New Cinema EOS camera announcement

I disagree. The only reason the EF mount would work for cinema use is thanks to lenses like the CP.2's which have EF mounts on them. That and the CN-E lenses that Canon has developed. Still glass is universally accepted to be less than ideal for cinema use, and until all manufacturers come out with high quality EF mount cinema glass, I see no reason to make it an exclusively EF mount camera. Especially when this is in their "Cinema" line of cameras. Cinema cameras, by default, implies cinema lenses, which are mostly PL mount lenses.

Also, why would cinema glass need AF confirm? I don't see why they need any form of electronic control. The advantage of cine glass is the increased control, and the fact that everything is done manually right now means that there is no need for any electronic control.

To bring this back on topic, I hope that Canon makes both EF and PL mounts available for this camera. It's not going to damage their sales. In fact, it opens them to a wider market, which should essentially increase the opportunity for sales.

Also, I'm not 100% sure about the details so far, but am I right in saying that right now this is likely to be a 4K camera shooting MJPEG with an APS-H sized crop?
 
What I expect is a downgraded version of the C300. In other words, something like Canon's answer to the FS100, let's say the C100. I think this is the kind camera that has more sense right now, not the 4K DSLR.

C300 sensor, AVCHD, 1080/60p (?), EF-only mount, HDMI 4:2:2 8 bits output, autoexposure, no built-in EVF, plastic body.

We'll see.
 
corderouge said:
I disagree. The only reason the EF mount would work for cinema use is thanks to lenses like the CP.2's which have EF mounts on them. That and the CN-E lenses that Canon has developed. Still glass is universally accepted to be less than ideal for cinema use, and until all manufacturers come out with high quality EF mount cinema glass, I see no reason to make it an exclusively EF mount camera. Especially when this is in their "Cinema" line of cameras. Cinema cameras, by default, implies cinema lenses, which are mostly PL mount lenses.

Also, why would cinema glass need AF confirm? I don't see why they need any form of electronic control. The advantage of cine glass is the increased control, and the fact that everything is done manually right now means that there is no need for any electronic control.
Click to expand...

Canon have already announced EF mount cine primes and EF mount cine zooms. LINK
Plus I'm an idealist and I like to believe that technology will evolve - I would like to believe that cine zoom lenses can one day have servo motors in them just like a still lens for one touch focus. At the very least to carry meta data back to the camera.
 
I did see the cine lenses that Canon has announced. I just think that they woud alienate the market that already owns PL lenses, but find the specs of this camera perfect, save for the fact that it doesn't offer a PL mount.

The way I see it, Canon knows that a PL mount option is possible on a Canon DSLR, as converted by Hot Rod Cameras, and undoubtedly a few other companies. They know it's possible. Plus, the C300, their first Cinema EOS camera offers both options. I see no reason why they wouldn't continue providing that option on this camera.

Also, in response to Carlos - That does make sense, but I feel that they wouldn't mention the 4K DSLR at the Paramount event and then announce a completely different camera in April. Perhaps they might call the 4K DSLR the mid-level between the 5D and the C300, with the added feature of 4K (which, to be honest, has been ridiculously over-marketed, not only with RED and the Sony F65 but also the fact that the C300 uses a 4K sensor...
 
If it comes PL mount then its going to be more expensive than EF.
PL mount means no mirror because of the flange distance, which means it needs an EVF
 
yoclay said:
Currently at a Canon camera event in Paris. Have used the new 5d and the image is MUCH better. Notably the absence of rolling shutter. Much more solid piece of kit as well than 5D2.

In any case the Canon rep just confirmed to me that it is indeed the 4K camera which will be unveiled on the 15th of April.
Click to expand...

yoclay, what exactly did the Canon rep say to you?
 
Of course, the PL will be slightly more expensive, but not by much. As for the lack of a mirror - that's only used for stills. If this is truly going to be advertised as a "cinema" camera, they don't need to bother with a mirror. Also, way back when the C300 was announced, EOSHD posted that he received information from a Canon rep that it was a mirrorless DSLR, so there's a chance that there's some truth in that claim.
 
Why make a Cinema camera in a DSLR body without the ability to take stills? They would be better off making a C300 shaped 4K shooter and let the DSLR cameras stay with 1080p recording. There's limits to how far you can push a DSLR into a video camera and preserve the still functions and a high end DSLR without mirror wont please still shooters.

Looking at the Canon lineup the C300 is a video camera and the DSLR cameras are photo cameras. Both aimed to make the best out of each duty.
 
Yes, I agree that the form factor is clearly suited to stills, but if it's a "cinema" camera, and they have announced that it is a 4K DSLR, then it is a cinema camera primarily, and so stills then becomes the afterthought. Just like how the 5D was never intended to be used for video production on any serious scale, and stills always took priority, I see any cinema camera, regardless of form factor, as a motion picture camera first and foremost, and a still camera second.

I understand that Canon may not agree, and may not do that, but that's my reasoning. It also brings in the potential for an EVF, not unlike the GH2...
 
Maybe stills will just be grabbed from the video stream. That way, they don't need to add any high end still features.
 
corderouge said:
I did see the cine lenses that Canon has announced. I just think that they woud alienate the market that already owns PL lenses, but find the specs of this camera perfect, save for the fact that it doesn't offer a PL mount.

The way I see it, Canon knows that a PL mount option is possible on a Canon DSLR, as converted by Hot Rod Cameras, and undoubtedly a few other companies. They know it's possible. Plus, the C300, their first Cinema EOS camera offers both options. I see no reason why they wouldn't continue providing that option on this camera.

Also, in response to Carlos - That does make sense, but I feel that they wouldn't mention the 4K DSLR at the Paramount event and then announce a completely different camera in April. Perhaps they might call the 4K DSLR the mid-level between the 5D and the C300, with the added feature of 4K (which, to be honest, has been ridiculously over-marketed, not only with RED and the Sony F65 but also the fact that the C300 uses a 4K sensor...
Click to expand...

I think the simple reason is that Canon is above all a lens company. Nikon and Canon are the same, they make a lot of their profit on lens. They know the importance of lens investement and eco system. They have sold a ton more of their L lens to the video guy and companies that have invested in the 5d and below dslr. So they are not going open up even if it is written cinema.

This camera is perfect for them in that sense because it start with an unconventional form factor (dslr) so it is not a proper... traditional video camera and don't have to fit to any standard. In fact it is a new segment/market for people like me, who just want the continuation of the first HDslr revolution. That is the best quality video for the lowest price possible. I am no event shooter so I don't need the flexibility of a full featured camera. I already have a a rig, external monitor etc... so I don't need these function even if it would be better to have them.
 
Last edited:
Stills from a video stream would be no good at this level, you'd be better off with a 5DIII *as well*, which rather defeats the object, which I see as an image aquisition unit with sound secondary, perhaps only a referance track to help syncing up double system.

So even if it does have an EVF it will still take 18-or-so MP raw stills, assuming, as Canon said in Nov, that it was based on the 1DX.

But we don't actually know anythis as yet, even whether the 15th of April is even an anouncement about a camera, it could be a film-festival sort of screening.
 
Razz16mm said:
I know still shooters love them, but mirror reflex systems are an anachronism on a digital camera. They are rapidly becoming obsolete with the latest gen small high resolution OLED screens and an EVF gives a more useful indication of what the sensor actually sees.
Click to expand...

I agree and said as much before. And oddly, i lost interest in mirrors when i made "The Transition" in 2004. Now a flip out EVF would be nice. The flat up against the back is silly and has kept me away from DSLRs, ever since they came out. Get the 'R' our of DSLR please.
 
Jay Birch said:
Maybe stills will just be grabbed from the video stream. That way, they don't need to add any high end still features.
Click to expand...

yes. see the grabs RED has been posting that are allegedly published spreads and mag covers? Gorgeous! but... you need RAW for a still grab.
 
corderouge said:
It also brings in the potential for an EVF, not unlike the GH2...
Click to expand...
I think they've had some time to evaluate the success of the GH2 as a filmmaker's tool first and foremost.
All the hacks have certainly solidified its position as the go-to camera, even over a 5D.
I've been hoping for a mirrorless competitor to come from Canon in a solid professional form-factor.
 
If the camera shoots 4k jpeg files, you could extract 8Mp stills comparable to JPEG still capture. Still not raw though.
 
well. I just got back from looking at the much Ballyhooed April Vogue cover that i cited before. Not impressed. I need for jared to call out the specs for the video stream grab because it would not work for me. Just leaving through the rest of the Issue you can easily tell the images that were taken with the digital Hasselblad (amazing detail) versus the Epic grabs. I'm not dissapointed as my point and shot can do better than that and all i care about is the video. but now i'm clear. you can't expect a grab from the stream to match a dedicated still capture.
 
Can we really expect 4k from this thing? Wouldn't that seriously hurt the C300, which is only capable of 1080p? Even if the image is better out of that camera, people are obsessed with resolution with these things. And what would be the price point of such a camera? Even if you stripped out a bunch of features and made it a bare bones unit, it doesn't seem like this would be anywhere near the range of the FS100.
 
Danielvilliers said:
I think the simple reason is that Canon is above all a lens company. Nikon and Canon are the same, they make a lot of their profit on lens. They know the importance of lens investement and eco system. They have sold a ton more of their L lens to the video guy and companies that have invested in the 5d and below dslr. So they are not going open up even if it is written cinema.
Click to expand...

The entire consumer business unit generated under 40% of Canon's revenue in 2010 (source: canon's 2010 annual report). That business unit includes inkjet printers, compact digital cameras, scanners, broadcast equipment, printer perpherals (ink/toner, paper, etc), camcorders, DSLRs and lenses. Canon is a $50B (annual revenue) company.

Nikon is a $11B company. According to its 2011 annual report, it's imaging business unit drove more than $7B of that revenue.

So Nikon is a lens company and Canon is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top