 4:2:2
Canon Lenses
Autofocus lens
$10K

Or Epic competitor
FullFrame sensor
3K image
200Mb h.264
10bit 4:2:2
Canon Lenses
Autofocus lens
$25k
 
I don't know man the Ex1 and their ilk put out fantastic pics and come with a slew of features that DSLR's aren't offering yet. So I think they keep significant value. Audio, exposure controls, multi viewing ability, the ability to capture uncompressed and focus assist are huge and hugely lacking in the DSLrs. You're gonna have to spend some money to get a DSlr there.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top