Is Canon getting ready to release new cinema camera/s? Big C200 Price reduction

I def hear you...the honest answer is you will never be able to use this kind of camera for conferences unless you pay a lot of money.

Affordable big chip servo lenses are the Achilles' heel in the video world and when I used to shoot a lot of conferences there were only two options for me:

(1) Use a camcorder.
(2) Use a regular stills zoom lens when I knew the subject wasn't moving towards me. Meaning he/she was either standing in one place or moving sideways where I didn't have to zoom in and out. (Occasionally I'd push in/out with a traditional wrist flick to change from a MS to a little tighter or wider. Not as smooth as a traditional rocker but not a big deal either.)
 
Ken1212 said:
One would have to buy both to shoot conferences as some rooms are short and others are long. Not practical and would not spend that kind of money in 2023 on EF lenses.
Click to expand...

I own the 18-80 and it's a fantastic lens. I certainly wouldn't buy it new at this point, there's plenty of copies to be had used, but I actually think it's an amazing time to buy EF lenses.

You can use them on EF mount (obviously) but also RF, E mount, Micro 4/3, L Mount, the list goes on. And because everyone wants the latest and greatest you can get great deals.

I agree that there are certainly way better and cheaper options to shoot a conference with though and a camcorder makes a lot of sense. But if you shoot any outdoor doc-style work then the 18-80 is by far my favorite lens for it.

Matt Porwoll has a great review of the 18-80 on his Behind the Lens series here.
 
DLD said:
As I see it - if Canon follows Sony's example of repurposing the existing hybrids into video-centric cameras, they could use R7 as a base for an APS-C replacement for C200 and a competitor for FX30 and R6 MKII as a competitor for FX-3.

With a micro HDMI, naturally. Just to piss off SMM.
Click to expand...

I guess this has been discussed ad nauseam, but
  1. What features would a new C200 have that the C70 and C300 Mark III don't already have?
  2. What would the price point be?
  3. The fact that you can strip down the C200 and force it onto a gimbal, but also kit it out with viewfinder, microphone holder etc. shows how versatile it is. You can do anything from gimbal work, run-and-gun as well as more complicated setups.
  4. Being able to use the parts such as EVF interchangeably between other C-series cameras is a big plus.
  5. Is it time for a new form factor (box camera) - with the same modularity as in point 2?
That being said, I would love to see a new C200 (as long as I can continue to use the accessories I already own).
 
They would have the typical improvements that the C70 and C300 Mark III have over the C200: better AF, more resolution, better processing, more HFRs, more DR, better IBIS, etc.

And then features we might not really think about like better menus, better design, new modules, maybe more ND, maybe 32-bit audio built-in as a first, etc.

Many of the updates we've seen in our careers/lives will now happen all over again with 8K cameras, but they will have better specs, on paper and in real world performance.
 
Should these new cameras come out in the manner I semi-predicted, their specs would be pretty similar to the hybrid cameras they are based on. The rest depends on the product positioning. Let's say, an R7 based camera is priced at the same $1500 point, then it might not have much over R7. Maybe an SDI connection or better in-camera video codecs. Let's up the ante and imagine it being priced at the FX-30 level of $1,800. Then it might have 6K and the ever desirable "some other stuff".

And a surprise or two.

Side note, I think I huffed-and-puffed about the possibility of a video camera based on A7S/II 4-5 years before FX-3 came out. The suits in the executive suits, obviously, considered it way before that but the HQ asked for other things.
 
DLD said:
Should these new cameras come out in the manner I semi-predicted, their specs would be pretty similar to the hybrid cameras they are based on. The rest depends on the product positioning. Let's say, an R7 based camera is priced at the same $1500 point, then it might not have much over R7. Maybe an SDI connection or better in-camera video codecs. Let's up the ante and imagine it being priced at the FX-30 level of $1,800. Then it might have 6K and the ever desirable "some other stuff".

And a surprise or two.

Side note, I think I huffed-and-puffed about the possibility of a video camera based on A7S/II 4-5 years before FX-3 came out. The suits in the executive suits, obviously, considered it way before that but the HQ asked for other things.
Click to expand...

Do you have an insider at Sony? :D
 
morgan_moore said:
personallt I find what some 'professionals' go on location with to be a mystery

r5c - micro hdmi - not an A camera
r6i-ii -micro hdmi - not an A camera
c70 - bad hdmi position - not an A camera
all dsrl - no nd - not an A camera
bmc 6k - no af - not an A camera
bmc 12k -no af - not an A camera

c300, fx6/9 - much more expensive.
Click to expand...

I also put quotes around “Professionals” who rely on autofocus.
 
Well there are dreamers and people who use AF. (not rely on it)

The truth is that for a 70-200 walk to camera or other things that happen in reality once, and once only, AF is gonna resolve more information (keep more of the shot sharp) than some arrogant fool who thinks he can do it with a BMC 6k, reflecty badly positioned monitor and a hand spin of a crunchy retro lens.

Ive grown up over generations of tech and know that you cant get eyelash good focus in 4k on a compressioin artifact riddled 720 or 1080 monitor or on a smalll bit of ground glass.

And yes AF struggles with bushes in the fore ground or which of the five guys you want sharp, for sure you have to learn when to switch it off.

And of course drama (that pic I posted of four folk to drive one camera) can with measure tape, markers, laser distometers, remote monitors, 'horns', (all kept charged by the trainee) and consistent actors do a pretty fine job of making nice footage after a rehearsal or two. In fact with horns the arris on pro sets are almost AF!

If you need a selection of sharp shots fast on a typical corporate 2 crew shoot you are gonno do best with af. And this is where the c200 (and this thread) sit.
 
Last edited:
The wierd thing is I hate the R5/6 with thier lack of everything.. but the better af almost makes them better cameras than the c200.
 
morgan_moore said:
And of course drama (that pic I posted of four folk to drive one camera) can with measure tape, markers, laser distometers, remote monitors, 'horns', (all kept charged by the trainee) and consistent actors do a pretty fine job of making nice footage after a rehearsal or two. In fact with horns the arris on pro sets are almost AF!
Click to expand...

Haven't seen a tape measure or Hilti come out of the bag in years. Monitors are a given (every AC I worked with now owns their own little focus station). Cinetape/Panatape (horns as you call them) are still in use although the Preston Light Ranger 2 is more common now, which does have an autofocus mode although I have yet to see an AC rely on it. Even with all of the measuring tools in place, I would hesitate to suggest this is anything like autofocus, that is suggesting the AC is being "told" what to do and simply following, whereas in reality they are ingesting that data, processing it along with their intuition and then confirming with visual feedback from the monitor, all within a split second. You can put a variety of AC's on the same physical setup and get a widely varying range of success, which indicates that the human factor is still quite present regardless of the tech in play.

"A rehearsal or two"...VERY rare now. "Shoot the rehearsal" is the typical call, much to our quiet dismay, unless the shot involves stunts/special effects or something else highly technical. Long gone are the days when the AC's were given the set to lay marks, run the tape and work through their craft, at least in the world I inhabit. That all said: the percentage of successful focus is higher than it ever was--you don't ever see entire takes on "ears" like you sometimes used to in the film days.
 
All true im sure.

I dont know the system they used arri wcu 5 handunits I think

there certainly was a button to match the focus distance to the horns measured distance.

the a/c descibed it as 'the emergency button' - not something he would want to be using.

I knew the 'couple of rehearsals' quote would light some fires - while there are often no rehearsals on my last films often the second would be doing his best to stand in and give the first a few guessed marks before the first take/rehearsal/f_ck fest

Again we might have got a few more walkthroughs because the brutal grips wouldnt shoulder the cams onto the ops until he had seen a halfspeed walkthough - what an ar_se!
The grip and the 1ad had a little code going :)

The overall thing is I think people who might be choosing an AF C200 or a MF BMC camera probably wont be playing that drama game but wanting a sharp shot of the MD walking through the factory to lay over his sitdown interview and can get it fast and nice with af and a 70-200
 
norway said:
Do you have an insider at Sony? :D
Click to expand...

Morita-san. He hasn't been around much over the last 25 years but he does send signals from the far beyond. Sometimes with the hand gestures; at other times, with a nod and a wink. I think A7RV was from a wink but am not completely sure.
 
Ken1212 said:
Would you buy a C200?
Click to expand...

Personally, no. Most of my client base has largely moved away from Canon "cine" cameras for their more serious work and even "internet" work. I bought an original C300(still have it) and all of my stills cameras are Canons, because I've always loved Canons color, but as far as "cine" cameras go, they don't generate the calls like an Arri(among other things they can't do like an Arri). That being said, I own about $90K worth of Canon cine glass.
 
morgan_moore said:
The arri is really its own thing. They are indeed mainly useless if you dont have a fully developed 1st a/c swinging focus ND and lenses. And a $10k pack of accessories. But of course when you do they fly high!

a fully built arri!
Click to expand...

No internal ND sucks. But move to the likes of the Amira, mini, miLF, and A35 that all have built-in ND and these cameras are being used in vast numbers (well, maybe not the A35, yet, because there just aren't large numbers in the wild, yet) by single ops in the doc, sports doc, feature piece and corporate worlds.
 
Ken1212 said:
These lower prices are tempting but not sure if I want to invest in EF as I mainly have RF lenses. If there is a nice servo zoom lens that makes sense for conferences at a decent price that might sway me :2vrolijk_08:
Click to expand...

The 17-120 can have a swappable mount system put on it(Abel/IBE collaboration) and it can go from PL to EF (even FZ and N) (I would not buy the lens as native EF, only PL). I've been told there are plans for one for the 25-250(covid and other things threw a monkey wrench into it), but at this point, I probably would not spend the money on it(mount system), as I haven't touched my C300 in a very long time.
 
NorBro said:
I def hear you...the honest answer is you will never be able to use this kind of camera for conferences unless you pay a lot of money.

Affordable big chip servo lenses are the Achilles' heel in the video world and when I used to shoot a lot of conferences there were only two options for me:

(1) Use a camcorder.
(2) Use a regular stills zoom lens when I knew the subject wasn't moving towards me. Meaning he/she was either standing in one place or moving sideways where I didn't have to zoom in and out. (Occasionally I'd push in/out with a traditional wrist flick to change from a MS to a little tighter or wider. Not as smooth as a traditional rocker but not a big deal either.)
Click to expand...

Honestly, large sensor cams are the wrong tools for shooting conferences. 2/3" broadcast cameras with long servo zooms. They are a steal on the used market. So many people try to shoehorn large sensor cams into everything(saw it this past weekend), when there are better tools available. I mean, I love my Amira, but I haven't picked it up all month(Dec). Laughing all the way to the bank with the work I did with my P2 VariCam's and ENG lenses that have been paid off for over a decade.
 
Run&Gun said:
No internal ND sucks. But move to the likes of the Amira, mini, miLF, and A35 that all have built-in ND and these cameras are being used in vast numbers (well, maybe not the A35, yet, because there just aren't large numbers in the wild, yet) by single ops in the doc, sports doc, feature piece and corporate worlds.
Click to expand...

In the UK ive never worked with an arri (or red) without being part of a full crew, first a/c wireless focus. Actually no.. I worked with an american on a Red with no first a/c but never a uk based shoot.

But of course any solo op doc shoots Im not there!

My chum who does some heavy doc work has..
2/3 camera, fs7, A7s (or sommething) on a gimbal

Of course shooting is MF is fine.. especially the old schoolers who know the shots that work and how many takes may be neded.

Int terms of ND the (big) shoots ive been on the first is usually swinging a matte box and to some extent the internal nd is too much of a blunt tool because everyone is pointlessly nerding out over 2/3 of a stop instead of gathering content - they will be choosing from a flight case full of filters!

I noted to a second that the filter was covered in small blobs that looked like sea spray. Part of the look apparently. Best to get back into my box!
 
morgan_moore said:
In the UK ive never worked with an arri (or red) without being part of a full crew, first a/c wireless focus. Actually no.. I worked with an american on a Red with no first a/c but never a uk based shoot.

But of course any solo op doc shoots Im not there!

My chum who does some heavy doc work has..
2/3 camera, fs7, A7s (or sommething) on a gimbal

Of course shooting is MF is fine.. especially the old schoolers who know the shots that work and how many takes may be neded.

Int terms of ND the (big) shoots ive been on the first is usually swinging a matte box and to some extent the internal nd is too much of a blunt tool because everyone is pointlessly nerding out over 2/3 of a stop instead of gathering content - they will be choosing from a flight case full of filters!

I noted to a second that the filter was covered in small blobs that looked like sea spray. Part of the look apparently. Best to get back into my box!
Click to expand...

Granted I don't work in the narrative world, so there is that...., but here in the US, by sheer numbers, I would say that more RED's are operated solo than having an AC. And I can't say for sure with Arri's as they are so dominant in narrative and commercial(probably more in commercial than Arri?), but it draws my attention when I see someone with a mini or miLF that actually has an AC pulling. I was just on a big sporting event this weekend, with two separate "sports film crews" shooting(was asked, but already booked on the broadcast side). I'd have to go back and look at the crew list, but probably 10 Arri's/op's between them and no AC's pulling

I will say that the ND on the Amira does bug the hell out of me. I can't stand the jump from four stops to seven. Way too much of a jump. most of the time. I guess people complained and they took note, because the miLF and A35 have the more traditional ENG/Broadcast camera spacing of 2, 4 & 6 stops.
 
Last edited:
I rarely see them at basketball or baseball games (on TV), but the AMIRAs flood the NFL sidelines. Those guys/gals are using them like regular 2/3 cams. I think some of them might be from the NFL Films dept, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top