Canon's 4K Cinema EOS Official Announcement & Latest Info-NAB 2012

[Gillvane]

After looking at LensRentals.com I'm sold on renting.

http://www.lensrentals.com/for-canon

Looking forward to seeing what the rental for the Canon 4k will be.

 

[TrueIndigo]

Nice camera, but at 15,000 that's me out.

Just thought I'd bump this thread in case anyone's still interested!

 

[alpi69]

Um... who told you that?

I have been on bigger productions (not Hobbit size, but let´s say Europe-big) and once they lost a shooting day because the film got exposed to light in the copy-house and once they lost a whole day because both wind machines didn´t work. Of course their was bad blood, but the production went on. I know of enough productions that would pretty much die if a whole day with the whole crew of 60-70 people and actors needs to be repaid.

 

[nothing]

If a "big" production has camera issues on set they will not lose hours, they will just grab another camera body off the truck or strip the body off the steadicam and convert it to studio/handheld/whatever mode and continue shooting. It will suck for the ACs, but few others on set would even notice a delay. BTDT, much more often since the beginning of the "Red Era" than before (that's one thing Canon offers over certain competitors with more impressive specs - rock-solid reliability).

 

[Emanuel]

I don't understand Red's business model. Announcing upgrades before you've even delivered the product that you're announcing an upgrade for, seems backwards to me. Maybe those who are potential Red customers are reassured by the notion that whatever they buy today will not be obsoleted tomorrow?

Yes, obsolescence obsolete. If it is true the sensor upgrade can cost the same as a new camera the point is the system is already there. Not with RED ONE but EPIC and Scarlet. There's no other company like RED. Jim Jannard and Jarred are there, listening the customers. Where else?

 

[Wendt]

The bottom line: 4k-oolaid. Unless your filming for the big screen, 1080p will do just fine. Just give us a true 1080p 10bit 422 camera in the $6000 range (Panny???) and you will be happy for years to come. Until I see the $2000 4K TV displayed at Costco, I care less for 4K-ooliad.


Finally: I'd like to see canon get some balls and update the mk3 with a firmware of 1080p Mjpeg 8bit 422.

+1:thumbsup:

 

[Jay Birch]

I'm sure I speak for many when I say that they have lost the hearts and minds of the very people, the low-budget indie-filmmakers/cinematographers, that gave them their reputation as a company capable of creating cinematic images...

Is that Canon's fault though... or an over the top view of what $3k-$4k should bring?

Canon, along with Nikon, are the only companies offering full frame digital video.

For $3500, you can get a full frame camera that shoots a very good image that is free of aliasing, moire and rolling shutter (pretty much).... It is usable to 128000 ISO. It has 10-11 stops of DR and shoots to very cheap media and uses low cost batteries.... The resolution isn't as good as the likes of the C300 and Alexa, but it will hold up on the big screen and your viewer will not walk out of the theatre, if you have a good story. It is also a hell of stills camera.

For $85000 you can buy a digital camera that could win you an oscar (Alexa)

For $3500 you can buy a digital camera that could win you an oscar (5DIII)

For $600 you can buy a digital camera that could win you an oscar (GH2)

That is the amazing situation we find ourselves in.

 

[Danielvilliers]

Sorry, but I can't help but feel that that is rather unfair. So only those who don't complain about the price need 4K?

If Canon wants to make "crash cameras", "cameras for Hollywood", "compete with RED", so be it - I'm sure I speak for many when I say that they have lost the hearts and minds of the very people, the low-budget indie-filmmakers/cinematographers, that gave them their reputation as a company capable of creating cinematic images...

+1, exactly my thought. I am not a Canon shooter but I can feel the pain of all those who have invested a lot in their Canon gear. It is this group that have put Canon reputation where it is. Before the 5D2 there was no talk of Canon in the film/advertising market, it was those people that rig everything up and made Canon as a starter in this domain. So now those people have the 3.5k 5d3 or a 15k DSLR!!! Many would say that the 5d3 is not even a proper update after 4 years of waiting. Mr Canon could have thought a little bit about this group. I think they would have been truly satisfied with a true/approaching 1080p camera with the 5d3 or perhaps a mini C300 in the $ 5/6k.

That is why I feel that some have a very snob attitude toward this group because they contributed a lot to what the snob have now. As for me I have a hacked gh2 and a Nikon d800 for my photography. Everything the the d800 will bring to me in video (Dr, rolling shutter unfortunately aliasing) will be a plus because I have the gh2. If I upgrade to a true video camera, I am sure now it won't be a Canon (Bought a 7d for video before the gh2, so no fanboism here). I see the same pattern that Barry has said about Canon and fortunately I have no big investment there. I think for the dslr crowd that want to upgrade there are fortunately other option out there. At least this release show that the 5d2 was a fluke and what are Canon intention to this market demographic and if you want the type of value to money just move on.

 

[Steve R]

Yes, obsolescence obsolete. If it is true the sensor upgrade can cost the same as a new camera the point is the system is already there. Not with RED ONE but EPIC and Scarlet. There's no other company like RED. Jim Jannard and Jarred are there, listening the customers. Where else?

Sony has been bringing their ENGINEERS for direct, face-to-face roundtable meetings with end-user filmmakers to determine specs for cameras and firmware upgrades.

I'd call that listening.

 

[Emanuel]

Agreed. It's 720p for broadcast mostly and 2K for the big screen. Why would you need 4k? We are acting like children, wanting the new big bad shiny toy.

Where I come from people mostly still watch SD and not HD because the infrastructure isn't up to it yet.

It depends on your 'product'. Future proof counts. The pictures produced by a camera remain, and they work out as same as a property even decades later.

 

[Emanuel]

Sony has been bringing their ENGINEERS for direct, face-to-face roundtable meetings with end-user filmmakers to determine specs for cameras and firmware upgrades.

I'd call that listening.

'End-user' filmmakers, you wrote. Jannard/Jarred listen everyone. You included, if 'your' voice has something valuable to add.

 

[PappasArts]

Yes, obsolescence obsolete. If it is true the sensor upgrade can cost the same as a new camera the point is the system is already there. Not with RED ONE but EPIC and Scarlet. There's no other company like RED. Jim Jannard and Jarred are there, listening the customers. Where else?

"A quarterback doesn't throw where the receiver is... he throws where the receiver will be." Wrote Jim Jannard at Reduser.


RED is gonna swing back hard. Looking forward to seeing RED set the bar today that others won't be at until a few years or more.


Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS

 

[yoclay]

'End-user' filmmakers, you wrote. Jannard/Jarred listen everyone. You included, if 'your' voice has something valuable to add.

More nonsense. There would not be such a self defended culture at RED if people were truly listening.
In fact I have rarely seen less openness to divergent points of view than coming from that environment.

That said, it is hard to beat the inscrutable nature of the Canon corporate culture either for total deafness.

There is something about need that makes people have to sit up and listen. Maybe Sony is in the position of most need right now.

 

[Simon Shasha]

Is that Canon's fault though... or an over the top view of what $3k-$4k should bring?

Canon, along with Nikon, are the only companies offering full frame digital video.

For $3500, you can get a full frame camera that shoots a very good image that is free of aliasing, moire and rolling shutter (pretty much).... It is usable to 128000 ISO. It has 10-11 stops of DR and shoots to very cheap media and uses low cost batteries.... The resolution isn't as good as the likes of the C300 and Alexa, but it will hold up on the big screen and your viewer will not walk out of the theatre, if you have a good story. It is also a hell of stills camera.

For $85000 you can buy a digital camera that could win you an oscar (Alexa)

For $3500 you can buy a digital camera that could win you an oscar (5DIII)

For $600 you can buy a digital camera that could win you an oscar (GH2)

That is the amazing situation we find ourselves in.

You also need a s**t-load of marketing and money to win an Oscar...

"Story is king" - please, for once, let us let go of this and talk about cinematography as a stand-alone art in itself, regardless of script. We all know "story is king" - we all know this. And yes, you can make a film with many of the sub-$3500 cameras on the market - but you can't make the beautiful cinematography that I know lays within the hearts, minds, and dreams of many of the people that post here - people that want their films to look like FILM - people that dream of more dynamic-range, more resolution, better low-light, a more organic image, more realistic skintones, and so forth. And yes, there are RED cameras, Alexa, and so on that get close to film, if not supersede, the dynamic-range and resolution of processed film - but here lies, in my opinion, the great misunderstanding; why is everyone treating Canon as the under-dog? Canon dwarfs RED in terms of funds and resources. Canon dwarfs ARRI in terms of funds and resources. Canon should be the one capable of serving the masses, not the one serving the elitist niches...(after all, the processor on the C300 can be found in the $300 handy-cams...)

I said it before, and I will say it again; Canon have neglected the very people, the low-budget indie-filmmakers/cinematographers, that gave them their reputation as a company capable of creating cinematic images.

I can't help but feel the same emotions I felt when RED dropped the "3K for $3K" Scarlet, and decided to create a $15,000+ Scarlet instead - prior to "3K for $3K", RED was seen as too high-end and expensive for low-budget indie-filmmakers - a pipe-dream. When RED announced "3K for $3K", they become a sensation, a champion in the eyes of low-budget indie-filmmakers everywhere. Their support-base swirled, REDUSER membership grew, and so on - then what happened? Like Canon, they too neglected the very people that supported them...

 

[Noel Evans]

Sony has been bringing their ENGINEERS for direct, face-to-face roundtable meetings with end-user filmmakers to determine specs for cameras and firmware upgrades.

I'd call that listening.

And so have most other manufacturers - JVC is the notable one that I know nothing of. But these companies arent exactly running from their end users these days. Panasonic / Sony / Canon - have all spent a great deal of time doing this in recent years. (Panasonic being the notable one that probably started the trend). The Red way of doing things is comparably very transparent however, you see all the warts and all on the Red forums - right up to the Company owner having 2am rants. Theres little doubt however over their relative success.

The success of the 1D C will depend on the end image. Coming from an 18.1MP sensor and how you need to take the image from that sensor - there's a high chance that the DSLR like foibles may still be present, but that could be completely inaccurate and anything is speculation at this point.

From what I understand, it is exactly the same as Red uses (for its 4K Red One). A 4K sensor with a Bayer pattern. If you read it out like in the C300, it delivers 1080p @ 4:4:4. If you read it out as raw and then de-mosaic it, you'll get the same type of imagery that Red delivers - 3.2k of resolution at about 4:2:0's worth of color.

Which is best? Well at this point - at this level however is that question even relevant anymore? I mean of course people look at numbers and base their entire decision making process on that and the marketing behind them. My point is not all 1080 v 1080 or 4K v 4k is now or is ever going to be equal.

I remember going back a few years Panasonic released the HPX500 which cost me around $18k. There was a lot lower cost product that delivered full raster 1080 at the time that utilised 3 1080p cmos chips. Forgetting the lens capability variant which was quite a big jump. I chose the 500 simply because it was far more sensitive and delivered more in DR - the 500 is a 3 CCD x 960x540 utilising DVCProHD - solid codec. I was shooting a lot of Doc work at the time however. So the 500's robust body designed for all types of environments was also another factor. Right tool for the job. But it also captured lighting nuances I thought the other wasnt capable of. I remember the first DVX I bought, a 100A and when I shot some footage with some big dark areas amongst light I was in awe of how little noise I saw. Perceptions...but to this day theres a few DVX100A pieces I shot that I still entirely love the look of.

Hold on a moment, have I gone OT?

 

[eleison]

Sony has been bringing their ENGINEERS for direct, face-to-face roundtable meetings with end-user filmmakers to determine specs for cameras and firmware upgrades.

I'd call that listening.

I guess when a company is losing a ton of money for the past few years, that makes companies pay more attention to their customers. If canon doesn't shape up, I expect canon to be in the same position in a few years, if not sooner...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304356604577339033152077486.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

I hope sony cleans up, and canon falls on its face...

 

[cowpunk52]

Sony has been bringing their ENGINEERS for direct, face-to-face roundtable meetings with end-user filmmakers to determine specs for cameras and firmware upgrades.

I'd call that listening.

Canon met with hundreds of cinematographer's and camera professionals over the course of a couple of years to help Canon determine what they wanted and needed out of a professional camera system. They did it directly and face to face. Trust me, they listen, every day. That's one of the main reasons they built the Canon Hollywood Service Center, and are developing similar offices in other markets (eg, NYC).

 

[Noel Evans]

"A quarterback doesn't throw where the receiver is... he throws where the receiver will be."Jim Jannard

Very true statement - and it happens even when the receiver isnt any good.

I thought we were talking about cameras though?

 

[eleison]

Canon met with hundreds of cinematographer's and camera professionals over the course of a couple of years to help Canon determine what they wanted and needed out of a professional camera system. They did it directly and face to face. Trust me, they listen, every day. That's one of the main reasons they built the Canon Hollywood Service Center, and are developing similar offices in other markets (eg, NYC).

But yet there seems to be more complaints regarding canon than Sony. Perhaps Canon should not be listening to these people -- there might be less complaints. But what do I know. I don't have million dollar budgets... studios.. .etc. Obviously, I'm not who Canon is marketing their gear towards. They want to sell to Red's customers. Steal Red's clientele. I wonder if canon knows how many customers Red have compared to the mass market? Canon is a mass market company, isn't it? If they want Red's customers, they have to prepare for the type of revenue that red has... How many employee's do Canon have? Can they support their employee's with the type of revenue that red has? I doubt it... but whatever.

 

[Emanuel]

why is everyone treating Canon as the under-dog? Canon dwarfs RED in terms of funds and resources. Canon dwarfs ARRI in terms of funds and resources. Canon should be the one capable of serving the masses, not the one serving the elitist niches...(after all, the processor on the C300 can be found in the $300 handy-cams...)

I said it before, and I will say it again; Canon have neglected the very people, the low-budget indie-filmmakers/cinematographers, that gave them their reputation as a company capable of creating cinematic images.

I can't help but feel the same emotions I felt when RED dropped the "3K for $3K" Scarlet, and decided to create a $15,000+ Scarlet instead - prior to "3K for $3K", RED was seen as too high-end and expensive for low-budget indie-filmmakers - a pipe-dream. When RED announced "3K for $3K", they become a sensation, a champion in the eyes of low-budget indie-filmmakers everywhere. Their support-base swirled, REDUSER membership grew, and so on - then what happened? Like Canon, they too neglected the very people that supported them...

Well said but...

Something everyone have forgotten to say, though.

On motion picture, Canon follows RED. Price-wise included. I've heard this information from inside. A couple of years ago, I posted some thread on reduser which made some success into blogsphere just because someone from Canon had referred the fact they are lurkers on reduser and told me very clearly: we're planning 'to dwarf' RED. It was posted. Even Jim participated in the discussion. Both sides are aware of that.

Canon only had a video division ('cameras for weddings'), now they try to lead in hollywood (post-5DII age).