Looking for Canon 1Dx mkIII raw video files

There still aren't many cameras which shoot internal RAW (not including Blackmagic or RED), so not sure which ones you're referring to as far as any particular camera sales. Do you have any in mind?

IMO, the best standout would be the C200. It came at a really perfect time.

As mentioned above, there was hype with Blackmagic's CDNG, but their prices would sell the cameras regardless even with the IQ of ProRes at a time when it looked better than 99% of everything else on the market, especially for the money (think 2012-2014).

What else is left? DB went out of business. Random oddballs like the Sigma FP have internal 8-bit 4K CDNG. Not sure how many Kinefinity cameras are out there. Some more new models from Canon. A lot of external RAW if that counts.

Personally, I think the C200 was really the only camera that was rewarded for its RAW marketing.
 
C200 was saved by its RAW ... with no 10 bit codec ... but that RAW is indeed very good.

For me the 1DX III checks a bunch of boxes ... external 10 bit 422 to PR 422HQ no time limit ... Internal 10 bit H265 all-I 422 Clog ... which seems to
edit well in DR Studio ... and when the RAW is sorted ... and I can deal with a frame or two out for the present ... 5.5K internal without the need for an
external recorder to a new but extremely fast media ... assume that the teething issues will be solved at some point. Weather sealed ... robust build ...

Loved the color and BRAW from my P6K ... but the stills button was a disgrace ... worked 20% of the time ... about 2 seconds after you mashed it four or
five times. Otherwise great menus ... but had to record to T5 from a cable without a lock ... as the CFast cards were too limited ... and only one in camera.

My hope is that the R5 will bring a lot of traffic/noise/feedback to Canon which may accelerate their improvement of Cinema Raw Light and the associated
workflow. Should trickle down to the other Cine Cams ...
 
The C200 was saved meaning no one for sure would buy a $8,000 4K 8-bit camera in 2017 (I hope), but the RAW and no 10-bit were of course planned all along.

IMO, Canon is smarter than Sony and Panasonic and they know exactly what they are doing at all times even if it's detrimental to their own business.
 
Re: sales it seems to me that sensational specs move hype and sales. And raw external recording for z6 and s1h. Not that those cameras sold big, but they were marketed big for a feature that few will probably use and before it was available.
 
Sony seems pretty smart with its camera positioning. It's certainly sold a ton. Panasonic not as much, except the GH series which was a big hit. If the S1 had good AF and no-crop 4K60 I would still own it. Loved that camera
 
ahalpert said:
Re: sales it seems to me that sensational specs move hype and sales.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt about that. And it's the main reason you and I got into it a bit today because I'm truly trying to help you just have more understanding...a different view...another camera angle if you will.

And don't think I'm some "know-it-all"...I legit spent a lot money learning the hard way.
 
I guess the western assumption is that chasing big sales numbers, churning the market and going for short-term gains
is a sign of a healthy corporate worldview.

Canon may be willing to lose a few battles as they seek to gain a following not dissimilar to that of Arri ... however the days
of Canon charging unbelievable amounts are pretty much over ... BM and a host of Chinese close are leading a race to the bottom.
Not a bad thing for consumers if the end result is not a lot of Olympus-like deaths.
 
The only Sony cinema camera I've seen anyone use is the FS7. Maybe there were more but I didn't see them. (FX9 is new and times are not the same to know.)

The mirrorless cameras were undeniably a mega-hit but they were also cheap. It's tough to tell the difference when prices affect sales.

And there are other variables like Canon's pull with photography. 1DX Mark II probably sold tons for that purpose, but that couldn't count towards mainly video-related people.
 
NorBro said:
There is no doubt about that. And it's the main reason you and I got into it a bit today because I'm truly trying to help you just have more understanding...a different view...another camera angle if you will.

And don't think I'm some "know-it-all"...I legit spent a lot money learning the hard way.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your input although sometimes it feels a bit condescending. I will not go chasing some dog of a camera just because RAW is slapped on the box. But there are many RAW implementations I've seen in different cameras that I would love to have at my disposal. I would love to have a camera with a full range of codecs (H265, ProRes, REDCODE). Some come close but none do it all.

If I had a Pocket 6K its only codec flaw would be not having something more compressed. I have a couple wedding companies who want me shooting 28Mbps HD lol. (Which is fine for what it is - I tweak the profiles for the scene I'm shooting and give them something good SOOC because they dont wanna grade anyway)
 
Last edited:
Oh, it's definitely condescending when I feel like it's not getting through. LOL :D

The Pocket 6K can shoot 1080p PR Proxy at 36 Mbps, so it would be close.

Actually I always felt like that was a camera you should have tried the way you talked about it, but I know AF isn't there.
 
I'd be happy to try the Pocket 6K. But I can't buy every camera and it doesn't tick enough boxes for me and it wouldn't help me get more work beyond a few things.

The only problem with a ProRes proxy is that I assume you're getting less IQ bang for your Mbps buck. In the sense that a 38Mbps that is tightly compressed and hard for the computer to unpack is probably giving up less detail than ProRes proxy. But sure in theory such a client would accept it. Not sure that blackmagic is on their list of accepted cameras tho
 
NorBro said:
The only Sony cinema camera I've seen anyone use is the FS7. Maybe there were more but I didn't see them. (FX9 is new and times are not the same to know.)

The mirrorless cameras were undeniably a mega-hit but they were also cheap. It's tough to tell the difference when prices affect sales.

And there are other variables like Canon's pull with photography. 1DX Mark II probably sold tons for that purpose, but that couldn't count towards mainly video-related people.
Click to expand...

The FS7 obviously a huge seller. I think the FS5 did super well too.

The A7SII was/is quite popular. The A7R3 has also found many video buyers.

Then you've got the A7III and the A6500 or whatever. Very very popular.

You could argue that they only sell because of the price, but Canon has bodies in that price range. The Canons don't sell as much because of the cropping limitations etc. (Though I see plenty of people on 5Dmk4s and 6Dmk2s but as much as the Sonys)

Fuji XT and Lumix GH are even lower priced. And popular too. But not like the A7 series
 
Ha, I read that video's description, and the shooter said they were surprised at how well ProRes grades. Everyone who wants to grade or change the white balance thinks they need to be shooting raw. ProRes LT is still robust enough for what most people need, imho.
 
ahalpert said:
The FS7 obviously a huge seller. I think the FS5 did super well too.

The A7SII was/is quite popular. The A7R3 has also found many video buyers.

Then you've got the A7III and the A6500 or whatever. Very very popular.

You could argue that they only sell because of the price, but Canon has bodies in that price range. The Canons don't sell as much because of the cropping limitations etc. (Though I see plenty of people on 5Dmk4s and 6Dmk2s but as much as the Sonys)

Fuji XT and Lumix GH are even lower priced. And popular too. But not like the A7 series
Click to expand...

Before you started posting a lot again a few months ago, I don't know if you know but I would always share screenshots of B&H's 'Top Sellers' and 'Best Sellers'...those badges that cameras get. And these were all relatively cheap cameras and most companies had a few on there - but the Canons were ALWAYS on there.

I noticed it a few times and then I was determined to keep track and see if it ever changed. They always sold out.

Now is B&H lying? Is Canon paying them the most money? Is it a glitch? All conspiracies. No facts. No comment. Take it for what it is.

But it would make perfect sense because why would you offer more if what you're already providing year-after-year is enough since people keep buying and buying.

Obviously here we are with the R5 and things may have changed, but just saying...you're not going to offer more when you don't need to, or until you need to.
 
Perhaps Canon has realized that if you do not cannibalize your own product line ... someone else will.

And their long-term development finally gave them processors that could handle a better data stream in camera.
 
NorBro said:
Before you started posting a lot again a few months ago, I don't know if you know but I would always share screenshots of B&H's 'Top Sellers' and 'Best Sellers'...those badges that cameras get. And these were all relatively cheap cameras and most companies had a few on there - but the Canons were ALWAYS on there.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that Canon didn't sell well. Just that Sony does too, perhaps equally well. Those 2 do better than the rest
 
You actually said they don't sell as much as the Sonys...and perhaps most recently they haven't, which is why the R5 for $4000 still makes no sense to me.

Great for us though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top