open letter to CANON: A new strategy

[cowpunk52]

Seriously, who's left now that hasn't already bought a AF100, Red, F3, FS100, 5D, 7D.....

Me for one. The lower-market large sensor camcorders don't reach the level of IQ that is required for my work (network television). I've never used an AF100 or FS100 on a professional shoot, and in fact the subject has never really even been brought up. DSLR's are used widely due to their cost/size/performance ratio, but mostly in a peripheral way (C-cam, crash cam, b-roll, plates, etc).

What market share is left?

There's a lot of market share that can benefit from the very simple, production-ready and broadcast approved workflow that the C300 provides; out of the box, just add a lens and you're ready to go to network. For my work (TV broadcast; narrative & documentary), I travel extensively and shoot a lot in remote areas with small crews. Many times I don't even get an on-set DIT. For these shoots, RED is out. The F3 is considered, but no one wants to deal with an outboard recorder if they don't have to. AF100 and FS100 are not even brought up. The C300 can give me a very efficient, network approved in-camera LOG codec on cheap and easily accessible CF cards - not to mention it's low power consumption for places were power taps aren't prolific; and all in a very light, very small and highly configurable body. The camera has it's place.

 

[combatentropy]

Seriously, who's left now that hasn't already bought a AF100, Red, F3, FS100, 5D, 7D..... that's going to find it in their heart to buy the C300 now? What market share is left?

You're right that if someone owns an AF100 or the like probably won't buy a C300. But I think the market left is huge. Besides, of course, an expanding population, there is also an expanding middle class worldwide. Brazil, Russia, India, and China (the so-called BRIC) ensures that if your product is right you could sell millions. Entrepreneurs rejoice!

 

[Piolet]

The F3 definitely has some nice features, but it has weaknesses that the C300 can exploit. The C300 has a broadcast approve 4:2:2 codec on board. The F3 requires an outboard recorder for that, which you now have to deal with mounting, cabling and perhaps another power supply. The C300 draws half the power of the F3 (12 vs. 24 watts), which means longer run times for a given power supply. The recording media is off the shelf and inexpensive CF cards compared to SxS cards. You can get the C300 in an EF mount, giving you iris and IS on EF lenses.

A shooter doing a network piece could have a very tidy camera package with one C300, a set of small Canon batteries, a handful of L lenses and CF lenses and he could be editing on his laptop right away. Throw in a 5DMkII and he could could shoot C300 A-camera, 5D B-camera and then use the 5D for high quality stills while using all the same lenses. It's a pretty attractive camera for the market it's intented, which is not DSLRs.

 

[starcentral]

Guys I had a HARD TIME deciding on the F3 and let me tell you how tempting it was to go for a RED One MX used package when I started to look at SLOG and off-board recording... I only justified the F3 because I talked myself out of SLOG and it was a cheaper way for me to get a S35 camera now and get as far away from 35mm adapters as possible. If I was now at the point of contemplating a C300 for $20k I would buy a RED in a HEART BEAT even if it cost me slightly more for a RED. Sorry but once you get to that level, I'd rather have 4k RAW, PL mount and never look back. I'm just saying that $13k had me leaning towards RED, $20k I wouldn't think twice.

The C300 draws half the power of the F3 (12 vs. 24 watts), which means longer run times for a given power supply

Yes that's what everyone buying a camera looks at first. Gimme a break.... if you can afford a C300 you can afford to buy batteries.

 

[VGurcu]

here's a lot of market share that can benefit from the very simple, production-ready and broadcast approved workflow that the C300 provides; out of the box, just add a lens and you're ready to go to network. For my work (TV broadcast; narrative & documentary),

The C300 has a broadcast approve 4:2:2 codec on board...A shooter doing a network piece could have a very tidy camera package with one C300, a set of small Canon batteries, a handful of L lenses and CF lenses and he could be editing on his laptop right away.

Correct me please; so you are suggesting a 'market share' for a 'Cinema Camera' designed & presented for cinematographers & Hollywood in the BROADCASTING, ENG MARKET?
Good luck with that, especially you Cowpunk, {if I remember correct you own a XF305 which is a truly ENG camera}

 

[Piolet]

Yes that's what everyone buying a camera looks at first. Gimme a break.... if you can afford a C300 you can afford to buy batteries.

I'm not necessarily referring to the cost of more batteries. What I'm saying is lower power consumption = more convenience. You might not have to bring as many batteries for a given shoot. You don't have to swap them out as often. Or you don't have to worry about leaving the LCD on all the time. The camera is going to run cooler. You can even use the small Canon 5000 mah camcorder batteries that fit flush inside the camera instead of a brick battery, which would require even more support gear like a cable and battery plate. Lower power draw in electronics is almost always universally desirable! And in this case, the difference is quite large...by half compared to the F3.

 

[Piolet]

Correct me please; so you are suggesting a 'market share' for a 'Cinema Camera' designed & presented for cinematographers & Hollywood in the BROADCASTING, ENG MARKET?
Good luck with that, especially you Cowpunk, {if I remember correct you own a XF305 which is a truly ENG camera}

Not ENG, but it could be used for EFP. Think network pieces for Dateline or 60 minutes which have a crew. Television is part of Hollywood. The camera can be used in multiple markets, depending on the situation. But Canon is realistic and doesn't expect it to be an A camera on a majority of motion pictures. It's more of B camera for those situations and more of an A camera for television, documentaries, commercials, independent films, etc. If within those groups they need something specialized like overcranking or 4:4:4 output then Canon figures you can rent a different camera for that situation.

 

[HHL]

OK, OK

In the context of this thread, the general idea is to communicate to Canon our direction (the market direction based on potential buyer options and consideration).

In other words, there are many folks here who want Canon to know that the Cost to Functionality ratio takes the C300 out of the picture (especially compared to the F3 and the Scarlet X.) This thread was started by a group that wants to make that displeasure known by was of a petition or online method that amounts to the same thing.

Try to keep that in mind when responding here on this thread.

 

[starcentral]

When you're spending this much, and there are only 3 other cameras like it to chose from in this price range sorry but no one is comparing power consumption, just saying.

But definitely as you said, 422 in-board is really cool. I might have paid a little more than $13k for that on the Sony but not much.

Well anyway you know how it is, sooner or later you have to jump and just buy a camera before you end up waiting for the next big thing...

 

[Nuno Dias]

Rick - I don't think you are polluting this discussion, quite the contrary. Your knowledge and insights speak for themselves, even though I don't agree with some. But some other people are just plainly throwing words out of their brains onto the keyboard.

Stephen - I completely forgot that Reduser has something to do with this website, but my phrase wasn't intended as an insult. Its just that their advertisement style is mostly directed at the amateur crowd, and I don't believe this to be an insult as they know this better than anyone.

Daniel - If you're a pro photographer than you know what a good image is when you see one. Same as in cinema.

 

[cowpunk52]

Correct me please; so you are suggesting a 'market share' for a 'Cinema Camera' designed & presented for cinematographers & Hollywood in the BROADCASTING, ENG MARKET?
Good luck with that, especially you Cowpunk, {if I remember correct you own a XF305 which is a truly ENG camera}

I do own an XF300. I use it on a travel show that shoots 22 episodes a year. It works beautifully, and I wouldn't trade it for a C300 or an F3 or even an Alexa on those shoots. Different tools. Why do I own it? As I said, we shoot 22 episodes a year and I rent it to the production. It pays for itself over and over.

I also shoot other things besides broadcast documentary. In fact, if you turn on your television, you might notice that there are literally hundreds of narrative programs being broadcast daily straight to your television! I know, shocking, right? And these narrative programs have amazing DP's and camera operators on them - who would think that such a trashy medium such as television would want cinematic quality? And get THIS: some production companies have the gall to shoot that junk in HOLLYWOOD! I was just as surprised as you are. [/sarcasm]

Look, I don't shoot high-end motion pictures. I'm not at that level, so I can't readily speak to the viability of the C300 for that market. However, I can speak to the viability of the camera in the market for which I work, i.e. broadcast. And broadcast is much more than just ENG.

 

[Piolet]

When you're spending this much, and there are only 3 other cameras like it to chose from in this price range sorry but no one is comparing power consumption, just saying.

But definitely as you said, 422 in-board is really cool. I might have paid a little more than $13k for that on the Sony but not much.

Well anyway you know how it is, sooner or later you have to jump and just buy a camera before you end up waiting for the next big thing...

I'm not saying power consumption is the highest priority or even one of the higher priorities, because that depends on the situation of the individual shooter. I'm only responding to clarify that lower power draw has other benefits than just the number of batteries. The magnitude of that benefit depends on the specific situation of the shooter and it's not our place to make that call.

I agree, if you need a camera now, you get the camera you need. But your initial post asked why would anyone want to buy (or use) this camera and I laid out my case.

 

[starcentral]

My case is that it is WAY too close to RED price territory, and no 444 option. max 30p - is that true?

So seriously what are you getting? A 5D without aliasing and moire so you can keep using your EF lenses?

I couldn't see people spending $15k for this.

 

[steventimothy]

I think Canon knows how to price a camera for whatever market they're going for. Which is obviously not, um, most of us.

Red says they don't do any market research, they just make a great product! That may or may not be the case But I think Canon does. In fact, they're market research department is probably rather large, and full of economics grads, with access to up-to-the second research analytics.

The hollywood angle is probably symbolic, I think they're going for the ENG/Docu market, which is jumping on the DSLR large sensor look for public interest / long format news or docu reporting.

 

[starcentral]

Market research????????

If people are going to buy into HD when 4k is already here and "coming" as they say, then it better well be 444 and do 60p 1920x1080. The C300 doesn't do either of thise from what I understand and it cost $20k, the F3 sort of does some of that but you have to pay to get it, but at least the option is there.

For what is probably going to be the last set of HD 35mm cams ever made to sell, I don't see Canon selling a lot for that price. I own EF lenses for my still photography gigs and it never bothered me to pickup a whole set of Nikons for $2000-$2500 for the F3. Again, when you're spending this much money to worry about using your lenses for both platforms doesn't make sense.

 

[Piolet]

So seriously what are you getting? A 5D without aliasing and moire so you can keep using your EF lenses?

This statement is so exaggerated, I can't tell whether you have done no research on the camera or you're just making sensational statements.

 

[Rick Burnett]

Low power is certainly subjective, so it really depends on what you compare it with. For the F3, as described, it's less power. Compared to the Scarlet-X and the Alexa, without question it is low power. Compared to my FS100, it's a lot more power since the FS100 burns 5.6W with an electronic lens (which I have to tell you, is one amazing feat that Sony has done.) And I think talking about power/weight ratio is very valid. Having hiked through the woods on a 103 degree day with my FS100, I was VERY glad to have just one extra battery in the bag.

I know I say this a lot, but no camera is perfect and there are certainly things we all can and cannot live with. I don't think the C300 is a bad camera AT ALL. I love the form factor. The internal codec is better than my FS100, or my 7D. I like CF cards more than SD cards personally. I like the size and almost all the design features they've included. Personally, I think the camera is brilliant. After careful consideration of my needs, I would take this camera over the Scarlet-X or the F3 if price was not an issue. But, that's for me. There are many people who have other limitation, needs, or desires. There are people that hate the form factor of the C300. Nothing wrong with that.

To me, the most important thing is to be respectful and constructive if you have an opinion on a product. How many times have you been in a discussion whether Apple computers are too expensive? There are those that find value in the cost (as I do) and those that don't (many people here). I don't argue with them, it's subjective. They have valid points that I can agree with on certain fronts, and others that I don't. It doesn't always have to be so polarized.

Again, I think it's worth pointing out that even Canon says the camera price is still TBA. Where that final price sits could depend on a lot of factors, and how close it hits something I can rationalize I'll have to decide when the end of January comes around. I like hearing opinions from people from all angles, and I've certainly enjoyed the input from those who were at the event, and even those opinions I've read who shot secretly with the cameras. I don't pretend to know other people's needs, but I can certainly elaborate on my own at length. As someone who does 3D compositing with real footage, believe me, image quality is a huge concern for me. When I have to make my pixels look like a cameras pixels, it can get tricky, especially with 4:2:0 color spaces.

 

[Rick Burnett]

If anything you are getting XF105 back end processing with a 7D sized brand new 4K acquisition pixel video optimized and read/reset enhanced sensor using a newly developed sensor read technology. The 5D is full frame

 

[starcentral]

This statement is so exaggerated, I can't tell whether you have done no research on the camera or you're just making sensational statements.

Mostly sensational statements, but.........

Do you know the F3 has a built in auto-exposure tool called TLCS that will allow a user specific amount of gain or shutter speed to be introduced to maintain exposure? Do you know how many uses that has from ENG, time lapse shooting, etc..? The C300 does not have this.

The F3 can be unlocked to 444 RGB output albeit with off-board device and battery - but it's an option. This makes it possible to go through serious grading and post production process with extreme pushing or pulling over 14.5 stops of dynamic range. This exceeds film in lattitude and gives you full post processing optons you would expect to have if working with film. The C300 does not have this.

The F3 can shoot in variable frame rates from 1 to 60p and after 30p resolution drops to 1440x1080. The C300 can only shoot 60p in 720p mode.

Lens mount. F3 has E-mount for variety of lens mount options. The C300 you must chose PL or EF. You buy the C300 because you own a set of EF lenses, but wait, someone wants to hire you for a cine shoot and you can't even rent industry standard Cookes or ARRIs to use.

White balance: presets on the F3 using picture profiles and ability to hold two custom white balance settings using AWB. The C300 does not have auto white balance period.

In the end you can't beat 422, or its form factor and the ability to use any EF glass you already own for the C300 - but you can beat its price. EF glass owners definitely have a tough decision to make, no doubt.,

 

[steventimothy]

Market research????????

If people are going to buy into HD when 4k is already here and "coming" as they say, then it better well be 444 and do 60p 1920x1080. The C300 doesn't do either of thise from what I understand and it cost $20k, the F3 sort of does some of that but you have to pay to get it, but at least the option is there.

For what is probably going to be the last set of HD 35mm cams ever made to sell, I don't see Canon selling a lot for that price. I own EF lenses for my still photography gigs and it never bothered me to pickup a whole set of Nikons for $2000-$2500 for the F3. Again, when you're spending this much money to worry about using your lenses for both platforms doesn't make sense.

My point is that Canon's market research has probably led them to the ENG market, which doesn't care about 4:4:4, 4K or grading, but more safe name brand purchasing, durability, reliability, and turnaround speed. So broadcast purchases, in other words. Not for hard news, but "soft" news, docu-style and long form, which is now demanding a large sensor, more attractive look to draw eyeballs. Also think serialized BBC type (docu) stuff, travel programs, history stuff, etc.