open letter to CANON: A new strategy

VGurcu said:
Why does a logical person let the sentiment take the best of him?
People didnt/doesnt help Canon. If anything Canon helped millions by providing tools that they hadnt access at that price point before.
Canon doesnt step over anybody, VDSLR segment going strong more than ever.
There is no 'walking into Hollywood' either, not with these specs and in the presence of Epic & Alexa...
Click to expand...

Contrary to what you may think...like it or not, yes the consumer DID help canon be in the place they are now with that "mistake" of the 5d. And yes Canon did help the average man make dreams and visions a reality. its a 2 way street. And i do agree there aren't stepping into Hollywood with this thing
 
I have to head out the door RIGHT now :) If someone wants to do that, I am fine with that, or, tomorrow I can do that. Or, the OP can edit his first post and put it in there.
Click to expand...
Done pls check the first page...
 
Rick Burnett said:
The biggest problem is, without Canon telling us, we cannot know. The cost of their sensor alone has so many variables [...]

The basis on cost has come from a variety of comments from people both here, Red User, and through lots of google searches. I wanted to get a good cross section of what people's perceived value was on the camera. Some people think $14k is a good price, some people believe $5k should be the price. Cameras like the F3 and it's features pull the price upwards. Cameras like the AF/FS pull the price downwards.
Click to expand...

Good points. We don't know how much it cost to make, so we can't argue on a cost basis. We can only argue based on the price of competing cameras. The F3 is clearly the closest to the C300 in abilities and (speculation here) image quality. It was mentioned that the F3 has a stop more dynamic range, and on the other hand the C300's higher bitrate is broadcast acceptable and it may be better in lowlight at extreme ISOs. So I can see an argument for pricing the C300 close to the F3.

I don't see the argument for pricing it around $5000-$6000. We're not howling about the F3's pricing, and you can't say the C300 is half the camera the F3 is. People want a $5000-$6000 solution. This simply isn't it. What would you have to remove from this camera to make it so? Take out the ND filter like the FS100? Have difficult compression artifacts and noise in the blacks like the AF100? I wouldn't want the camera then. This is a better camera than that, a substantial move up from a DSLR in features and abilities, and the price is going to reflect that.

I signed the petition and can only hope that Canon crunches the numbers again and decides that undercutting the F3 price is worth it. Canon could repeat the success Sony had with the EX3 - a mid-price camera (roughly the $8000-$12,000 range) that doesn't do everything (4K, 4:4:4 out, shoot to ProRes, etc.) but pros can rely on it for great quality, and yet it's still within reach for those on a budget. I think that's the real sweet spot.
 
I haven't read the whole thread but I have two points to add. One, this immediately frees up my nex-5n purchase ! ha ....it's funny that I'd want the nex5n over anything canon can offer at this moment, even though I'm sitting on 8 eos lenses ! And two, after all the hoopla, the absolute unbelievable conundrum is that Scarlet X autofocuses eos lenses and Canon's own "professional camera " doesn't ! I think that little detail puts it all into perspective for me. Truthfully I would still purchase a fs100 over this camera at the end of the day....and then save 15k for my next two, or three cameras !!
 
kurth said:
the absolute unbelievable conundrum is that Scarlet X autofocuses eos lenses and Canon's own "professional camera " doesn't !
Click to expand...

I never use auto-focus, so I don't really care, but yeah, that's stupid. What would be a huge issue for me is if the IS on Canon lenses doesn't work on the C300. I already emailed Canon asking them and am waiting for a response. Should arrive by February. ;-)
 
I think that there are two state for the pricing of these camera. You had the before and then the after Scarlet-X announcement. Before I would say a realistic price would be between $ 10K and $ 13K. Just below the F3, which with the s-log update about $ 16 500, has superior spec, like 444 output, about 2 stop more Dr even auto-focus with some zoom that will make it also an eng capable cam. In fact it is really the baby Alexa.

Now after the Scarlet-X announcement and price point, I don't see even the F3 not being heavily discounted. If red does not have supply issues I can't find the F3 including the S-log above S 10/12 K. The C300 would sell only where it should have been from the start at about $ 8000. Unfortunately I don't see Canon reducing the price drastically, for such a company it would be like loosing Face. The answer might come from the video DSLR they are planning. The C300 might even be sacrificed in terms of the dslr cannibilizing its own sale because of its price performance value, just for them not to loose face. They will sponsor some shows and film to try to boost it recognition and might sell at discount price to some TV producers that don't need or want 4k for their tv series. If their is any change it will be subtle. But it is good to do petition etc because they might understand the error in price point vs features and technology.

This episode looks a lot about the Final cut X debacle. A company that has got a following and screws up all its loyal user base who have invested time and money into a product. So the more vocal the protest might be, the better it is. So the next time (for example the Canon 4k Dslr) they will be much more careful about their user base.
 
Well I will say that it is certainly a symbiotic relationship between Canon and the VDSLR segment. If Canon hadn't released the technology, we wouldn't have had it to begin with. But, even in their own words, it was never meant to be used as it has been used. Most of us aren't journalists looking to get a 30 second video clip in the field.

Instead, as word and examples got around of what people could do with Canon VDSLR cameras, people who I know that normally shot on traditional video cameras with or without 35mm options began moving in droves over to Canon. In fact, I STILL see buying them who are getting into narrative filmmaking. We still use our 7D's over the FS100 when we are in situations where a small camera makes more sense, or multicamera since we have one FS100 (mine) and 2 7Ds. I moved to Sony while waiting for Canon to make something better, as the FS100, outside of size, is vastly superior to my 7D.

Canon is going to do whatever they want to do, I mean, they haven't existed for this long without making good and bad decisions and recovering or gaining from them. It just baffles me that I haven't seen anything said to support those who so much enjoy using their VDSLR products and really do want to move to a camera that is more capable. Not just a $17k to $19k jump which is unreasonable and clearly not the target market of the VDSLR base.

People compare this to Red and the Scarlet 3K for $3K carrot, but at the same time, these people were not invested in Red physically, only in heart. Same with the 2/3 market. Sure, Red has alienated a bunch of people who wanted to get into their technology, but those people hadn't been customers yet. Not the same.

And certainly, I guess the historic part was 'entering hollywood'.

The point of this petition is not just the actual cost, it's more about the disappointment in Canon at least from me and last time I checked 19 more people. I had a meeting this weekend with the rest of the crew I work with and they too are very disappointed. There is some fleeting interest in this unknown camera which many believe will be like a 5D with video as the primary focus. And there is the 1D which, while definitely not as ideal, is something we will wait and see how it performs. I just want Canon processing with less moire/rolling shutter, XLR, and some tools like zebra/waveform/histogram.

We are also considering the Scarlet-X. For now it's still out of our price range, but, we are working on that as well. Between the F3 and the Scarlet-X at a price point of $15k let's say, I just can't see spending that much on the F3 if the Scarlet-X is really as good as the Epic in terms of the sensor (I am WELL aware of all the limitations in framerate per resolution). I've downloaded plenty of Epic footage and studied it heavily.

Nevertheless, not to be so crude, but this is a "Put up or shut up situation". All the complaining I've read online since Nov 3rd, I want to see how many people would consider the camera if it were $10k (which I still think is realistic) compared to $20k which I do not. So far, 20 people total really tells Canon that maybe they aren't missing out on that many sales. I am sure there are people who think $10k is out of their range, but $5k to me for that camera and what I see in the videos that have been posted so far, and considering the Scarlet-X and F3, is highly unrealistic from my viewpoint. It's an opinion still as well. Maybe many people have just gone to Scarlet-X now and aren't looking back. There are certainly a high number of pre-orders being talking about on reduser.net. Maybe some people are so upset, they are just not looking at their computer for the weekend. :)

In any case, thanks for participating, and of course, coming up with the idea. It's a reality check, one I may or may not like.
 
Thanks for putting out that open letter, Rick. I think the chatter here and across the web on the general disappointment in the price will be enough to at least catch the eye of Canon and force them to discuss it internally. I imagine pre-orders at BH and other places will start in the next few weeks, so we'll see then what effect these discussions have had.
 
Interesting reading. I do question the "Canon owes us and didn't come through" sense I get from some posts, and the suggestion that we "tell everyone not to buy it". The market will speak far louder than any petition; when the market has spoken, petitions and letters may help Canon "translate" just what it is the market is saying. But if someone has looked at the specs and decided "this is exactly the camera for me", let 'em buy the damn thing and tell 'em congrats.

Personally, I just don't see what the market for this camera is, especially with the final-nail-in-the-coffin of no overcrank frame rates. (I understand there's no 60p, right?).

I'd still feel that way even if Red hadn't announced on the same day... and I get it that some people feel Red is overhyped as a company and others feel the footage is overhyped as "true cinema" footage - but in my opinion, the new Scarlet blows the Canon away on all fronts. Good lord, what would shooting at 100+fps open for you in commercials, action scenes, effects and high-end artsy shots? Over on RedUser there seems to be a fair amount of disappointment, but if you're in the $10-$20k market, it seems like a hell of a contender, and Red says full-stock, no backorders by February.

Yes yes yes, there is definitely a gaping hole in the market to be filled by a $3-$6k camera. My shot at MINIMUM specs? Here goes (and we all post these lists, but I think this would fill a gap in the market, not just my own wishlist). Holes in the market are where fortunes are made and industries created:

Min. 1080p, up to 60FPS. 2K @ 24/30fps and 1080 @ 60fps might make engineering sense;
Variable frame rate (not just 24/30/60)
APS or full frame sensor; perhaps full frame 1080, APS crop-sensor for 2K and 1080 at high frame rates - a lot of the market was "raised on APS", right?;
No skew or Moire issues;
A card-friendly codec with great compression & high bit rate;
Uncompressed out for external recorders (or 4.4.4, give us something here) HDMI is fine at this price point;
Stereo balanced ins (hell, not even XLR if need be - give me 2 balanced channels with soft limiting and manual controls);
TWO HDMI outs with independent control of data display (one's for external recorders) that's a little much, but hey...;
A useable, pref. wireless remote interface for start/stop, iris, focus and zoom at the minimum;
Nikon and EOS mounting choices;
WFM, zebras, and audio monitoring;

I'm sure we could add to that list, but I'm talking minimum specs - would you pay $6k for the above? I sure would. And my guess is that could all be crammed into a DSLR-sized body, or a purpose-built body without still features (no mirror or shutter, hell, no viewfinder - keep in mind the market already has loupes, ND, etc).

Create that and give it AF, full auto, and a well designed audio limiting system, and you would negate the need for many to have an HMC150/Sony or "real video" camera as well.

I am completely, dumbfoundedly AMAZED that a camera as described does not exist yet. AMAZED that this long into the "DSLR revolution" we don't have something like this at a "step up" price people could actually aspire to and work hard towards (and that bigger operators wouldn't think twice about buying two of).

I feel like that's what we were all expecting November third.
 
It ultimately depends on the image performance of the camera, but I just think it is too expensive compared to the F3.
 
How about a petition to release the 5D3 with no aliasing, moire and a clean HDMI signal? Now that would have been bigger news than this camera.
 
Hey all! Haven't been around for a while but.... wow! Canon gets everyone excited, then wham! $20,000!!!! For that....hmmm, one could buy an AF100 , an FS100, a couple of go pros, a 5DMK2, a GH2, and an AC160. I know it's a bit ludicrous to put it like that....but it also reveals the misfire of Canon's pricing here. Now of course we haven't seen exact tests to see how it performs, but still.....very underwhelmed so far.
 
Definitely all good points. What I've written is not a one size fits all, and camera prices aren't some linear sliding window that is easy to peer into. I am a very highly technical person, as I've stated, I help design CMOS circuits myself, from the inexpensive to the very expensive. While this really means nothing in terms of Canon, who I've never worked with, I have worked with a HUGE segment of other camera companies over the years. If anything, it at least gives me visuals into the R&D across a wide spectrum, which I do not think is unreasonable.

I'll give you a perfect example of something that could drive this price. What if Canon cannot make enough of these new sensors? What if they realize if they tried to make the quantity that might sell at $10k or $5k that the orders would overwhelm them and people would even be more upset with them that they then had a product they couldn't deliver (how many times had Red been yelled at for that by many).

Also, the C300 hasn't passed FCC inspection yet, as listed in a footnote on the site. There is nothing saying it will be released when they said if the FCC finds something they do not like. Still lots of variables. Even with the Scarlet-X, I bet you many people don't believe it will ship when Jim says, it might be close, but just looking at the track record, things happen.

Just from a global cursory viewpoint it looks to compete with the F3. After all I have read, all I have seen, it just makes sense to me. Look we have a better codec than the F3, look we are smaller than the F3, look we have a log option built in. It just makes sense that this was their target. Now that said, I don't understand how some of the specs are worse than the F3 yet it is priced more than the F3. I still haven't seen confirmation that the SDI out is 10-bit. I see the internal codec is 8-bit which makes NO sense to me. What good is using log internally if you are still stuck with 256 levels? Log makes sense to me when you have a large enough container that you aren't going to be quantizing away information that you will later crush/expand in post. This is why people who shoot to 8-bit try and get as much of the look they want in camera. So they don't have to watch gradients posterize in the clouds as they just tweak the colors a touch. If internally it was 10-bit, well, that would be a big step up compared to the F3, although not to the Scarlet-X.

I would never tell someone not to buy the C300, I would just tell people to evaluate what is out there. I've talked with quite a few people after the 3rd that just don't understand the pricing of this camera. And not just random people either, but professionals that are well known on their own blogs are scratching their heads as well.

I don't think Canon actually "owes" me anything, but at the same time, as a customer of theirs, I'd like to think they'd see my usage of their products as something they'd like to continue with. I like their engineering, I like their past products, I wanted to continue with them, but now I don't have a roadmap from them that includes me in it. I get the feeling from a lot of people that most of them are just unclear of exactly Canon is wanting to accomplish.

if I were Canon, I'd at least try to give people an idea of where they are going for people that have VDSLR as their starting point. You can't tell me it feels like Canon just isn't taking the non-hollywood shooter into consideration. If they did, they'd have had something more to talk about for those that can't spend $20k on a camera.

And maybe they are just being tight lipped to sell a bunch of C300s to those than can afford it, THEN releasing something that is cheaper for the rest of us. It's not uncommon for that to happen; F3 then FS100, Epic then Scarlet-X.

And I definitely don't think the Scarlet-X is perfect either. There are certainly other issues to think of in that flow. If I shoot 60p I have to shoot a windowed sensor (I believe is 2K) or higher than that even smaller. It's also MUCH heavier (5lbs just for the brain). It probably will not work as well in low light, pertaining to the reports about the Epic and low light, and I do have to take into consideration transcoding time as well for my editor as he will not work in redraw, I can tell you that.

What is really annoying for me is not having EF lens support native in a camera. The FS100 does a great job shooting, as did my AF100. However, I don't like panasonic lenses and I DEFINITELY do not like Sony lenses. I really don't want to buy all new lenses as I also like the freedom to use them on my stills camera as well (7D). Given the fact that Birger just can't seem to get their product out the door for even the AF100, and that Red Rock has told me they haven't planned on building a mount for the FS100 yet (that could change), I'm really stuck.

In any case, for all participating, thanks so much. Get the word out. Even if nothing happens from Canon, at least we can see how many people think the cost of the camera per features seems unreasonable. Maybe this will interest other manufacturers.
 
Rick Burnett said:
What good is using log internally if you are still stuck with 256 levels? Log makes sense to me when you have a large enough container that you aren't going to be quantizing away information that you will later crush/expand in post. This is why people who shoot to 8-bit try and get as much of the look they want in camera. So they don't have to watch gradients posterize in the clouds as they just tweak the colors a touch.
Click to expand...

One strange thing is that by using Neatvideo with an 8-bit file in a 32bit project will get rid of all of those posterizations. It automatically fills in the 32-bit space from the 8-bit file. When you then apply levels that would cause posterization, will suddenly not do so. It's a miracle to all of those cloud posterization things. Neatvideo is used to get rid of noise but it also works in translating 8-bit material to 32-bit pretty darn well.
 
if I were Canon, I'd at least try to give people an idea of where they are going for people that have VDSLR as their starting point.
Click to expand...

I thought they did it with this:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about...etail&docId=0901e024803cf0aa&WT.mc_id=C126149
I am not sure if there is another incremental camera development in the history of digital imaging (in terms of providing options for budget & features in such a short time) like VDSLR's; T2i, T3i, 60D, 7D, 5dMark2, 1Dx, now this concept C DSLR that will sit between 1Dx and 5dmark2.

In any case, for all participating, thanks so much. Get the word out. Even if nothing happens from Canon, at least we can see how many people think the cost of the camera per features seems unreasonable. Maybe this will interest other manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
Last edited:
maarek said:
One strange thing is that by using Neatvideo with an 8-bit file in a 32bit project will get rid of all of those posterizations. It automatically fills in the 32-bit space from the 8-bit file. When you then apply levels that would cause posterization, will suddenly not do so. It's a miracle to all of those cloud posterization things. Neatvideo is used to get rid of noise but it also works in translating 8-bit material to 32-bit pretty darn well.
Click to expand...

I've actually used neat video and I will say, it is a really good tool. The problem I have with it is you do sacrifice resolution for noise reduction. Not every small step in color will be caused by posterization. For a camera that is shooting lower resolution already then your current resolution, say with the FS100 or AF100, then you've got some room to work with. What I would be concerned about is losing on an imager that actually has a muchi higher actual resolution in the final image that is recorded.

Once you've lost data, which is what happens with quantization to 8-bit, knowing which spatial frequency edges need to be smoothed out over a gradient compared to another cannot be logically derived. A light pattern say in an engraved piece of metal could look like quantization issues, but it isn't, it's just the two colors between the shadow inside and outside are very close. Trying to determine what needs to be a gradient again is certainly not trivial.

BUT, knowing that sometimes tools like this can save you in a pinch, OR, you could always resort to rotoscoping out only certain parts to fix through neat video, it at least gives you more options. The fact you are paying $20k for 8-bit log still makes no sense to me.
 
VGurcu said:
I thought they did it with this:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about...etail&docId=0901e024803cf0aa&WT.mc_id=C126149
I am not sure if there is another incremental camera development in the history of digital imaging (in terms of providing options for budget & features) like VDSLR's; T2i, T3i, 7D, 5dMark2, 1Dx, now this concept C DSLR that will sit between 1Dx and 5dmark2.


Agreed.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. With no price listed, for all we know it will be $15k list price so it sits between the 1Dx and the C300. Will it have XLR? Will it have professional imaging tools in it? What is "in the future" in terms of releasing this camera? The 1Dx I heard isn't supposed to come out till march. What separates this camera from the 1Dx?

I definitely think it's a carrot that they know they need to dangle, but with how little the've released about it and how out of touch the C300 price seems, I really have no confidence in it. I feel like if I pretend it's going to be what the VDSLR user is going to want, I'm just going to be let down when it is feature crippled to protect the C300 line and/or misses the price point completely, and/or, insert any other number of issues here :)

The size/shape and feature set of the C300 seems to be a logical step for anyone coming from the VDSLR. The price however isn't even a jump, it's like a rocket ship away :)
 
Rick Burnett said:
I still haven't seen confirmation that the SDI out is 10-bit.
Click to expand...

I was working for Canon during the event at Paramount, and I can confirm that the SDI out is 8-bit. From the filmmaker's perspectives, none of the films presented ran into any problems with the in-camera 8 bit codec, and I believe them. I shoot and edit with the Canon XF codec on a regular (read: weekly) basis, and haven't once seen posterization across any gradient either before or after color grading. But don't take my word for it, watch the films from the announcement - there was a lot of heavy post grading and digital special effects in some of them. This idea that 8-bit is somehow completely untouchable in post is quite frankly 100% bullocks.

I can also say that this camera is the first in a family of cameras for the EOS Cinema line.

Personally, I think $20k is a bit too high for this camera. But $15k would be a bargain for what it's capable of delivering, especially since I wouldn't have to pay for an LOG format upgrade or an external recorder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top