Rumor: Canon 4k super35 camera

Canon once again demonstrated complete lack of understanding the market that they are entering...
It would not take much to make this camera a viable player but they just don't know IMO...
The company is based half the way around the world and it shows...
Their arrogance/incompetence combo is astounding on this level of market share at stake...
RED on the other hand being based locally and driven by a marketing genius passionate about our industry knows exactly what to do.
The result is that RED just took over 75-80% of the market Canon was hoping for last night.
RED has their own issues (mainly system stability and delivery schedules) that they reluctantly admit to once in a while but they are very focused and their offerings are just too attractive to the film makers to to pass by.
Well done RED!!!!
Shame on you Canon!!!! with all the wasted resources....
 
optitek said:
...RED on the other hand being based locally and driven by a marketing genius passionate about our industry knows exactly what to do...
Click to expand...

Based locally? lol

To who? The center of the universe? hahaha

Not disagreeing with the overall gist of the post but that got me :D lol
 
Red is based in Hollywood (at least their studios).
This is the center of the film making universe- make no mistake about it.
I found this out 20 years ago when I moved here looking for a job:happy:
Everyone wants the gear that Hollywood is using.
I know- I've been designing gear for 20+ years
 
I appreciated it, man :) I was just laughing from an indi(ish) point of view.

But yeh, the fact P Jackson is using 48 Epics in the Hobbit is testament to RED being on the ball. Properly on the ball. And it'll be for reasons you touched on.

Even though the Scarlet-X is currently out of my reach...it's a possibility which makes it so exciting.
 
Exactly. They stumbled upon this cinematic revolution. They intended the video to be used by news photographers and journalists who mostly shoot stills with it. They stepped in crap and came out with this revolution that was completely blind to them from the beginning. They didn't design this paradigm shift... they were just some lucky buggers...


Danielvilliers said:
I have been thinking about the C300. So Canon put some video in the 5d mark2 as an afterthought, just for some news gathering and it is resounding success. For what it was, a photo camera that shoot video, it gave access to the large sensor cinema look to everyone. Now they have 3 years, decide and plan some dedicated video camera for this market they have created and they deliver a 8 bit 50 mbit, 60fps in 720p only, for an astounding $ 20 000. Apart from its sensor this camera has more or less the same processing than its XF line starting at $ 3 500.

Now I do understand that it was effectively an accident the Canon 5D mark 2, because if they had anticipated it video success they would have sold it at a much higher price.
Click to expand...
 
DVinfo says price is 16K

At that price, I wouldn't say they've stepped in crap. It's still a bit high, but if it comes down quickly to about 14K then the opinions here are way off base. I agree, at 16+ it's a hard sell, but the image quality from what I've seen in first runs exceeds F3 and at 14K costs less than what you get out of an F3 at the same price.

That's saying a lot.
 
DVinfo was saying it was 16K before even the event was finished. My guess is after the sound thrashing that they received last night, the price is going to come down rather quickly.
 
What I like about the C300:

- Works natively with EF lenses, including (naturally) aperture control. Lots of sweet, affordable Canon glass out there that will now (finally) work natively on a decent digital cinema large-sensor camera.
- Seems to have tremendoud lattitude and dynamic range - from the specs and sample footage. Seriously, the footage shot with the thing looks nice.
- They're promising minimized moire and rolling shutter issues (remains to be seen)
- Small, light, simple, ergonomic design. The shape is really appealing to me.
- Love the button layout: Zoom Focus Assist, Peaking, Zebra and WFM all in a row; easy to find with fingers, not hidden behind the LCD when closed (are you listening Panasonic?)
- Detachable/movable LCD.
- Built-in ND filters.
- PL mount version available.
- Did I mention that the footage shot with it looks really sweet?

What I don't like:
- 8-bit only (need to confirm what comes out of the HD-SDI though)
- 30fps max at 1080p for overcrank (Same as the F3, remember). 60fps would have been nice.
- Bizarrely, Push AF seems to be missing. Don't care about continuous autofocus, but Push AF would have been nice.
- The biggie: PRICE; Will probably street around $16K - but given RED's Scarlet-X announcement, may actually be lower by the time of release; All things considered, should probably have been around $10K-$12K. Then it would have KILLED (as an upgrade from an AF100, undercutting the F3).

Next-gen will probably fix the 8-bit and 30fps issues (updated processor) and price point - but for Canon next-gen might be 3 years away.

Given the price, and the Scarlet-X announcement - it's a miss for me.

If they see the error and adjust the price downward to properly position it, it's a great camera with a definite place in the market, and only a few flaws.
 
I guess I look at it from perspective, and that's what I don't get. The 5D on down opened up a whole new market to them. Lot's of people got into making movies/productions what have you that probably would never have before. I am in that group. Before the Nikon D90, I had an HV30. Both of these cameras for me were a huge disappointment. To get the image I wanted was just too much work. There was a certain bar that I wanted to reach, so I just didn't do any film making and continued to let the others I worked with do all the shooting with their HVX and I just did sound.

Then someone showed me the 7D and I bought one IMMEDIATELY. I fell in love with S35. I bought lenses. I studied and read a HUGE number of educational resources, poured over acclaimed films for cinematography and just totally immersed myself into the trade. Canon did this to me. I'm a decent cinematographer now, but I do this on the side, in my free time, and I wouldn't change that for anything.

Panasonic didn't embrace the DSLR shooter in their professional line, they embraced the 35mm adapter user and created the AF100 (from their words). Being first to market, I felt they had to make a lot of quick decisions and try to get something out there to help the professional in a market they wanted to be in. While they didn't create the perfect camera for me, I think they mostly nailed the market they were looking at. My only serious gripe about the AF100 has been lack of 1:1 focus assist. Every other complaint I can forgive given their target audience.

Sony comes along with the F3. I was less than impressed with the internal codec, but I thought the image quality was great and I think their price point wasn't really something I could argue with because I felt they had a camera that was in it's own class. Given the output capability, the future sLog, it was just different. I was not the target audience for this camera, and I never felt like (at this point) that sony really had an DSLR video interest anyways.

Then Sony comes out with the FS100. Here was a camera that I felt did take on some of the DSLR/EPIC design, but also tried to be the camera that would appeal to shooters of traditional video recorders as well. It lacks many of the professional features of the AF100, but at the same time, I feel offers a bunch of other features that makes it on par with the AF100. This camera impressed me from Sony, even from what it lacks, and was put at a price point that someone coming from the 5D could get at if they wanted to move up to a camera with better performance, albeit not Full Frame.

And then there is yesterday. Canon announces the C300 which looks like a slightly deeper DSLR. My first thought was, wow, they really understand how there is a HUGE segment of people that like the small size of the camera that the DSLR provides, but are desiring a better quality picture and some additional professional features. Countless people, before the price was announced, were saying things like "5D up for sale soon" till the price dropped.

I can't say if the quality of the image is *worth* $20k, $16k, $14k or even $10k, but that really isn't the point of the disappointment. There are a HUGE number of people who do like cameras like the 5D, 7D, T2I, 60D, T3I, that wanted to step up to another camera from Canon, and they thought this was it due to how it looked. And that's not the case. I mean, it's not just here that people are underwhelmed with Canon, I read it everyone on the web I go to. There is a HUGE market waiting for a better camera from them, and they are going to miss it, because they designed something right past that market. Typically, they have been good about making an accessible camera to the masses, but this isn't it.

Further, they barely hint at this FullFrame camera that has no release schedule, no information, and they didn't even talk about it during their event? I mean, why show it in the picture and then not give people a little more information to go on? That whole presentation was just a big waste of my time.

I fully believe that this camera was targeted at the F3 crowd. I also don't think they knew what Red was going to release, maybe they thought it was 2/3 still. Sure, the Red still has issues as well that people will have to decide if they can live with (like no built in ND), but on paper, it sure sounds like A LOT better deal that the C300.

Again, I don't think it's necessarily the technology as much as Canon just priced themselves out of the majority of their user base. And I think people are very underwhelmed at the thought of $20k to have internal 8-bit, no 60p at 1080, etc.

At the end of the day, it is what it is though, oh well.
 
Rick Burnett said:
There are a HUGE number of people who do like cameras like the 5D, 7D, T2I, 60D, T3I, that wanted to step up to another camera from Canon, and they thought this was it due to how it looked...There is a HUGE market waiting for a better camera from them, and they are going to miss it, because they designed something right past that market. Typically, they have been good about making an accessible camera to the masses, but this isn't it.
Click to expand...

I think that's a really good point.

Rick Burnett said:
Further, they barely hint at this FullFrame camera that has no release schedule, no information, and they didn't even talk about it during their event? I mean, why show it in the picture and then not give people a little more information to go on? That whole presentation was just a big waste of my time.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think that aspect was just a knee-jerk reaction to RED's Scarlet-X announcement. Didn't think Canon would care, but this now makes me think they do.
 
Good post Rick Burnett :)

What nobody seems to be able to properly answer is what was the 'historic' part of last night's announcement. Was it just Canon entering that market (a market that the specs and price seem to suggest doesn't exist)?
 
Symon said:
What nobody seems to be able to properly answer is what was the 'historic' part of last night's announcement. Was it just Canon entering that market (a market that the specs and price seem to suggest doesn't exist)?
Click to expand...

Yes, the historic part was relative to Canon. This is their first motion picture cinema camera ever. They are now committed to playing a larger role in the Hollywood and television production community. Finally, the EOS brand has crossed over to motion imaging: Cinema EOS.

Personally, I welcome them into this community and hope they do well.
 
Piolet said:
Yes, the historic part was relative to Canon. This is their first motion picture cinema camera ever. They are now committed to playing a larger role in the Hollywood and television production community. Finally, the EOS brand has crossed over to motion imaging: Cinema EOS.

Personally, I welcome them into this community and hope they do well.
Click to expand...

I welcome them too. Along with anyone else for that matter...(including the Chinese group with the RAW S35 cam for 8Kusd).

But my "welcoming them" doesn't mean they get to stay or that they'll be successful with this camera.

Honestly, Piolet, I think that many of us are frustrated at Canon because WE WANT them to succeed. We WANT to be their customer. But I can't justify buying a product that is THIS FAR OFF BASE. The simple fact here is that DROVES of people are so disappointed with them and so impressed with Red's offering that they've signed 14K over to Red and are spewing obscenities aimed at Canon. We're with you Piolet....we like Canon too. We just don't appreciate the steaming pile that they labeled as "Historic" with a 20K price tag. The S35 4K Canon offering is unfortunately giving fuel to those who would say that the 5dMII and DSLR success was nothing more than a "fluke". For me (and many, many others), the C300 smells like a "bust".

One final note: It seems like there are some who are defending the C300 and Canon...(fair enough). It would be helpful to me (I don't know about anyone else) to know if you are shelling out the 20K to buy one. Countless folks (on this forum) have shelled out the 10% to be on the Scarlet pre-order list.....who's writing checks for the C300? I'm not being aggressive here, I just think that hypothesizing about how great the C300 is when a person has NO INTENTION of shelling out the 20K makes for a POINTLESS discussion. I'm NOT saying that no one will. I totally respect that. I'm certain some folks will. On the other hand, if your NOT shelling out 20K, and you want to argue every point of the C300....uh.....what's your point? If its so great...then where's the green? (I understand that we don't have as much as we'd like, but running in circles for NO REASON gets old.)

Mad love for DVXUsers, everywhere!
 
No, I won't be buying the C300. I'm just a hobbyist and I can never justify spending that much money.

But I can see how other people who make money doing this, might like it and want to buy it. If we take away the price for a second and just look at the camera, it's not a bad camera. It seems to perform very well (judging by early footage) and I like the design. It's relatively small, light and it seems user friendly. The small batteries last 3 hours, the codec is easy to work with it and it uses off the shelf CF cards.

Sure it doesn't have a few extras like 60p, 4:4:4 output or 10-bit codec, but I understand from a technical standpoint why it doesn't have these things.

But my "welcoming them" doesn't mean they get to stay or that they'll be successful with this camera.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I'm just trying to be a friendly neighbor by saying welcome, instead of burning them at the stake :)
It's not my job nor yours to make them successful. Only sales will determine if Canon will be successful.

I'm just trying take a Zen approach to all of this by looking at the bigger picture. Canon has only designed one camera and it happens to not be the one for us DSLR guys. That's a bummer. But the C300 might be right for someone else and it's only fair that they get their camera too. The bigger picture is Canon's commitment to this market. They have a master plan and I'm excited for that. Our camera will eventually come. We just have to be patient.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top