C300: Could touchscreen auto-focus be around the corner for the C300mkII and C700?

NMSK

NMSK

Active member
For the past couple months, I've been trying to find out whether the C200's touchscreen (LM-V1) was able to atleast display the video output from the C300 as it would make a decent, light, self-powered monitor on gimbals or even handheld if you so desired. Every Canon rep I had a chance to ask said the LM-V1 was only supported by the C200 and I wasn't able to track anyone down who had access to both a C200 and C300ii to test whether it worked.

Cut to this morning, I'm on B&H and notice the headline for the LM-V1 has been changed to include C300mkII and C700. Seems like touchscreen autofocus be just around the corner for the C300mkII/C700. Does anyone know anything about this??

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1340812-REG/canon_2417c001_lm_v1_lcd_monitor.html
 
Should work on C300 II (if C300 II doesn't need a firmware upgrade, that will be very cool indeed):

From B&H:

Canon's LM-V1 4" LCD Monitor is a touchscreen viewfinder monitor for the Canon C200, C300 Mk II, and C700 cameras. It features a screen resolution of 1.23 million dots and supports one-finger tap-focusing when using compatible lenses.
Note: Canon UN-5 or UN-10 Unit Cable, sold separately, is required for connecting this monitor to the camera.
Click to expand...
 
Wow, very interesting. Although as a heads-up for you C300 MKII and C700 shooters, it's not easy to use as a touchscreen on the C200 due to the movement when tapping the screen being visible in the shot. But perhaps it will be more useful on the bigger, heavier C300 MKII and on the C700, I don't think it would be an issue since the C700 is a heavy beast.
 
Wow! Seriously, I just wanted to know if the thing would display the image on the C300II. It would be a great lightweight monitor for gimbals and certainly better than any aftermarket monitor at that price. If they actually added touch screen functionality, it would be amazing.

Really, though, would somebody just plug the monitor into a C300II and see if it passes the signal?
 
There's a chance that B&H title/overview is incorrect...I find random mistakes all of the time (and I don't blame them as the amount of products they have is too massive to have everything 100% correct), but it would nice if Canon did provide an update for the other cameras.

Here's the product from Adorama: https://www.adorama.com/calmv1.html

If possible, one of the sponsors here should indeed check for a signal on one of their floor models.
 
I have both C200 and C300mkii and just tried to attach the C200 monitor to the C300ii and it didn't work! I'll try and see if it's a firmware question and come back to you soon. I'm sure I don't have the latest firmware on the C300ii as it was more related to Canon lenses that I don't own so I didn't install it yet!
I'll do it now and come back to you soon with results
 
hmm...maybe there'll be a new firmware update that will make it work! Just updated the C300ii to latest firmware, and nothing! no signal on the C200's monitor...sorry to be the one that brings you bad news:embarasse
Let's hope it's coming soon with a new firmware update! this would be great .
 
Last edited:
I’m sure Canon will release a firmware update. Video and touchscreen too (trivial x,y data) should be possible! More sales, more profit...
 
Sometimes it appears old hardware is just not capable of doing what new hardware may be able to do with new or updated software.

It's like that with all cameras...you have a new model that comes out with some kind of new feature, and all of the existing users from the previous one may want the same feature but it just never comes because it either can't or the company wants to separate the new product from the old one.

For the C100/C300 DPAF upgrades you had to purchase a new camera or send it in...
 
NorBro said:
Sometimes it appears old hardware is just not capable of doing what new hardware may be able to do with new or updated software.

It's like that with all cameras...you have a new model that comes out with some kind of new feature, and all of the existing users from the previous one may want the same feature but it just never comes because it either can't or the company wants to separate the new product from the old one.

For the C100/C300 DPAF upgrades you had to purchase a new camera or send it in...
Click to expand...

The data protocol on the cable is likely identical. The packets/functions are likely nearly the same, so ultimately a firmware change (software only). If not, lost profits...
 
If you're an engineer (or have the experience) and knows/understands the internals & software of Canon cameras and what is doable, I'll take your word for it.

I myself don't know and just speculating on history.

People paid good money for the C300 Mark II and C700 and deserve this feature even before the C200's existence...or at least immediately after it started shipping.
 
NorBro said:
If you're an engineer (or have the experience) and knows/understands the internals & software of Canon cameras and what is doable, I'll take your word for it.

I myself don't know and just speculating on history.

People paid good money for the C300 Mark II and C700 and deserve this feature even before the C200's existence...or at least immediately after it started shipping.
Click to expand...

If Canon sent me the software and tools for their firmware development, I could fix it (as could any other embedded/C/C++developer here).

I'd be really surprised if Canon doesn't shortly release updated firmware for the C300 II and C700- easy money.
 
jcs said:
If Canon sent me the software and tools for their firmware development, I could fix it (as could any other embedded/C/C++developer here).

I'd be really surprised if Canon doesn't shortly release updated firmware for the C300 II and C700- easy money.
Click to expand...

I have inferred from the ferocious pace of canon firmware upgrades and their often sorta trivial content, that Canon has a couple of high school interns writing their firmware updates. I don’t mean to be overly critical, but any company that announces firmware updates months before they will be released, and when they are released frequently deal with very small incremental improvements, does not give me great confidence that there will ever be a firmware update that open up the touchscreen focus for the C300 mk2 or C700. THat Said, I would love it if that were the case, but I don’t put too much stock in this coming to pass.
 
Mark Smith said:
I have inferred from the ferocious pace of canon firmware upgrades and their often sorta trivial content, that Canon has a couple of high school interns writing their firmware updates. I don’t mean to be overly critical, but any company that announces firmware updates months before they will be released, and when they are released frequently deal with very small incremental improvements, does not give me great confidence that there will ever be a firmware update that open up the touchscreen focus for the C300 mk2 or C700. THat Said, I would love it if that were the case, but I don’t put too much stock in this coming to pass.
Click to expand...

Canon's issue is they view themselves as a hardware company, primarily, and the firmware that ships with the camera is considered 'finished' asides from small fixes. They also must have extremely thorough and long validation processes, a good thing considering their over-all reliability, but a pain when it comes to stuff like this.

Canon really need to embrace this touchscreen business completely, and come out with a 7 inch one that has a module to make it wireless. That's the future of focussing. We're so close it hurts to think about, the DPAF is already there all they need to do it write the software better.
 
IanTheM said:
Canon's issue is they view themselves as a hardware company, primarily, and the firmware that ships with the camera is considered 'finished' asides from small fixes. They also must have extremely thorough and long validation processes, a good thing considering their over-all reliability, but a pain when it comes to stuff like this.

Canon really need to embrace this touchscreen business completely, and come out with a 7 inch one that has a module to make it wireless. That's the future of focussing. We're so close it hurts to think about, the DPAF is already there all they need to do it write the software better.
Click to expand...

+100

The Canon DPAF is really good. Its one of key reasons I own the camera. Give us a 7" with touch screen wifi better that the current WFT8 and there is no looking back. While I would like un cropped frame rates above 60 fps with the C300 Mk2 , I use the DPAF ALL THE TIME in various modes and it screws up far fewer time that I do when manually focusing.
 
Last edited:
NorBro said:
There's a chance that B&H title/overview is incorrect...I find random mistakes all of the time (and I don't blame them as the amount of products they have is too massive to have everything 100% correct), but it would nice if Canon did provide an update for the other cameras.

Here's the product from Adorama: https://www.adorama.com/calmv1.html

If possible, one of the sponsors here should indeed check for a signal on one of their floor models.
Click to expand...

I've been keeping an eye on the B&H item page periodically since the launch of the C200 to see if Canon roll out support to the C300ii and previously the title and supporting text reflected the copy in the adorama link nearly verbatim. Now all of a sudden, it's updated to include the C300ii and C700. So I'm hopeful Canon are making moves to integrate the LM-V1 into their current lineup. Makes a lot of sense I have to say, not only drives a whole bunch of LM-V1 sales for Canon but it could breath some new life easily into C300ii sales and offer even more functionality to the C700. Fingers crossed.
 
anatusa said:
to be honest i would be more interested in raw light for the rest of the C family
Click to expand...

Rawlite would be cool, but as a windows user, I'd dread the post work and avoid shooting it 95% of the time. Just thinking about transcoding to DPX then transcoding again to something compressed just to edit makes me ill, especially since the Odyssey 7Q raw to prores offers such great IQ already and is ready to cut.

If anything, I'd really love a lighter 4K codec in the C300ii for quick turn around, burnt-in stuff. As great as the 10bit422 is, it's not neccessary every single job I shoot.
 
NMSK said:
Rawlite would be cool, but as a windows user, I'd dread the post work and avoid shooting it 95% of the time. Just thinking about transcoding to DPX then transcoding again to something compressed just to edit makes me ill, especially since the Odyssey 7Q raw to prores offers such great IQ already and is ready to cut.

If anything, I'd really love a lighter 4K codec in the C300ii for quick turn around, burnt-in stuff. As great as the 10bit422 is, it's not neccessary every single job I shoot.
Click to expand...

An interesting viewpoint. but mine has been the opposite. I am shooting two feature documentaries solely on CRL and I am loving it. The 2K proxy is super easy to work with for assemblies and previews and the CRL is not bad to work with in Cinema RAW Development. I love the flexibility of choosing your gamma and color after you shoot, being able to boost exposure afterwards and pick your color temp, all with no hit in quality. I shot a subject in a car yesterday at 5:00 AM. We were turning into a harbor and in the BG of the subjects shot, I had shot of a lit up street signs on the signal tree. Of course, in the 709 proxy, the lights are blowing out the name on the sign, all you can see is white light. But when I examine the same shot in CRL in the CRD tool, I was amazed that the name on the sign and the sign itself, when viewed with Log 3 applied was totally 100% legible, it looked great, all of the detail was there. This, to me means that when we do our final assembly using the selects from the CRL, my documentaries are going to look considerably better than the proxy cut, so much more meat there.

With 4TB drives costing $94.00 at Costco and being able to still use my 2012 iMac and cheap Thunderbolt G-RAID with the proxy and then only using the selects from the CRL, this is a convoluted and not the most convenient workflow. But the end result is totally 100% worth it. I shoot with the C300 MKII a lot and while it looks great and the 410 Mbps XF-AVC is wonderful, the CRL from the C200 is better, by a decent leap IMHO, having shot on both quite a bit lately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top