Rumor: Canon 4k super35 camera

TimurCivan said:
Wow. 45k for an ef mount lens that is a variable prime.

Sigh*
Click to expand...

Well, not exactly.

The zoom marks are all nicely ticked in white until you hit 240... and then after that there's an orange line and an orange "300".

It holds aperture from 30-240mm at T2.95... but loses it when you go past 240mm into the 300mm range.

But yeah, $40K is pricey. Though Optimo 24-290 T2.8 is $60,000 new.

Hmm... actually, apart from the Canon, is there a lens with comparable zoom range and aperture, 4K resolution and no breathing
(http://blog.abelcine.com/2011/04/13/nab-11-new-canon-pl-zoom-lenses/)
...that costs less than $60K new?

Sounds like canon SAVED some people who were going to buy Optimos $20K...

Again, this is not marketed at us. My definition of a "high end" zoom is an Optimo Rouge or a Duclos-modded DSLR still lens! My definition of "too expensive" is a Arri Alura or a Zeiss Leightweight Zoom.

Things like the Optimo 24-290, this Canon lens, or the Cooke zoom are way out of my price point but I don't really see the need to knock them... just let them be - and if you can somehow get a rental deal on one, awesome!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Just saw the Canon at Paramount. Very nice camera, & the footage looked great on the big screen.

Can't wait to take it for a proper drive.
 
Wise man waits for second hand MX and F3 w/S-Log bodies to start falling to 14K prices. Wise man buy then, get everything for nothing.
 
The price for the Canon zoom is actually very good for a cinema grade zoom. But it will need to be compared to others for quality.

Concerning Red, I think we saw a bit of Sun Tzu in action, letting the enemy think you are weaker than you are, letting them become over confident, then striking at the right time. Canon obviously thought they were competing with a 2/3" inferior camera. I have a feeling it was not a happy flight back to Japan for Canon's president. I think if Canon had known then what they know now, they would have tried to use the new Digic V processors and waited till nab to announce. As far as the petition, the camera is not worth over 8K in the current market. IMHO. Certainly more than an AF100/FS100, but less than the Scarlet X no matter how good the picture is. Especially with the upcoming 1Dx offering uncompressed recording for 6800.
 
I was taking a trip down memory lane. Remember the first 24P camera? The Sony F900, shot 1440 x 1080, 4:1:1, and sold for over $100,000. In today's market, when you can buy the Alexa or RED for about half that, and the F3 for under $20,000, what would you pay for this 2/3", tape-based, 8-bit camcorder? If you want one, you're in luck, they're still for sale, and even upgraded to full 1920 x 1080 and 4:2:2. Only $80,000.

Movie camera prices are all over the map still, as the industry goes through major contortions in the midst of a revolution. But I believe that in the coming years prices should even out, the way they have always been for the still-camera world. In the still-camera world, you can buy the same camera the pros use for a few thousand dollars. In the motion-picture world, until recently, the pro cameras were literally a hundred times as much money as consumer or prosumer cameras. Technology is reducing the difference, though, between a good still camera and a good movie camera. In time, we'll probably see all professional movie cameras for not much more than professional still cameras.
 
Last edited:
Piolet said:
This is how I remember it too because I debated Barry as well because he didn't think it would be a product announcement then he kept saying it would be the hairdryer (or similar). I agree Barry lost the bets.
Click to expand...
Well, seeing as there's a lot of money on the line for a good cause, I think we owe it to ourselves to revisit the posts and find the exact terms under which said bets were made.
All discussion of bets took place in the thread "Is Canon planning to release a competitor for the AF-100???"

Here is the exact text of both bets:
First, on an AF100 competitor...
So, here's the bet, open to at most fifty takers: I'll bet $20 that Canon will not release, for sale, actually purchasable on the market, an AF100 competitor (meaning a professional video camera with XLR inputs from their pro video division, as in the XHA1/XLH1 series) before January 1, 2013. If I am correct, then on January 1st 2013, everyone who takes this bet must send $20 to Isara. If I'm wrong, and you are able to actually walk into B&H and walk out with a Canon M43-or-larger-sensored pro camera prior to January 1, 2013, then I have to send $20 to Isara, for each and every person who takes the bet (up to a maximum of 50).

Any takers? Who wants to put their money on the line and say that Canon will deliver for retail sale, a large-sensor pro video camera in 2010, 2011, or 2012?
Click to expand...
Steve R happened to edit out the whole context of what the original bet was, which was "an AF100 competitor". At the time I made that original bet, which was well over a year ago, it was inconceivable that Canon would be aiming at a $20,000 price tag. The operational term there for understanding what I was talking about was "An AF100 competitor" and I don't consider a $20,000 product a competitor for a $4995 product. And keep in mind that the thread I was responding to was titled "Is Canon planning to release a competitor for the AF100???" By any reasonable interpretation, I would say that the C300 does not meet the spirit and intention of the original bet. The words could now be interpreted after the fact to apply to the C300, but based on my original intention that the camcorder I was betting against was the introduction of an AF100 competitor, I don't think it's fair to say that the C300 meets that definition. However, to be fair, 2012 isn't over yet, and my bet allowed for any time frame before January 1, 2013 and I am pretty sure Canon will be introducing a C100 model within about a year of the release of the C300, so as far as I'm concerned the bet is still on and the odds of me winning are a whole lot lower now than they were when I made the prediction. If it takes Canon one year or more to introduce the C100, I win. If they bring out the C100 available for retail sale sometime next year, I lose. If they bring it out on January 1, 2013 or later, I win. And, right now, as for those who have taken that bet, it includes Stephen Mick, Peter J. DeCrescenzo, David G. Smith, and Steve R.

As for the second bet, it's a lot easier to determine who won and who lost. That second bet, the $500 one, was specifically in response to Steve R's post. Here's Steve's post, and my response.
What odds will you give me for:

- There will be not one, but TWO Canon large-sensor cameras announced Nov 3rd.
- The lower-priced camera will cost slightly more than the AF100 (i.e. $6,000-ish), but with mostly better specs (slightly larger sensor, 10-bit 4:2:2, better codec/higher bitrate) in EF mount.
- The higher-priced camera will be in F3-ish territory, price-wise and feature-wise - and will have even higher specs and additional outputs than its lower-priced sibling, and will have a PL mount.
- You'll be able to walk into a store and buy them both before June 1, 2012

What odds will you give me on all of these things being true?
Click to expand...

That was Steve's request for a bet. Notice the relevant part: What odds will you give me on ALL OF THESE THINGS being true? So I responded with:
On ALL of them being true? Well, first question is -- are you basing this on any firsthand knowledge? Have you been part of any beta test program or know someone who has, and therefore you have some reason to believe that these assertions are factual statements rather than wishful thinking? Because if you know something, then it would be grossly unfair of you to take advantage of me that way.

But if you don't have any firsthand knowledge, and you're basing this off rumors, then I'll put up $500 against $500. If you're right and every bit of what you say is true, I'll send $500 to Isara. If you're wrong on any aspect of it, you send $500 to Isara. Deal?
Click to expand...
That was the exact text, presented fully in context, nothing left out. And seeing as there was no second camera introduced, nothing like an AF100 competitor, and certainly nothing like "The lower-priced camera will cost slightly more than the AF100 (i.e. $6,000-ish), but with mostly better specs (slightly larger sensor, 10-bit 4:2:2, better codec/higher bitrate) in EF mount" being announced, and seeing as both Steve and I specified that the bet would be on "all" of those things being true, and that Steve specified that the announcement would take place specifically on Nov. 3rd, then I don't see how anyone can see it any other way than that I won. Especially since Steve never actually said he accepted the bet in the first place. I put $500 up, but he never responded saying he accepted it.

So - Steve R - if you accepted my $500 dollar-for-dollar proposition on all of the things you said coming true, then surely you agree that you lost and will now send $500 to Isara. You can make the donation to donation@isara.com. Of course, if you didn't accept the bet at all, you can just say so.

I guess I should point out that the terms were reiterated in my post from Oct. 14th, where I said:
If I'm totally wrong and they introduce an S35 F3 competitor AND an S35 FS100/AF100 competitor, I'll send $500 to Isara then and there. And if Canon doesn't introduce those things? I'll laugh myself silly, roll my eyes, say "I told you so"... and probably still send that dough to Isara...
Click to expand...
They did not introduce the FS100/AF100 competitor. I didn't bother rolling my eyes, I didn't even laugh at the announcement, but I did just sent Isara $500 anyway.

As for the original bet about an AF100 competitor, that's still open and there's still room for 46 more people to bet their $20 if they feel bold enough. :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top