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

[ahalpert]

First, does anybody actually argue that Arri is more reliable than Canon? That just seems to be an assumption based on price more than experience. From a design standpoint, Canon always seems to be very conservative in features in order to make sure that cameras don't fail. I guess some of the cabling and plastic parts can break easier on a Canon can break easier, but it is a lot cheaper to have backups.
.

I've seen used alexas on ebay that looked like they'd been in an explosion but claimed to be in perfect working order. I'm under the impression that most components have a fixed price. For example, adding an SDI out to monitors or cameras always seemed to add $500 to the retail price, at least in the past. (Obviously less to the cost of manufacture.) So, I would assume that a camera that costs 5x as much could better afford to be built like a tank as long as that's a design priority for the company.

Of course, the Canon 1D series has a reputation for being indestructible. But it was priced at about a 6x multiple of their cheapest slrs.

In terms of having backups, when you're shooting live events I would think that not failing in the first place is a prime consideration, depending on the type of event and coverage you're doing

 

[DLD]

Personally, i dont even watch sports. I would think that shallow DOF is not that desirable when you're trying to follow the action in a game. And also that when you zoom way in on a 2/3 camera, your DOF is relatively shallow anyway (if you're wide open).

Shallow DoF is becoming a norm on the post-goal/post-touchdown celebrations, when the camera operator can safely walk onto the pitch/field and be within a close physical proximity to the players involved. It's done for the visual effect of seeing things in a "cinematic" mode. It doesn't need to be done like this but it's caught on across the globe. It can be annoying too.

As to the AF, the current generation stills/video hybrids ought to be able to distinguish both the human and the animal eyes without flinching. Contrast-Detect only cameras tend to pulse and lose its AF completely in low light. LiDAR doesn't care about light but it's only used on smartphones and a Ronin own gimbal/external AF contraption. A Phase-Detect and some additional programming (often called by the most modern of all buzzwords - it's a Chat GPT AF!) tends to nail the majority of its shots.

Auto racing and golf are generally covered by the 2/3" broadcasting cameras where everything is in focus. Flying - and occasionally rolling - golf balls can also be accompanied by the separate graphics track, much like in the NHL of the 1990s, where a puck was tracked by the nascent computer aided technology.

From the technological POV, the above can be done on any camera. It costs money, that's all.

 

[morgan_moore]

i think when using a super telephoto on 2/3 'everything is in focus' is very far from the truth.

 

[Peter C.]

What's tickle mode?

There's a feather attachment that tickles you. It keeps you in a good mood for those long shoots but I once messed up an important take when it caused me to giggle.

 

[ahalpert]

i think when using a super telephoto on 2/3 'everything is in focus' is very far from the truth.

Maybe you're right. Even at f/16 focused at 100' on a 400mm on a 2/3" camera, online dof calculator claims you only have 12.7' DOF. But drop that to 200mm and you have 54' DOF.

Maybe i have a point as well. 200mm in 2/3" has FOV of 900mm full-frame. And in broad daylight, they can choose their aperture. 54' DOF is a lot. And they probably have a rough estimate of the distance the ball will land at. Don't they typically zoom in over the course of the flight and end at full zoom on the landing? Honestly, it's the operating and following the ball that impresses me more than the focus-pulling in that case.

Here's 2/3 HD ENG lens lineup:

 

[Tom Roper]

As far as AF, I feel like it is more of a tool than a crutch if used correctly. Canon has slowly added a number of different AF tools, but you have to practice with them to figure out what works best.

MF requires your continuous attention, sometimes not. AF requires planning and setup considerations, to put it in the right mode, to operate within situational limits. That takes your attention too. Self driving autos can keep it in the lane but do you trust it to make better decisions? Sometimes it may seem there is no alternative to AF, such as when setting an unmanned camera angle to track the bride's walk up the aisle, or you may be shooting on a gimbal. Is AF always the right decision? If you think so, then I think you are unqualified. Focus to a distance, stop down to broaden DOF. Most viewers will find that not distracting for video, than AF not planned and executed perfectly.

 

[DLD]

Don't they typically zoom in over the course of the flight and end at full zoom on the landing? Honestly, it's the operating and following the ball that impresses me more than the focus-pulling in that case...

A) No one can tell if the ball is in focus while it's in the air.

B) It's impossible to keep it in focus due to speed (~ 170mph) and the size of the golf ball.

C) This is why the networks use a superimposed colored tracker to follow the ball.

D) This is why they will focus on a player's face and his frantic arm waving.

E) This is why they show the ball when it stops rolling.

F) They will also show a track on some putts if they have to pull out due to the ball location and the camera placement. On large greens, it's very difficult to even spot a stationary ball. It's also difficult to spot a hole without a flag inserted in it. And the above speaks poorly of the US cable systems ability to keep up with the technological developments. 720 60p smacks of 2005.

PS. NBC doesn't even show their YouTube EPL highlights in 4K, despite having the footage. Apple+, having just picked up the streaming rights for MLS, shows its highlights in 1080 60p, with a noticeable improvement in detail.

And don't get me started on the camera placement.

 

[morgan_moore]

scary skills on YT

 

[ahalpert]

scary skills on YT

some of that is motion blur?

 

[Andy9]

A) No one can tell if the ball is in focus while it's in the air.

B) It's impossible to keep it in focus due to speed (~ 170mph) and the size of the golf ball.

C) This is why the networks use a superimposed colored tracker to follow the ball.

D) This is why they will focus on a player's face and his frantic arm waving.

E) This is why they show the ball when it stops rolling.

F) They will also show a track on some putts if they have to pull out due to the ball location and the camera placement. On large greens, it's very difficult to even spot a stationary ball. It's also difficult to spot a hole without a flag inserted in it. And the above speaks poorly of the US cable systems ability to keep up with the technological developments. 720 60p smacks of 2005.

PS. NBC doesn't even show their YouTube EPL highlights in 4K, despite having the footage. Apple+, having just picked up the streaming rights for MLS, shows its highlights in 1080 60p, with a noticeable improvement in detail.

And don't get me started on the camera placement.

The obvious (and popular) solution to all of these problems is to neither film nor watch golf.

f/8 and don't be there

 

[DLD]

The obvious (and popular) solution to all of these problems is to neither film nor watch golf.

f/8 and don't be there

Golf coverage would really benefit from a drone presence but, with so many spectators and the actual participants in tight spaces, the US networks are generally content with the overhead shots being taken from a blimp. "When I was on the seventeenth hole, it was a very good year".

 

[DLD]

The CBS golf coverage also got those shallow DoF shots ... when following players from hole to hole or into the clubhouse. Since the golfers generally do not jump around much, it looks all right. Once the player they were targeting (Scheffler) stepped behind his playing partner and the camera immediately lost track of Scheffler by going out of focus. But once the camera operator walked around to get the direct view, the focus almost immediately returned.

 

[ahalpert]

The CBS golf coverage also got those shallow DoF shots ... when following players from hole to hole or into the clubhouse. Since the golfers generally do not jump around much, it looks all right. Once the player they were targeting (Scheffler) stepped behind his playing partner and the camera immediately lost track of Scheffler by going out of focus. But once the camera operator walked around to get the direct view, the focus almost immediately returned.

That sounds a bit like the NFL touchdown celebration coverage. It's not actual game play, where I don't think shallow DOF is necessarily even desirable. But it's a bit of stylistic punctuation and the shallow DOF adds to the cinematic heroic depiction

 

[QuickHitRecord]

For a limited time, the C200B is available for $1999.

 

[norway]

For a limited time, the C200B is available for $1999.

Wow, 50% off...!

 

[Peter C.]

If I hadn't spent my money on another system I would buy two and put one under my bed for safe keeping. Canon cripple hammered that camera so well they pushed it out of existence in record time. Congrats!

 

[morgan_moore]

Im not sure how it is crippled .. raw.? . its no worse than H265 on the computer.

Yes the AF is a bit dated but thats not a hammer.

 

[Peter C.]

Im not sure how it is crippled .. raw.? . its no worse than H265 on the computer.

Yes the AF is a bit dated but thats not a hammer.

Too many cripples to list

Whether you can make do is different than whether it delivers what cinema pros would demand.

 

[NorBro]

If I hadn't spent my money on another system I would buy two and put one under my bed for safe keeping. Canon cripple hammered that camera so well they pushed it out of existence in record time. Congrats!

Definitely one of the sillier things you've said on this forum and it's obvious you've never been in the same room as the camera.

Crimson Engine loves the system (as he said in the first few seconds) and is just nitpicking/creating content for this channel. Some I would def agree with, some not and are his opinions on things.

___

C200 was one of Canon's best selling creations and was an absolute beast in 2017. Anyone and everyone had it or was still loyal to the FS7.

It's been almost 7 years; many cameras were completely discontinued and done, never heard of again after 3-4.