Rumor: Canon 4k super35 camera

[HHL]

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.



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. Our camera will eventually come. We just have to be patient.

All fair and intelligent responses. Thank you.

I will add that I'm NOT a Red fan, but will own the Scarlet X. No-one will cheer louder than ME if Canon responds with a BETTER option than the Scarlet X. Here's my hope, along with yours, that they will! Cheers Piolet!

 

[Stephen Mick]

I'm just trying take a Zen approach to all of this…

To a mind that is still, the shot reveals itself.

I like this Piolet guy and his attitude. While there are things that disappoint me about the C300, I'm sure it will deliver beautiful footage.

 

[Bachman]

The EF mount is not dumb. You can control both iris and focus, even wirelessly with the optional Wi-Fi adapter. There's even a wheel on the camera to control the iris on EF lenses. However, the camera does not have AF or AE. If you're a professional filmmaker you wouldn't be using AF or AE anyway, correct?

Yip correct. Though occasionally use quick AE button.

 

[Piolet]

I will add that I'm NOT a Red fan, but will own the Scarlet X. No-one will cheer louder than ME if Canon responds with a BETTER option than the Scarlet X. Here's my hope, along with yours, that they will! Cheers Piolet!

Cheers to you as well HHL. Congrats on the Scarlet and here's to beautiful images no matter what it's shot on!

 

[TimurCivan]

No 444. That's a problem for "Professional Cinema" uses.....

Especially when it has 444 capability!!!!!!! It has full RGB bayered, per pixel!

Waste.... this cam should have interchangeable mounts, dual link, and all the other goodies.... if I didn't own a F3 and was in the market for cam of this class, i'd still buy the F3.

Its just a bigger more expensive XLH1 in my eyes. Sigh*.... was hoping for a small, sub 15k 4k camera..... oh wait.... RED made one... cool. I'm good.

 

[HHL]

No 444. That's a problem for "Professional Cinema" uses.....

Especially when it has 444 capability!!!!!!! It has full RGB bayered, per pixel!

Waste.... this cam should have interchangeable mounts, dual link, and all the other goodies.... if I didn't own a F3 and was in the market for cam of this class, i'd still buy the F3.

Its just a bigger more expensive XLH1 in my eyes. Sigh*.... was hoping for a small, sub 15k 4k camera..... oh wait.... RED made one... cool. I'm good.

Hehehe...I KNOW right? Thank goodness for Jim. I was soooo downered after Canon's face-plant. I haven't felt so relieved and elated in a very long time after Jim's announcement. So funny! Red made history on Canon's "historic" day. Ah...the irony.

I really do mean it when I say that I want Canon to kick butt though. Even with the C300. If all they learn is what we DON'T want, fine. Lesson learned. BUT PLEASE do better next time Canon!!!

 

[Doctor Wu]

The "next time " for Canon might be two to three years, or a revamp in a year, a "C300s"?

Otherwise, they have to compete on price.

On the positive side:

-Nice form factor.
-Possibly a very nice viewfinder ? (haven't seen specs on VF resolution, VF bit depth)
-Cheaper media than Sony SS cards for in camera recording.

 

[PerroneFord]

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.

I can shoot 60p on my $900 DSLR. I can't FATHOM not being able to do it on a $20k camera.... in 2011/2012 Ok, let's leave price out of the equation for the moment. How do you put the label of Cinema Camera on something that doesn't overcrank, doesn't shoot RAW, doesn't even have a 10bit codec, and doesn't do 4:4:4. What kind of cinematic post are you supposed to do with the footage? I can see taking Mpeg2 4:2:2 8bit through FCPx, even iMovie. But you mean to tell me someone is going to try to push that through a Quantel, or a DaVinci, Avid DS, etc? For theatrical release? I'm not buying it.

 

[PerroneFord]

If all they learn is what we DON'T want, fine. Lesson learned. BUT PLEASE do better next time Canon!!!

I don't understand this. They have had EVERY advantage. They've had feedback from LaForet, Bloom, Charters, even George Lucas for goodness sakes! They've been on House, 24, the set of Ironman, etc. If they could possibly get to THAT level of input from some of Hollywood's biggest names and still ship the C300 as their first salvo into the world of cinematic cameras, I hold out very little hope. Canon's still division has been knocking it out of the park since the 5DMk2. Canon's video division has been getting it's butt kicked since the DVX100 was released. The numbers tell the story.

 

[HHL]

I don't understand this. They have had EVERY advantage. They've had feedback from LaForet, Bloom, Charters, even George Lucas for goodness sakes! They've been on House, 24, the set of Ironman, etc. If they could possibly get to THAT level of input from some of Hollywood's biggest names and still ship the C300 as their first salvo into the world of cinematic cameras, I hold out very little hope. Canon's still division has been knocking it out of the park since the 5DMk2. Canon's video division has been getting it's butt kicked since the DVX100 was released. The numbers tell the story.

I think your question is your answer. Think about WHAT got them in the door: 5dMII. If this thing (C300) was designed with that heritage (5dMII) as a starting point....there it is. This is how they got there. (And I think that part is quite obvious.)

You also must remember that they think they've been "borderline" cine quality (some saying cine quality) on 4:2:0 aliased-out mush. So...with that as a starting point, they probably thought they had "a winner". And I would HONESTLY agree that they DO HAVE a winner, IF....(big giant if) they PRICED it from the same heritage. (Less than 5K) If THAT was their announcement.....the DID AWESOME!!!!

20K? Ahem....That's current cine PRICE RANGE, with 5dMII (second generation) technology....and THAT does not add up at all.

...and I agree with you.

 

[bruceallen]

OK, since I won the last bet against Barry Green, I am in a good mood

Anyone want to bet with me that the Canon will ACTUALLY SELL for $20K at B&H?

I think it'll be much more like $16K - the number on dvinfo.net sounds right to me.

Personally, the moment someone posts $20K in some criticism about Canon, I take the rest of the things they say with a grain of salt.

Nobody's paying anything near list for an F3, are they? I think F3 + S-Log is over $20k list...

BTW, this is designed, among other things, for Hollywood - who liked using a Canon 5D as a small and light C-camera. Not a cheap camera. A small and light camera with great image quality for the size and weight.

I'm sure that when Canon's next ASIC is ready they will make an improved version but there is definitely a place for what they released today.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Piolet]

I can shoot 60p on my $900 DSLR. I can't FATHOM not being able to do it on a $20k camera.... in 2011/2012 Ok, let's leave price out of the equation for the moment. How do you put the label of Cinema Camera on something that doesn't overcrank, doesn't shoot RAW, doesn't even have a 10bit codec, and doesn't do 4:4:4. What kind of cinematic post are you supposed to do with the footage? I can see taking Mpeg2 4:2:2 8bit through FCPx, even iMovie. But you mean to tell me someone is going to try to push that through a Quantel, or a DaVinci, Avid DS, etc? For theatrical release? I'm not buying it.

The reason is a technical one. They designed this camera somewhere around 2-3 years ago. They already had a new video-specific sensor cooking, but in order to get this camera finished quickly, they chose to use the existing and proven Digic DV III processor and XF codec. Unfortunately this processor is not capable of 60p and the codec complies with the MPEG-2 422 Profile@High Level international standard, which firmly stipulates 8-bit.

The camera will find a home. People will use it.

 

[reem12]

Very dissapointed!!!

 

[bimdas]

I've heard a lot of people putting down their deposit for a Scarlet, just wondering how many people are impatiently waiting to get one of these canon babies in their hands with their cash and credit ready?

 

[fingersonface]

I'm waiting to see what the 4k dslr is going to be, i'd rather have that any day over the c300,

 

[PerroneFord]

The reason is a technical one. They designed this camera somewhere around 2-3 years ago. They already had a new video-specific sensor cooking, but in order to get this camera finished quickly, they chose to use the existing and proven Digic DV III processor and XF codec. Unfortunately this processor is not capable of 60p and the codec complies with the MPEG-2 422 Profile@High Level international standard, which firmly stipulates 8-bit. The camera will find a home. People will use it.

That's not technical... that's accounting. They had the opportunity to go clean sheet and chose not to. Simple as that. Arri went clean sheet. So did Panavision, Dalso, RED, Grass Valley, Silicon Imaging, etc. All of them brought a REAL cinema product to market and all of them found a place. Because all of them could slot into the existing film workflow. From DPX, to LUTs, to metadata, to RAW outputs. Mpeg2 is not speced in ANY cinema ingest or output that I am aware of. In fact, the very premise of cutting cinema is that it needs to be discrete frames so you have frame accurate cutting. Using a long-GOP codec is the antithesis of cinema workflow. Mpeg2 high profile is an international standard alright... for BROADCAST. Take the "C" off the camera and put a "B" on it. Then we may have something to talk about.

 

[Piolet]

That's not technical... that's accounting. They had the opportunity to go clean sheet and chose not to. Simple as that. Arri went clean sheet. So did Panavision, Dalso, RED, Grass Valley, Silicon Imaging, etc. All of them brought a REAL cinema product to market and all of them found a place.

You asked why it can't do FullHD 60p. The correct answer is still a technical limitation of the DSP chip they chose to use.

Now why they chose to use that chip was explained by Larry Thorpe. It was simply a matter of schedule. To start with a clean sheet design would have meant developing a brand new chip. One look at RED's adventure in developing their own ASIC shows how difficult and fraught with problems this can be. RED suffered through an entire metal respin and had a huge bug in their code that took months and months to fix.

We can also tell how long it takes to develop these chips by the introduction dates of previous Digic chips. It has numbered between 3-4 years.

The decision to use an existing, proven, working chip was simply an engineering one to reduce risk and schedule slip. Going clean sheet would have pushed back launch for at least 2 years and everyone would be complaining where the hell is Canon?

But I bet they are working on something new right now

 

[PerroneFord]

The decision to use an existing, proven, working chip was simply an engineering one to reduce risk and schedule slip. Going clean sheet would have pushed back launch for at least 2 years and everyone would be complaining where the hell is Canon? But I bet they are working on something new right now

Using an existing chip is fine. if it meets muster. Why bring a horse to the race when you know he can't finish in the money? Better to simply bite the bullet, and develop something that has a chance. By the time Canon deliver something that ACTUALLY meets cinematic muster, the race will be over. If Scarlet gets in the hands of indie shooters and makes it to Sundance and Cannes before Canon get a real product out, this exercise will be simply academic. Especially, if they can't get the price in line.

 

[Piolet]

Using an existing chip is fine. if it meets muster. Why bring a horse to the race when you know he can't finish in the money? Better to simply bite the bullet, and develop something that has a chance. By the time Canon deliver something that ACTUALLY meets cinematic muster, the race will be over.

You seem to be basing whether this camera will "meet muster" entirely on specs alone. And you're mainly upset because it misses a few extra things that are important to you. You certainly have that right, but it's plausible that those same things aren't as important to someone else who might like this camera for other reasons. To discount the entire camera based on just a few specific specs seems like an overreaction.

A camera is more than just specs. Maybe you should try it out, examine the image quality, and see how it handles before deciding.

 

[J Bellari]

4 things tipped me off to Canon NOT having a true cine body this time around.

#1. Vincent Laforet earlier this year clearly states he does not buy cinema cameras and only rents, but
a few months later reverses course and BUYS a Red Epic-M while certainly under NDA with Canon

#2. Canon 1DX launch, camera has 1080p HDMI output but not clean! Even at $6800...
(Protecting Video division clean 1080p output, as if that's holy territory under $6800)

#3. Canon 1DX uses an 18MP sensor, and only records to 1080p Intra codec on Dual CF
even though it bursts FF RAW files at 12fps...
(not Raw video, maximum 1080p and they claim that legacy CF slots are to protect the
investment on CF cards for previous owners)

Gee... you think Canon shooters will suddenly jump ship to Nikon because you phased out CF slots
for $200 SSD's or $100 SDXC UHS-2 cards ? Have you looked at what you charge for an L Zoom lately?

#4. At the 1DX launch no new 4K optimized primes or parfocal video optimized zoom lenses with silent autofocus were announced

I am critical here because Canon is the same company with the 2/3" 4K blowdryer, the 120MP sensor and everything in between
available to them when they deem it is profit time, and INSTEAD SITS on what is technically available now waiting
for someone else to lead...

To summarize, when Canon DIDN'T KNOW what they were doing, they released the Full Frame 5D Mark II and sold oodles of bodies and lenses for under $3K to
video production companies and aspiring filmmakers worldwide.
Now, 3 years later, with all the pro help and feedback in the world, they release a $20K S35 chip camera recording to MPEG
with $7K and above lenses.

Makes perfect sense in Bizarro World...