Run&Gun
Veteran
They are big in motorsports and college sports, too.
NFL teams(in-house production crews) also shoot on Amira's. So for any given game you'd be likely to see at least two for Films and probably two to three for each team.
Is Canon getting ready to release new cinema camera/s? Big C200 Price reduction
- Thread starter Ken1212
- Start date
They are big in motorsports and college sports, too.
NFL teams(in-house production crews) also shoot on Amira's. So for any given game you'd be likely to see at least two for Films and probably two to three for each team.
Peter C.
Veteran
C200 was put into a strange no man's land by Canon that doomed it. $5,400 for a cine camera with crippled 8 bit codec then they released c70 at the same price with better 10bit codec, smaller form factor, RF mount, better AF, etc. Canon would have to make those fixes to the C200, but be easier to discontinue it. Maybe that was their plan all along because they did the same thing to the C100. I'd imagine it's more profitable at sub 5k price point to repurpose a mirrorless photo camera than to mess with cine body.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
The C200 was one of their best selling cinema cameras of all time. This place was insane when it was announced. It was going head-to-head with the EVA1 and even hardcore FS7 users were taking a good look at it.
This was 2017. And it was closer to $7500, IIRC. (The 'B' was always $1500 or so cheaper.)
C70 was announced 3 years later in 2020 and definitely a nice camera, but if I had to put a number for hype between the two on a scale of 1-10, the C200 had 10 hype and the C70 had 1 hype.
The R5 had 1000 hype.
This was 2017. And it was closer to $7500, IIRC. (The 'B' was always $1500 or so cheaper.)
C70 was announced 3 years later in 2020 and definitely a nice camera, but if I had to put a number for hype between the two on a scale of 1-10, the C200 had 10 hype and the C70 had 1 hype.
The R5 had 1000 hype.
I Love 1" sensor cameras for conference work, that's why I just bought an HC-X2. To me the C200 would be great for interviews but with a nice servo lens it can be great for low light settings. The 17-120 is a great lens for a hefty price at 24k! Honestly I am not sure if high tag super35 lenses is a good investment in 2023. I think Sony will be pushing full frame cinema cameras and Canon will have to follow suit.
Well it has 12 bit Canon RAW to CFast 2.0 cards. You can convert it to 10 bit codecs in post in pretty much any editing or color app.
Peter C.
Veteran
The c70 is the C200 replacement. The c70 has more competition now than when the c200 debuted. Its far more profitable to sell mirror less camera that can be sold both to photographers and videographers. That’s why we have seen all the new cameras and updates concentrated around mirrorless. The c70 is a modified photo camera body. That’s why the R5 ran circles around any Cine camera. Cine cameras have narrow use and limited user base. With the advance of Sony FX line an Black Magics pocket cameras dominance has faded.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
Cheaper stuff will always sell more.
There's no doubt that mirrorless' outsell everything (even because there's like 10x more of them than anything else), but there's a place for cinema cameras as well. A lot of people that you won't ever find on forums or reading news blogs to keep up with the latest and greatest still use cameras like that.
They'll buy one and use it for 5 years, and then usually will buy the next generation of the same model, or the model's competitor, use it for 5 years, etc.
___
One of the best things I learned on this forum, don't remember from who, was reading a post a few years ago about someone describing that he made the investment into an expensive camera, think it was like $15K or something, because that's the kind of camera he wanted for his business.
Specifically an expensive camera. For himself and for his clients.
He understood that the mirrorless' were amazing and had better and more features than his already very depreciated and aging 6-month cinema camera, but he was simply never going to show up to work with a stills camera that shot video.
That was his train of thought and it makes a lot of sense.
There's no doubt that mirrorless' outsell everything (even because there's like 10x more of them than anything else), but there's a place for cinema cameras as well. A lot of people that you won't ever find on forums or reading news blogs to keep up with the latest and greatest still use cameras like that.
They'll buy one and use it for 5 years, and then usually will buy the next generation of the same model, or the model's competitor, use it for 5 years, etc.
___
One of the best things I learned on this forum, don't remember from who, was reading a post a few years ago about someone describing that he made the investment into an expensive camera, think it was like $15K or something, because that's the kind of camera he wanted for his business.
Specifically an expensive camera. For himself and for his clients.
He understood that the mirrorless' were amazing and had better and more features than his already very depreciated and aging 6-month cinema camera, but he was simply never going to show up to work with a stills camera that shot video.
That was his train of thought and it makes a lot of sense.
Peter C.
Veteran
I’m not saying mirror less is better or more professional but their rise in popularity is largely due their flexibility and usefulness to content providers. If you have a youtube channel your clients are your subscribers who watch your content and don’t care what you film with. Cinema cameras will have a place it’s just that growth and innovation in the industry is in large part happening in the mirrorless sector.
Just like large shoulder ENG cameras use to dominate, then camcorders had their day in the sun… Both are still used but they have been in large part been relegated to sitting on the bench.
Just like large shoulder ENG cameras use to dominate, then camcorders had their day in the sun… Both are still used but they have been in large part been relegated to sitting on the bench.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
I mean, I def agree.
The writing was on the wall around 2008-ish.
It was incredibly liberating to use a small camera to shoot video and stills.
This was a very basic concept that has done well for those things called phones.
___
Keep improving those small boxes and making the most of them, 8-10-12 different models per year, and the rest happens naturally, especially when they are affordable for many, and not a $6K-$7K-$8K+ cinema camera.
The writing was on the wall around 2008-ish.
It was incredibly liberating to use a small camera to shoot video and stills.
This was a very basic concept that has done well for those things called phones.
___
Keep improving those small boxes and making the most of them, 8-10-12 different models per year, and the rest happens naturally, especially when they are affordable for many, and not a $6K-$7K-$8K+ cinema camera.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Its odd. when I think ND and xlr audio and a battery that lasts half a day (which I always do).. bulding my r6 (or a phone) to deliver that makes it bigger and more annoying than my c200 stripped to minimum.
I guess it may be kind of about what is being filmed by younger (?) people.. stuff indoors, near power to charge batteries with sound provided by a stock track and no passers by to bash into thier sticky out HDMI lead.
Doing that you dont need the nd and mic that I obsess about.
VLoggers do choose the sony mirrorless as they need a mic.. canon 0 sony 1
The big conferences mentioned above are still best covered by a zoom camcorder..and are. But clearly todays users are not really filming conferences.. they are filming thier dog or thier dinner or thier dogs dinner.
I did some news recently (nurses industrial action).. there was me (c200) a 2/3 crew (itv) and a small sony handycam (bbc!) - not a mirrorless to be seen on this 'proper' job.
I guess it may be kind of about what is being filmed by younger (?) people.. stuff indoors, near power to charge batteries with sound provided by a stock track and no passers by to bash into thier sticky out HDMI lead.
Doing that you dont need the nd and mic that I obsess about.
VLoggers do choose the sony mirrorless as they need a mic.. canon 0 sony 1
The big conferences mentioned above are still best covered by a zoom camcorder..and are. But clearly todays users are not really filming conferences.. they are filming thier dog or thier dinner or thier dogs dinner.
I did some news recently (nurses industrial action).. there was me (c200) a 2/3 crew (itv) and a small sony handycam (bbc!) - not a mirrorless to be seen on this 'proper' job.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Vlogging was happening before it was called that and before Sony even made their first mirrorless, and it was on a Canon with a 50mm at f/1.4 with no AF and a Rode mic...the OG way, lol.
But even before that I actually saw this incredible video from 1989 the other day...this guy invented vlogging, it's really amusing.
But even before that I actually saw this incredible video from 1989 the other day...this guy invented vlogging, it's really amusing.
This is my original point: The C200 can easily be adapted to any situation: ENG/on-shoulder with EVF, gimbal, handheld/run-and-gun. All the audio inputs you need. NDs. Amazing battery life.
The only thing making the workflow difficult is the lack of internal ProRes.
I am rooting for a FX6 competitor with AF on par with the R-series cameras, priced somewhere between C70 and C300 MK III + box form factor, but same modularity as the original C200.
Peter C.
Veteran
Canon had done a disservice to their users. They put out these Cinema cameras then let them languish for years until they are discontinued. They did it with the c100 that had a 4k sensor but would never allow it film 4k, and then they did the same thing to c200 only this time with the codecs.
NorBro
Major Contributor
I'll get on them as much as anyone but have to be realistic as well because these are corporations, not fundraisers for our happiness.
No 4K C100 would ever exist in 2012. You wanted 4K, you had to pay $15K for a 1DC at the very least, and that was considered state-of-the-art and a decent deal.
No 4K C100 would ever exist in 2012. You wanted 4K, you had to pay $15K for a 1DC at the very least, and that was considered state-of-the-art and a decent deal.
Peter C.
Veteran
It was reasonable not offer 4k at the time of the release, I'm saying 10 years later they will not release a firmware update, a send in and service upgrade, or even release an updated newer version of the c100 that includes the ability to film 4k. They are still selling the same camera to this date with no changes. Do you think its unreasonable to update a camera a decade after it's release?
Clermond
Veteran
RF lens mount
NorBro
Major Contributor
I mean, of course it's unreasonable...anyone with any business sense would never operate like that. 10 years later!?
Can it even handle 4K without overheating? Is it built with the right cooling, if necessary?
How about the processing? Software?
I imagine you can't just press a button for a FW update.
___
Do you know the kind of stuff that has happened in the RED world with their cameras? Very large amounts of money were lost by people to say the least because of technological advancements and business philosophy changes.
Or what about ARRI? $70,000 for the Classic and it can't get a [faux] UHD update like the newer models after it?
___
It's easy for us to criticize but we have absolutely no idea what goes into making these cameras.
The hardware, the software, the teams, the parts (RED bluntly told people on their forum that they will not fix old cameras anymore because they don't have access to the parts!).
Life changes and the C100 was a really, really excellent camera for its time. It even had super-sampled HD from the 4K sensor which was one of the world's first.
But you move on...you don't update old products (for the most part) because you can - if you can - or because new ones are better.