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

The only thing that has been more of a struggle for everyone in the last 10 years than video dynamic range improvements is HFRs at high-resolutions.

Whether they are limiting them on purpose, I don't know - but the 120p, & even in some cases the 60p, almost never look as good as the lower framerates in cameras.
 
For me 60p without a crop would be ideal. 60 give just enough to slow things down without looking unnatural.
 
Based on Canon’s the newly announced sensors I think we are going to see two new cinema cameras soon. The 4.5K sensor in a C200 MKII for $6K-$7K, and the 5.7K FF global shutter sensor in a C300 MKIV or C400 for $11K+.
 
All this talk of the 500-300 not being a sucess. Its a shame.

Im pretty suprised really as the 500 is basically my dream camera apart from a phantom.

What we have seen is the success of cameras that replicate film (the arri) and not really moved forward the film making process.

I see a footballer (in my head) flying down the wing, being in focus with 400/2.8 DOF and HFR.

Its a shot that the arri cant to, cinematographers dont want.

I started my career on the side of wind chill night football pitches with bad lights and TMZ3200 film and a MF 300 2.8 whose focus was so stiff it'd peel my fingers from the nail.

Football rally car whatever.

Seeing this scene crisp and clear and nice seems like the c500 could deliver.. but no one is really trying for that.

Anc canon to seem to really see what they have or certainly the blogeratti they get to test on launch.
 
Frame rate capabilities go up along with the resolution - bit by bit but always up with each generation. That Ember piece - not yet shipping - can do 4K at 800fps and 4096 x 1728 (2.4) to an internal SSD at over 1000 fps for $18,000. It's a "feature specific" camera for fans of Stanley Matthews, George Best, Paco Gento and alike. A more rounded camera would probably have, as NorBro mention above, a 240 4K but, at a higher tier, might have 360-480.

And, naturally, after watching the footage for 5-10 minutes, boredom sets in and any super slomo would then only evoke deep yawns.

Unlike Stanley Matthews, George Best and Paco Gento.
 
I am pretty pleased with the C500MKII. It would be nice if it had the dual gain sensor of the C300MKIII and global shutter. I'm guessing having the two of them together is impossible so I would pick DGO. I like the fact that you can shoot in full frame, S16, and S35 depending on needs so I doubt I will ever go back to just a S35 camera. It might be nice to have 3:2 sensor and higher frame rates, but it is something I am unlikely to need. Also, an RF mount with easy PL and EF attachments would be nice. All of this sounds like what Canon is planning for the next iteration in a year or two. In general, it seems like Canon has a fairly natural progression in making their cameras more useable and convenient with each generation which is why I have stuck with them. I'm not sure why they seem to get a bad rap. Every time I am stuck using a Sony, Black Magic, or RED, I find all kind of nitpicks to deal with. I guess it is what people get used to.
 
DLD said:
And, naturally, after watching the footage for 5-10 minutes, boredom sets in and any super slomo would then only evoke deep yawns.
.
Click to expand...

5 minutes???? Mate there is 15 seconds or so.. that is instagram .. that is the audience.., that is the money.

HFR is about catching 'the deceisive moment' but really I think its a money makers doing insta of

cocktail shakers, beer pours fashion girls MTBs through a muddy puddle

And AF is pretty required for fast things so MF HFR cameras are a kind of joke (yes Ive shot with the phantom)
 
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...

lol I didn't know "A cameras" had to have AF? Quite the opposite typically.
 
well i think you are all stuck in 1985 and probably gets the wrong eyelash sharp all day every day. never a problem in SD but a problem today.

especially working of 1080 mudge monitors when recording 4k or larger

Thats befrore someone walks or cycles past and you have the 70-200 on them, not to mention GP cars or antelopes or bees.

I think you can tell the good focus pullers .. they people who admit they cant do it beyond a reasonable probablity.

Sure a nice marked rack in a drama has its place :)
 
My first Canon camera was the 70D, once I watched sample tests of auto AF on the 70D I new it's a must have in my arsenal then. If for nothing else it would be a great b-roll camera. Since then AF has been one of the most important features when shopping for a new camera. I can see some higher budget narrative film productions not caring about auto AF but for corporate work, documentaries and and small budget it's a huge asset.
 
sleekmedia said:
lol I didn't know "A cameras" had to have AF? Quite the opposite typically.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I just wrapped a small project using two FX9s and not once did we use auto Focus. We tested it and it was way too unreliable for mission critical shots. It would be crazy to use auto focus for an A cam. The tech still has a very long way to go.
 
Last edited:
A cams definitely do not need AF, but the tech is already there and it's been there...that's just not the right camera to be using for AF.

If you used some of the other Sonys you might think the FX9 is made by someone else, ha.
 
One of the reasons I have stuck with Canon is because I understand how they implement DPAF. It's a tool and you have to understand what it is doing or it will screw you over. Sony has their own automatic phase AF thing going. Now you have Lidar. The most consistent process is to just have an AC with their own follow focus and monitor trying to work their magic and hope they know what they are doing.
On the Canon, I mostly use DPAF in manual focus with the manual focus guides. I've worked with Canon shooters who have no idea the manual focus guides even exist. On the new cameras, you can even set two manual focus guides. For rack focuses or somebody that moves a lot, I will sometimes use the manual focus assist that just locks on when it is close to being in focus. I usually have the focus speed turned way down. On the rare time I use it on interviews, I will have face only but it will sometimes still end up focusing on just the hair or a high contrast background. Even they eye focus will sometimes end up focusing on the background which makes me think the eye focus is mostly just a monitoring icon gimmick. Tap to track requires its own weird settings. Canon just added an interesting feature for their cinema lenses that shows a focus distance guide on the side of the screen and allows you to set focus distance points for a rack focus.
I use continuous AF rarely and most of the time it ends up screwing up the shot. So, I think the continuous AF on a cinema camera is fairly useless, but I find the actual DPAF to be very useful. I'm looking forward to when they get the QPAF implemented.
 
The Canon cinema cameras are another example...I don't know what it is with these companies and their AF cinema systems. I think the FX6 is literally the only usable option.

Logically we'd expect to get the best for the most amount of money but it's the complete opposite (for AF).
 
Come on, Canon... when will the next Cinema camera be announced? CP+ at the end of February? 2025?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top