Canon's Upcoming RF cinema camera rumored specs

ahalpert said:
This is a good point. Now you get to pay c series prices without getting c series props. If that matters
Click to expand...

fs7/fx9 I can't argue with because they're bigger but I don't agree re c-series. A stripped down c500ii/300iii, c200 and c70 will all look exactly the same to casual observers.

Anyway if perception is your main selling point (?!) you should avoid the entire c-series.
 
rob norton said:
fs7/fx9 I can't argue with because they're bigger but I don't agree re c-series. A stripped down c500ii/300iii, c200 and c70 will all look exactly the same to casual observers.

Anyway if perception is your main selling point (?!) you should avoid the entire c-series.
Click to expand...

Personally I would never use a C70 or a mirrorless as an A cam on a corporate shoot. The C200, C300 or C500 can all be A cameras . In fact I would argue that the C200 is a better buy than the C70 with it's raw codec as an A cam.
 
Ken1212 said:
Personally I would never use a C70 or a mirrorless as an A cam on a corporate shoot. The C200, C300 or C500 can all be A cameras . In fact I would argue that the C200 is a better buy than the C70 with it's raw codec as an A cam.
Click to expand...

Do you mean because of perception? I understand it's important to some people but it goes both ways. You can sell the bells and whistles set up and you can sell the minimal set up.

As a tech savvy producer I also wouldn't hire someone that was trying to get imaginary credit by using a larger camera/prop accessories which slows down the whole shoot.

If the people you work with are only capable of perceiving value through physical components then there are bigger problems.
 
The camera looks amazing. A video camera that takes advantage of the DSLR form factor but with NDs, which is (for me) the single biggest reason to avoid using stills cameras.

I'm personally glad there's no EVF, it keeps everything smaller. I use the screen on the c200 outside with hardly any issues (am hoping c70 is similarly viewable).

I think building the camera into a production machine is a mistake. IMO this should be pulled out of a backpack and the shooting starts.

I'm physically fine shooting with the c200 in my hands all day but the footage isn't that stable so I use an easyrig. I love the easyrig but a true backpack/minimal set up has been an ongoing dream. EIS homework pending!

Also nice try canon but I'm still not buying any RF lenses.

What functions would people assign to buttons 11 and 12 on the front near the lens? I hardly use the front buttons on the c200 but maybe these ones would get used more if the camera gets "cradled" and a hand is already close or to help if you're filming yourself.
 
rob norton said:
Do you mean because of perception? I understand it's important to some people but it goes both ways. You can sell the bells and whistles set up and you can sell the minimal set up.

As a tech savvy producer I also wouldn't hire someone that was trying to get imaginary credit by using a larger camera/prop accessories which slows down the whole shoot.

If the people you work with are only capable of perceiving value through physical components then there are bigger problems.
Click to expand...

It's no so much the people you're working with as much as the clients. I'm not sure how it is in Australia, but when you're shooting a corporate video at a high end 5th Avenue law office they are kind of expecting you to bring impressive looking gear. It's just perception and it's stupid, but I've seen it happen many times...
 
rob norton said:
The camera looks amazing. A video camera that takes advantage of the DSLR form factor but with NDs, which is (for me) the single biggest reason to avoid using stills cameras.

I'm personally glad there's no EVF, it keeps everything smaller. I use the screen on the c200 outside with hardly any issues (am hoping c70 is similarly viewable).

I think building the camera into a production machine is a mistake. IMO this should be pulled out of a backpack and the shooting starts.

I'm physically fine shooting with the c200 in my hands all day but the footage isn't that stable so I use an easyrig. I love the easyrig but a true backpack/minimal set up has been an ongoing dream. EIS homework pending!

Also nice try canon but I'm still not buying any RF lenses.

What functions would people assign to buttons 11 and 12 on the front near the lens? I hardly use the front buttons on the c200 but maybe these ones would get used more if the camera gets "cradled" and a hand is already close or to help if you're filming yourself.
Click to expand...

Now just imagine if they would start giving us built-in ND in the mirrorless stills bodies... Something bigger than the R5/R6, but not as chunky as the C70. IF they really wanted to, I'm sure they could build the rumored R1(mirrorless 1D) with built-in ND's.
 
scorsesefan said:
It's no so much the people you're working with as much as the clients. I'm not sure how it is in Australia, but when you're shooting a corporate video at a high end 5th Avenue law office they are kind of expecting you to bring impressive looking gear. It's just perception and it's stupid, but I've seen it happen many times...
Click to expand...

Yes but then why is any c-series camera OK? Shouldn't it be a RED or ARRI if you have to play that game?
 
scorsesefan said:
It's no so much the people you're working with as much as the clients. I'm not sure how it is in Australia, but when you're shooting a corporate video at a high end 5th Avenue law office they are kind of expecting you to bring impressive looking gear. It's just perception and it's stupid, but I've seen it happen many times...
Click to expand...


That's been going on for ages. One of my friends said on big corporate shoots back in the day, they would pull all of the C-stands, lights, etc. out of the grip truck first thing and set them up, just to look impressive for the client. Another guy I used to shoot for when I first started always used to say, "Dog and Pony" when you'd go out for important clients.
 
scorsesefan said:
It's no so much the people you're working with as much as the clients. I'm not sure how it is in Australia, but when you're shooting a corporate video at a high end 5th Avenue law office they are kind of expecting you to bring impressive looking gear. It's just perception and it's stupid, but I've seen it happen many times...
Click to expand...

For some, yes - but if I came along with you on the shoot and they asked how much my little MONSTRO box cost and how much your FS7 cost, guess who'd be the favorite the rest of the day.

As the years move forward, the perception of a big camera will matter less and seem vintage to people.

And as always, as everyone says, you can build up a tiny box, but you can't break down a big one.
 
rob norton said:
Do you mean because of perception? I understand it's important to some people but it goes both ways. You can sell the bells and whistles set up and you can sell the minimal set up.

As a tech savvy producer I also wouldn't hire someone that was trying to get imaginary credit by using a larger camera/prop accessories which slows down the whole shoot.

If the people you work with are only capable of perceiving value through physical components then there are bigger problems.
Click to expand...

Most corporate people I work with do not know any difference between a mirrorless and full body cam but their first impression/perception of a proper interview setup with a full body is definitely not the same as using mirrorless. Concerning "perceivable value through physical components" Can some small mirrorless cams beat some full size cams "absolutely" but that's your job to buy the right full body A cam when shopping. The C70 would be a great as a B-cam for interviews and for b-roll, the question is do I need what the C70 offers as a B-cam. Again, I would argue that the A7S III is a better buy with it's external raw option using an Atomos.
 
rob norton said:
fs7/fx9 I can't argue with because they're bigger but I don't agree re c-series. A stripped down c500ii/300iii, c200 and c70 will all look exactly the same to casual observers.

Anyway if perception is your main selling point (?!) you should avoid the entire c-series.
Click to expand...

I dont think its that important. But the C70 practically looks like a DSLR. The others don't
 
And one of the reasons ARRI/RED guys/gals used to invest in those cameras because many of them make their system's value known on paper.

A $10,000 camera looks cheap no matter how good it is.

An $80K package makes them feel like they are getting something and that's where the big rates used to come from.

It's all crazy now though and not the same. Everything is up for grabs and subject to change.
 
NorBro said:
For some, yes - but if I came along with you on the shoot and they asked how much my little MONSTRO box cost and how much your FS7 cost, guess who'd be the favorite the rest of the day.

As the years move forward, the perception of a big camera will matter less and seem vintage to people.

And as always, as everyone always says, you can build up a tiny box, but you can't break down a big one.
Click to expand...

Like I said it's stupid. The best camera should be the best camera for the job, not the biggest or shiniest or even most expensive. But, unfortunately it's often a reality... In a related story, I was driving in Queens the other day and I saw an Uber Tesla...
 
rob norton said:
If the people you work with are only capable of perceiving value through physical components then there are bigger problems.
Click to expand...

There are many different types of shoots. And with a lot of clients, especially those who dont understand video well, I find that they judge my performance on set before they even see the footage. which has more to do with my professionalism and confidence but also the look of the gear. I also shoot for a corporate production company that basically always uses gh5's unless their client will be on set in which case it's fs7s
 
rob norton said:
Yes but then why is any c-series camera OK? Shouldn't it be a RED or ARRI if you have to play that game?
Click to expand...

They might not know a Sony from an ARRI but they can see that an FS7 is bigger than a C70, which also kind of looks like a stills camera
 
NorBro said:
And one of the reasons ARRI/RED guys/gals used to invest in those cameras because many of them make their system's value known on paper.

A $10,000 camera looks cheap no matter how good it is.

An $80K package makes them feel like they are getting something and that's where the big rates used to come from.

It's all crazy now though and not the same. Everything is up for grabs and subject to change.
Click to expand...

I did a shoot for a non-profit last December and had a 3-light interview set up with a $100 60" Glow softbox hanging off a $650 330w Nicefoto COB as the key. My green handler from the agency walks to his seat, tiptoeing around the lights and says something to the effect that he was terrified of knocking them over and breaking them because he "knew how much they cost."

And I thought - you have no idea how much THESE lights cost. All 3 lights + softboxes + stands + gels cost less than the 70-200 on my B cam. But they were an impressive display and they did a damn fine job, color spectrum included

I actually think one of his young colleagues may have asked me how much it all cost and I think I just gave a groan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top