Dear Panasonic : An Open Letter

dcloud said:
c300 with a avcintra p2 backend would be winner :)
Click to expand...
You could get that by recording to an HPG20, but the HPG20 itself would probably be 2x to 3x as big as the C300 head itself! Plus it still wouldn't be 10-bit, because the C300 itself is inherently 8-bit...
 
yoclay said:
It is however a processor introduced in 2009 and will be 3 years old in little over a month.
Click to expand...
Okay, repeat with me...

"C A N O N".


This is what Canon does. It's how they work. They release something that's substantially outdated technology compared to everyone else, years after everyone else has moved on. They only released their first tapeless pro camcorder last year, for cryin' out loud. Panasonic introduced the HVX200 with P2 in 2005. Canon didn't go tapeless for another five years. And when they did, they went with (wait for it...) MPEG-2. Creaky old MPEG-2, not even a modern h.264. Don't expect to see h.264 from them for another couple of years.

If you're expecting anything modern/cutting-edge from Canon, you will always, perpetually be disappointed. They will never be first, they will never even be comparable with what the other companies are making (witness that the C300 is 8-bit when the F3 is 10-bit and capable of 4:4:4). It's not who Canon is, it's not what they do, and it never will be.

The video on their DSLRs is fundamentally unchanged since the original 5D Mark II back in 2008. Panasonic trumped them in video quality not once (GH1), and not twice (GH2), but will probably do it three times (I bet we'll see a GH3 before we see anything substantially different in Canon DSLR video technology in their C-series DSLR sometime next year).

It might be the latest technology Canon offers, but I certainly doubt this is the latest video technology that Canon has...
Click to expand...
That's the point though. What does it matter what they "have"? The only thing that matters is what they offer. And they will always offer something that's years behind the times as compared to their competitors. It's who they are, it's what they do, and they have said they have no interest in changing that.

If you want bragging rights to the latest technology, don't go with Canon. Ever.

If you like the images that Canon products put out, go with Canon, and who cares what technology they use to produce the images that you like?
 
I think the video manufactures companies should take example on their photographic ones. Develop a sensor then processing chip and develop a line around it. Like the 7d to ti line. They basically share the same image quality, but it is the added functionality and even construction that determine the price. In this way the investment and R&D is shared between a whole range of cameras. Each offering different level of functionality at different price point and cater for the needs of customers at different level, that won't go to their competitors.

These big camera manufactures are at a crossing road. At the lower end, most consumers are using their phones and if they want to bring with them something better it will be the point and shoot photo camera which does video or a dslr. A good photo camera giving a medium to good video quality will suffice for 99% people. Now on the pro side apart from the pure eng world, the dslr invasion has prove one thing, that pros from the film, advertising and some reportage style are not bothered at all to use other type of capture device than the video cameras. You have another problem in red, which has changed the perception of value in the 10k to 20k market.

Now these companies have two choices, go cautiously, trying to keep there margin and business model until now and run the risk that something like the hdslr could take a big chunk of it. Or try to embrace a new economic model. One example, like as I said before developing a sensor/processing chip and build around it a product line. A $ 3000 (8bit, 50 mbit, hdmi)- $ 5000 (10bit, 100 mbit, hdmi) - $ 7000 to $ 10 000 (10/12 bit, 100 - 200 mbit, sdi) camera line. Body construction, things like wavefrom monitoring, the monitor viewfinder size, microphone connectors etc. can be differentiating factors. The hacked gh2 proves that a $ 500 to $ 700 dslr has enough power to have intra codec in the 200 mbit range. So yes they can, because they have to think of selling in the hundred of thousand rather than the thousand. Is it possible, do you think there is a market that big... Take again the dslr world, for those millions of camera sold, how much are for pro photographers!!!!! Most of it is driven by amateurs and enthusiast because it is still affordable. Look at photography forum to see amateurs and I mean really amateurs in quality also that have $ 5000 to $ 10 000 equipment.
 




Just saw that, is it the future of film-making on a $600 camera (promo pn the gh2 on adorama). Those black suit in those board should start to have a very deep look at the future, because it could pass them by without them noticing.
 
Barry_Green said:
If you want bragging rights to the latest technology, don't go with Canon. Ever.
Click to expand...

You've got to admit though Barry that the C300 took you by surprise. By Canon standards they seem to be speeding up their development process? I know the bet you made was about an AF100 competitor but I'm sure had someone made the bet that Cannon would have an F3 competitor before 2013 that you would have happily taken that bet too. So they have brought out a large sensor camcorder at least a year ahead of what you would normally expect them to achieve. Please tell me if any of these assumptions are wrong. My point is simply that things might change at Canon? And maybe this is the beginning?
 
I wouldn't have believed Canon would enter that market at all, much less by 2013. It's not the C300 that's really the thing here, it's that Canon has decided to move into the high-end cinema business. That was the decision that changed everything and made something like the C300 possible.

I don't really see Canon speeding anything up anywhere else; the 5D Mark II is now over three years old without any successor, the GL2 is still a "current" model in their lineup, the XHA1S is still a current model... the real curveball was this move into the hollywood business.

We'll see if they start doing things quicker. I said no AF100 competitor prior to January 1, 2013. I still think I'm safe in that prediction. If they drop a C100 on us in six months, that will be evidence to me that yes, they're closing the gap and getting products out sooner. If instead all they release is a "C" DSLR, well, that doesn't count, that'd just be the next generation of the 5D, so a three year product cycle once again.
 
Danielvilliers said:




Just saw that, is it the future of film-making on a $600 camera (promo pn the gh2 on adorama). Those black suit in those board should start to have a very deep look at the future, because it could pass them by without them noticing.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting....AMAZING.
 
Barry_Green said:
Yes, it's too much to ask on a large sensor camera. Search around, you won't find one anywhere. Zooms on cine-sensor-sized cameras are manual and they're astronomically expensive.
Click to expand...

This is one place where the sensor crop mode of the GH2 (ex.) would come in handy... From what I understand when shooting in that crop mode the sensor is covered by existing ENG R&G lenses for 1/2" broadcast cameras, for example, so should just need a mount adaptor.
 
Seems to me what panasonic should do....or what I and a lot of other people wish for is a AF-100 on steroids. Go Intra with P2 and that would be huge. And get the lens mount non-sense worked out. Canon is going with two versions; PL mount and an EOS mount which is perfect. They could certainly build there own adapters and sell them, or light a bonfire under Birger...But do something since the current lens situation scares off a lot of folks. I would prefer to upgrade to a shoulder mount, but an AF-200 with Intra, P2, and an improved lens system could really knock the wind out of the new Canon C series.

Grant
 
Nab 2012 should see the introduction of a Sony F5 and (speculative) a new model from Panasonic. I'm not sure what Panasonic is going to do regarding it's sensor size. There's a general stigma that the AF 100 is not a "Super 35mm" chip and I doubt an AF 200 would be either. I'm aware of the arguments regarding the difference in FOV, but I'm saying the stigma is still out there for people looking for the latest and greatest, and I'm not sure what Panasonic is going to do about it other than stick to m4/3 which may be a losing long term battle. I would be very interested in an AF 200 if it was capable of greater DR and had a 10 bit codec regardless of the chip size.
 
Doctor Wu said:
but I'm saying the stigma is still out there for people looking for the latest and greatest, and I'm not sure what Panasonic is going to do about it other than stick to m4/3 which may be a losing long term battle
Click to expand...

All it will take is for Panasonic to release an AF-200 that records 10-bit 100 Mbit AVC-Intra using internal P2 cards that costs about $8K or less, to put them back at the top again.

The m4/3 sensor size is only an issue if you can't find lenses to create the shots you have in mind. This is slowly getting fixed as more fast wide-angle lenses appear, and hopefully a fast constant aperture standard zoom. ( Hoping that the 12-35mm from Panasonic is a winner )
 
Yes Panasonic, please please release a new camera with 10 bit 4:2:2 super 35mm size sensor, incredible dynamic range, and full servo zoom for under $2000 so the handheld shots of my cat in the dark will be higher resolution when I post them to YouTube.
 
Well, s35 sized sensor would certainly help. Sensor size has probably been the biggest negative for me about the AF100. Yes, I understand the arguments ("It's way bigger than 1/3" chip," "It's close to 35 movie film size"), but the fact remains - no one with expensive wide glass - say the Canon or Nikon 14mm 2.8 - wants that glass to immediately double in effective focal length by strapping it on a AF100. Kinda defeats the purpose.

Add to that a serious lack of native glass in the 4/3 micro range (esp in the first half of 2011), and it becomes less desirable still. Yes, there is some nice glass, but certainly nothing remotely close to other formats.

Add to that perhaps the most damning fact - that 4/3 micro glass can't be used on Canon/Nikon/Sony/PL mount cameras - and it's an issue. More or less, either you're getting non-4/3's glass and using an adapter, or you're committing long term buying into the micro 4/3s format.

And that's certainly a little risky - the format's only existed for a little more than 3 years, and only 2 major camera companies have embraced it, with Panasonic being the only video camera manufacturer. The other company - Olympus - has major financial problems that may actually bankrupt them. Canon EOS on the other hand, has been used since 1987, and has hundred of lenses available. Nikon's mount has been used even longer - 1959 - and has over 400 available lenses by way of comparison. In other words, some hesitation about the micro 4/3s format isn't crazy.

That said, if you don't mind using all 3rd party glass or investing in the 4/3 micro format lenses, then it's no big whoop. But given the many, many, different references from users on this site expressing a desire for S35 sized chip, it remains a bugaboo. For what it's worth, I think of all the potential changes to the AF200 (or whatever it's called), a change in sensor size would be the least likely.

And I know Mr. Jones was joking, but a AF200 w/ a S35 sized sensor that had 4:2:2/10 bit quality for... well let's say $5K - would pretty much put an end to the camera war, wouldn't?
 
Last edited:
ggrantly said:
Seems to me what panasonic should do....or what I and a lot of other people wish for is a AF-100 on steroids. Go Intra with P2 and that would be huge. And get the lens mount non-sense worked out. Canon is going with two versions; PL mount and an EOS mount which is perfect. They could certainly build there own adapters and sell them, or light a bonfire under Birger...But do something since the current lens situation scares off a lot of folks. I would prefer to upgrade to a shoulder mount, but an AF-200 with Intra, P2, and an improved lens system could really knock the wind out of the new Canon C series.

Grant
Click to expand...

I know I'm in this boat with the lens mount situation. If I could just use the Canon lenses I've already invested in over the last couple of years with no compromises it'd be a no-brainer for me. Also would love dual card slots if sticking with avc...
 
I love the Vista Vision sensor. The best possible thing to come down the pipeline for me would be a Canon with the vista vision sensor and the probably dual Digic5 processors it would need to fully take advantage of it. That camera in the $5K range would pretty damn sweet.
 
jdv said:
And I know Mr. Jones was joking, but a AF200 w/ a S35 sized sensor that had 4:2:2/10 bit quality for... well let's say $5K - would pretty much put an end to the camera war, wouldn't?
Click to expand...
Well, that all depends. If the market remains satisfied with 1080p, then such a camera may win. But if some technological breakthrough allowed a minimally 4K, back-illuminated, 16-bit, global-shutter, 15-stop DR, HDR-capable sensor in a $5K-$6K camera (sans lens), then yeah, that would end the camera war, at least for a while. Until then, we can expect a nearly endless series of leapfrogging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top