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

In some ways the DSLR "revolution" seems to have resulted in some kind of step backward. Even cheap consumer camcorders around 2008 had clean HDMI out, good robust codecs, no aliasing (some even downscaling from 8mp sensors)... yet these things seem to be at a premium now. Take into account that these camcorders are a good few years old now, it seems like things are getting vastly overpriced.

There are sensors in consumer cameras out there that can do 4k at 60p already...
 
Noel Evans said:
And going further to the poster shooting on the HVX and 35mm adapter - same point and well said.

IMO over all on these new announcements, cant be bad to have more competition in the market place. More competition usually means the consumers win.
Click to expand...

Cosimo Bullo said:
I agree too, that the HVX200 + adaptor look is still pretty sweet. I think because of the solid codec and because, in fact there was something unusual about the adaptor look when done right.... now I'm waiting to see who 'decides' to go back to an adaptor to get that look. It will happen.
Click to expand...

-------------------

Ya, I never really jumped on the whole CMOS thing. I still think progressive CCD looks better.. and I like my image a little dirty artistically, so I don't mind the ground glass look. 720p is a little soft now a days, but 1080p on the HVX is still rocking it. The high ISO's are great though, CMOS has that going for it.

Like you all said competition is great... but just look back at posts from like 2006 - 2007. Its the same arguments then that are being made now. 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 vs 4:4:4... and 10 bit 12bit bit blah blah..... You would have thought they would get it by now. Or at least ask.

The stuff I'm excited about are the Digital bolex, ACAM dii, and the Chinese one. Just wish they were super 35.... maybe we can rig up a 16mm CCD cam up to a 35mm adapter. I'm up for that! :bath:
 
dcloud said:
Im not a fan of canon but this theory of them crippling mk iii is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Have you ever shot with this camera?

Sony-V5000.jpg


I did. More than 2 decades ago.

A Sony's engineer, one of the major responsibles of Sony Europe some years later once told me. Face to face, eyes on eyes. We've felt the need to place some plastic rather than true glass on it, or we wouldn't be able to get more money for the next step offer...

V5000 was semi-pro labeled for high-end consumers aka amateurs. Next stop was PRO division where he was then responsible.
 

Attachments

  • Sony-V5000.jpg
    Sony-V5000.jpg
    97.1 KB · Views: 0
Emanuel said:
Have you ever shot with this camera?

I did. More than 2 decades ago.

A Sony's engineer, one of the major responsibles of Sony Europe some years later once told me. Face to face, eyes on eyes. We've felt the need to place some plastic rather than true glass on it, or we wouldn't be able to get more money for the next step offer...
Click to expand...
OLPF is different from a plastic lens though :) but still, 5D mk III is still a Stills camera. the OLPF is there for a reason. name a camera with no OLPF.

maybe they couldve just done it like nikon did with the d800.
 
Last edited:
dcloud said:
Im not a fan of canon but this theory of them crippling mk iii is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like it's been demonstrated, Sony have been legends at putting this theory into practice.

Lee Saxon said:
Why would anyone want that. There is absolutely not one reason in the world a T4i couldn't provide that for $700.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.

Thinking about it... we all should have just realized that it was over for the little man in Canon's eyes after they revealed the Hollywood center.
 
dcloud said:
OLPF is different from a plastic lens though :) but still, 5D mk III is still a Stills camera. the OLPF is there for a reason. name a camera with no OLPF.

maybe they couldve just done it like nikon did with the d800.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but Nikon has no high-end to protect other than another stills camera (D4 ;-) Canon decided for an aggressive double OLPF solution for some reason...

As much as Canon follows RED, Nikon will follow Canon. Expect a new 4K Nikon for more or less in the same price range. $10K would be a lucky shot!

Hoperfully may Jannard bring some rabbit to compete over them. Then, the traditional manufacturers will need to re-think their price policies. The more they can, the more they get.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
dcloud said:
OLPF is different from a plastic lens though :) but still, 5D mk III is still a Stills camera. the OLPF is there for a reason. name a camera with no OLPF.

maybe they couldve just done it like nikon did with the d800.
Click to expand...

Your right most do, however not all have TWO OLPF's, as the 5D MarkIII does. So the question is, why two ( essentially ) blurring devices in a row. Miller only removed one, while leaving the 5DMIII still with one more OLPF inside. Where as the D800E If correct, has no OLPF at all.

Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
 
I love how so many people on here are camera engineers who know that it would be so easy for Canon to put everything they dreamed of into a sub $1000, if they just weren't so evil.

Apparently, RED are the people's company... Yet they couldn't do 4K for under $15k either. (yet the Scarlet was, deservedly, hailed as groundbreaking and cheap).

To repeat my eralier view... If this camera was in the C300 shape and not a DSLR... Everyone would be going wild for it. People are justing seeing a DSLR and thinking "well, DSLRs generally only go up to $8k or so... So this is obviously a rip off"... This is not just a DSLR though.... It is a 4K cinema camera.
 
Last edited:
Jay Birch said:
I love how so many people on here are camera engineers who know that it would be so easy for Canon to put everything they dreamed of into a sub $1000, if they just weren't so evil.
Click to expand...

I don't think everyone thinks that. I for one think it's cheap for what your getting compared to what you got not to long ago. I think RED EPIC- F65 and Arri Alexa are great deals for the powerful systems they are. Scarlet is a great price for what you get. I believe many were hoping that the 5K to 8K market was going to be where the Canon EOS-1D C was going to land. I said weeks ago that it would be under 10K, however not less than 8K. No matter what, still great prices for working professionals who own their gear and make money with it. For those who rent, now we have more options.

Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
 
Jay Birch said:
I love how so many people on here are camera engineers who know that it would be so easy for Canon to put everything they dreamed of into a sub $1000, if they just weren't so evil.

Apparently, RED are the people's company... Yet they couldn't do 4K for under $15k either. (yet the Scarlet was, deservedly, hailed as groundbreaking and cheap).

To repeat my eralier view... If this camera was in the C300 shape and not a DSLR... Everyone would be going wild for it. People are justing seeing a DSLR and thinking "well, DSLRs generally only go up to $8k or so... So this is obviously a rip off"... This is not just a DSLR though.... It is a 4K cinema camera.
Click to expand...
Jay, I am not engineer but I am also a business man beyond my background in economics as well.

Any price is a match between manufacturing (design/R&D/production) / exploitation (distribution) / marketing / support (customer care, technical assistance, etc) and so on... In any case, they charge not only for what the 'cost' means, also for what the market can pay. RED included.

The point is, as someone said, it is the need who can help the consumer (we are all consumers: amateurs and PRO :-) to get the prices down. Nothing else. Basics: supply and demand (natural) law.
 
I'm pretty sure everyone has a grasp on how the economics of business works.... But saying that tech in the latest camera could easily be put into a sub $1000 is just something none of us know. Even on a component level, it seems a stretch.... without taking into account all the other aspects of business that you mention.
 
hi everyone, i'm a new guy here with some questions in my mind: the first one is -- why is 4k so important? Since C500/1DC all have a bayer sensor, their resolution could only reach up to 1200tvl/ph, just a little more than those of C300/FS700. That seems not so attractive.
 
Emanuel said:
Maybe, but Nikon has no high-end to protect other than another stills camera (D4 ;-) Canon decided for an aggressive double OLPF solution for some reason...

As much as Canon follows RED, Nikon will follow Canon. Expect a new 4K Nikon for more or less in the same price range. $10K would be a lucky shot!

Hoperfully may Jannard bring some rabbit to compete over them. Then, the traditional manufacturers will need to re-think their price policies. The more they can, the more they get.
Click to expand...
Hanlons razor?

Or how about Something to the effect in the af100. Theyre too scared of the moire and aliasing they had a choice of making it sharper with some moire or completely take it out while making the image softer. .. And they chose the latter.
 
Jay Birch said:
I'm pretty sure everyone has a grasp on how the economics of business works.... But saying that tech in the latest camera could easily be put into a sub $1000 is just something none of us know. Even on a component level, it seems a stretch.... without taking into account all the other aspects of business that you mention.
Click to expand...
OK, but from $1000 up to $15,000 there is a road 15X longer. I think what everyone says is: why twice the price (DSLR-wise) ?

There is an easy (also accurate) short answer, besides the aspects of business already mentioned: Scarlet.

Reason enough to think Jannard can be an antidote.

Or the smaller Nikon (comparing with Canon).

IMHO, the market is overbought (the terrible mistake of a bunch of stupid fanboys on reduser is giving the idea the product is oversold). Overbought means in economics language that the price could/can go down the hill.

So? It is not the 'cost' to determinate the price of 4K technology as of now.
 
Last edited:
dcloud said:
Im not a fan of canon but this theory of them crippling mk iii is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to be the one that tells you this.. but EVERY major technological corporation does this. They cripple tech and release improvements gradually and incrementally, in order to make the most money. It's standard practice and I'm amazed that you think it's 'ridiculous'?

Your not a canon rep are you..? Or indeed a rep from any other major manufacturer?
 
Dvx user steps into time machine. Dials in “Future. 5 years” There is a loud whirl and a flash of light. He steps out to find his now older friend, a DP.


DP
Whazup?

DVX USER
I need a 4k camera.

DP
Well, my iphone 26 has a 256K 3D option....

DVX USER
How much are they charging for that little upgrade?

DP
Twenty bucks.

DVX USER
Wha.....? BASTARDS!!!!​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top