C200: The new Canon C200 with 4K

[Bassman2003]

If there is any expectation of Canon changing or innovating, then I would prepare to be disappointed! Sorry to be blunt but Canon has lost me over the years. I agree with drifting, they run the thing like it is a hobby or show piece. I think the only thing they care about is the sports stills market. Carry on..

 

[puredrifting]

If there is any expectation of Canon changing or innovating, then I would prepare to be disappointed! Sorry to be blunt but Canon has lost me over the years. I agree with drifting, they run the thing like it is a hobby or show piece. I think the only thing they care about is the sports stills market. Carry on..

I hold out some hope for them being innovative. The 18-80 CNe Servo zoom is a groudbreaking lens, no other company has melded their broadcast lenses, cinema and still lenses together in a servo form factor at an affordable price for digital cinema, it is truly a unique hybrid. The only other company that could do it would be Fujinon and they are not going to do that. The 70-200 CNe will be a good seller I predict. The C700 is arguably innovative (for Canon) by being the only higher end digital cinema camera with autofocus. I am not counting on them being too innovative with this new camera though. If it is in the under $10k realm, if they make it very innovative, they will kill their bread and butter C300 MKII sales.

 

[DLD]

I think if this C200 is small (ARRI Mini, FS-5, new Panasonic type'ish) and gimbal/drone oriented then it's almost a guarantee to look its predecessors (aka bowling balls).

 

[Jim Feeley]

Yes, for someone like you, that's tough Jim. I am an NRA Shotgun Instructor, do you realize you can train your right eye to become dominant over your left eye? I can tell you how to do it for shooting clays, it can't be that different for shooting video unless your right eye is physically damaged.

I used to shoot a bit (but not enough to become an instructor or anything), and I just couldn't make the move to right-eye shooting. I think my still-photography work, where I stuck my left eye to the viewfinder didn't reinforce my efforts. Maybe I'll try again... Thanks.

 

[Jim Feeley]

I think Canon can do something innovative. That doesn't mean they will, but think back to their Hi-8 cameras (A1) and especially the DV XL1. Interesting design, but it pretty much worked; at least I worked plenty of jobs with it with footage that ended up on networks (usually thanks to great operators more than my producing and sound). Seems like Canon's video division drove that project (with, IIRC, Panasonic VTR mechanisms):




And compare that to the Cinema EOS cameras. While I like DLD's bowling-ball description, they seem to me like over-inflated Canon DSLRs. Don't get me wrong, I like the cameras and their images. But they just seem to have a lot of still-camera-division heritage:




And then let's remember the XF series of cameras. Three small chips, but look more like biggish palmcorders; not a DSLR-based camera:





I hear that at Canon, there's quite a division between the photography division and the video division...Or at least there was. The 5DmkII was a stills-division project. I don't know who drove the Cinema EOS cameras, but seems like the EOS gang sure was involved in at least the body shape. Perhaps the C700 shows a bit more collaboration between the two divisions.... And I'll guess as smartphones take away more of Canon's stills business at a faster rate than it's taking away their higher-end video business (I'm just winging it here...not really sure about this), perhaps the Canon bosses are thinking they really do need to get their next video/digital-cinema cameras right.


So maybe if Canon can really incorporate input from their video users and engineers and industrial designers, we'll see something that looks rather different from a C100/C300/C500. Perhaps. Maybe they think that shape is part of their secret sauce and don't want to lose whatever advantage they have for some buyers. But I look back at their earlier cameras, and at the knowledge residing in their broadcast and cine lens divisions, and hope...

And if they don't Panasonic, Sony, and maybe even BMD will give us what we want. Going to be an interesting summer and fall for new cameras....

 

[Run&Gun]

I'm left-eye dominant. I can live with a nice shoulder-mounted camera (and liked the "can on the shoulder" feel of an Aaton), but I don't like trying to twist my head or move the viewfinder to see through the camera with my left eye. Plus, I felt like I was really cut off from peripherally knowing what's going on around me. Typical ENG-style cameras are a drag for me.

So for me, the layout of a C300, DVX200, FS5, etc., is something I'm willing to put up with. And I find I use a monopod with some success. So I totally hear what you all are saying, but for me a right-shoulder-mount design wouldn't necessarily be a selling point.

I can't find the picture anymore of the set-up, but I knew a shooter who was left handed and he said one of his former stations bought a conversion kit for his Betacam(possibly before then) that flipped the VF and allowed him to shoot with it on his left shoulder with his left eye and used a pistol grip for his left hand. The picture wasn't of him or his actual camera, I found it on-line with some digging, but it is very strange looking. At first you think someone just flipped the image until you really look and see that it was in-fact a normal camera on someone's left shoulder.

 

[markfpv]

I would have liked to have seen that set up 15 years ago. I'm left eye dominant as well, but taught myself early on shooting with beta cams to use right eye in viewfinder. Shooting news & sports it was actually beneficial (perhaps only slightly so in certain situations) to be able to open that left eye to see what was going on around you while rolling. Now, depending upon the camera and type of shooting, I have the ability to use either left or the right eye for convenience - but often resort to right eye from "old habit".

 

[puredrifting]

In shotgun shooting, we merely place of piece of Scotch Tape over the left eye shooting glasses lens, allowing the preferred "1.5 eye" vision for shooting as you need some of the opposite eye to acquire the moving target, using stereo and peripheral vision, but it blurs out the left eye's view enough that the shooter is forced to rely on the right eye. The conversion can happen pretty quickly and I've used it and seen it used to great success. Cross eye dominant is the worst in shotgunning as you can technically never achieve a proper cheek weld shouldering right handed but sighting left eyed and therefore will never be able to properly acquire and shoot moving targets. Not sure how this could be adopted to video shooting but it could work if you are shooting moving subjects with the camera. The idea is to not black out the left eye, that residual peripheral vision remaining in the left eye is the key to making the brain transition to the right eye.

If I was a lefty or cross eye dominant, I would do this in a heartbeat, the world discriminates against lefties in almost every device.

 

[scorsesefan]

The only logical conclusion to come to about Canon's strategy is that their EOS business really is just a blip on the corporate earnings report. Canon, as a corporation, has blown Sony into the water with earnings and profitability for quite a while. Sony, as a business, has been teetering on the edge for years. I was with a business consulting firm with Sony as a client for a few years and after a look behind the curtain, I feel that Sony's broadcast camera business is a significant portion of earnings of the electronics division, whereas for Canon, the EOS line cameras are basically a hobby. Compared to the tens of millions of EOS lenses, DSLRs up until a year or two ago, copiers, monitors, printers, plus all of the industrial and OEM work, I truly think that the EOS Cinema line is basically a prestige hobby that Canon is in. It's the only logical conclusion. If it were a significant portion of earnings, we would be on the C500 MKIII, the C300 MKIII and the C100 MKIV by now.

So Sony may sell a LOT more sub $10k video/digital cinema/mirrorless cameras than Canon, I agree, they have been killing it with sales of FS5/FS7/A7 variants, but it is still in question if there will be a Sony Corporation in five years, whereas Canon is a monolith in comparison. As to whether or not Canon will ever get serious about their cinema camera business, the C700 and the new CNe zooms are positive signs and relatively innovative new products. But I agree that the rest of the line is need of a re-think, re-strategy, and new products that innovate, rather than follow. That's what kills me, Canon, if they wanted to could so utterly dominate this business, they have the knowledge and resources to do so. But they have not innovated much, they are always ridiculously late to the game and overprice their cameras and then ratchet down the MSRP for the product's life. And this is coming from a Canon fan. They want to sell some digital cinema cameras, but with nice, but not impressive products like the C700, leaving off 4K 60P on their bread and butter C300 MKII, not having a sub $10k 4k capable pro digital camera in mid 2017, you have to say, they are not serious about taking, staking and reclaiming market share in digital cinema/broadcast cameras. Whereas, it looks as if Sony and Panasonic definitely are.

We went down this same road with Canon years ago with the XL-H1. Remember when everyone else was innovating, constantly battling it out with P2, SxS, EX1, HPX170 and Canon was STILL only selling an XL-H1 with HDV? They were years behind at that point. Then it seemed as if they caught up with the market again with the initial C100/300/500 lineup, now they have kind of fallen behind what the market is interested in again. C700 is a very nice camera but pricing it alongside the Arri Amira when it needs to priced alongside the Varicam LT was not a smart move. I am not seeing the camera on sets, I am not reading trades on how new episodic or features are shooting the C700 and it's been on the market, as in on dealers shelves, for five months. C300 MKII is a solid camera but it lacks features like 4K 60p frame rates, non-windowed, non-soft HD frame higher frame rates, Prores recording and the shoulder mounted form factor that the market wants. Personally, I think this new camera, if it is coming out this year, will be a very important indicator of if Canon will continue to have a place at the table. Honestly, the only things keeping me on Canon are the fourteen EOS lenses I own, the color science and DPAF, which is handy for some of my work. But even I am heavily taking a look at Panasonic and even a little at the Ursa Mini Pro, which I think in the next generation might be a killer camera, if they can just conquer the last few nits their camera lacks. I really hope Canon pulls out a winner with this new camera. If they do, I will buy it, but if it is just an expensive compromise, I will likely go back to Panasonic with either a Varicam LT or the new under the veil camera, if it turns out to be innovative. Either will work with my EOS lenses, and while they lack DPAF or at least the Varicam LT does, they have a good VF system and focusing aids. I'm not crazy about buying back into P2 but I would if I had to.

Agreed. One trip down to BH and you know where their bread is buttered - Canon/Nikon DSLRs and point n' shoots. The cinema line is a small part of Canon's biz. I liken it to Photoshop and Premiere for Adobe. The former overwhelming outsells the latter but also supports its continuation and development... It would be nice if c200 was shoulder mount but then they'd have to relocate the evf...

 

[Mitch Gross]

I'm right-handed but my right eye isn't very good vision, so I'm default left eye dominant. No way for me to switch that one, and I have the sore neck to prove it. But the left eye extension for my old Aaton was the greatest thing since sliced bread.

 

[coutard]

if it were to be the same form factor as C100s, why not call it C100 MK III ?
if it is indeed a C200, I'm guessing form factor will be different, as C700 is not an upgrade of C300/C500...

let's hope.

 

[puredrifting]

if it were to be the same form factor as C100s, why not call it C100 MK III ?
if it is indeed a C200, I'm guessing form factor will be different, as C700 is not an upgrade of C300/C500...

let's hope.

Good point Coutard. Hope you are right too.

 

[Matt Turner]

DPAF
Global Shutter
250 megapixel sensors
4 million ISO sensors
8K

I think Canon are moving ahead in R&D and "innovating". We know Canon has prototypes of the last 3, and the first one is industry leading.

You can bet they will take some time to bring these to market tho, but that's the way they work (like Apple and pro gear... aaargh!).

I think Canon give you what you actually need now, that's why the C300 MKII is a fantastic FHD camera with modest 4K.

Because that's exactly where the content consumer market currently is at.

 

[NorBro]

Even though the new Panasonic camera may out-spec the new Canon, I can't seem to get excited about it as much as I am about the new Canon.

Just a little mini C100/300 with 4K/60p, DPAF and C-Log3 would be nice -- that's all I want.

 

[puredrifting]

Even though the new Panasonic camera may out-spec the new Canon, I can't seem to get excited about it as much as I am about the new Canon.

Just a little mini C100/300 with 4K/60p, DPAF and C-Log3 would be nice -- that's all I want.

At this point, I am equally excited, I could go either way and will, depending on the value equation and workflow. Hope Canon is coming out with something that competes with this new Panasonic, it will be very exciting if two market leaders come out with bread and butter cameras at the same time. Kind of like NAB USED to be ;-) Competition always benefits us.

 

[drummondb]

I don't get all the optimism. Speaking as someone who owns several C100's and who has purchased more C100's and a C300/II for work, I don't see how the C200 or C100/III or whatever can possibly avoid being disappointing to most.

The C300/II costs $12K and is riddled with compromises, contradictions, and disappointments. Like 12-bit and /or 444 color? Great, you can only do that up to 30p. Like 4K (I don't know why)? But great, that also only goes up to 30p, and it will cost you $700 to record for 40 minutes. Like 120fps? Well, that is cropped. It will blow up the noise, double your focal length, and only record on one card at a time--essentially negating the point of a professional camera with dual slot recording. Like to record proxy files? Well you have to format the cards just right, or the numbering and file naming won't match the originals. Also, if you record in certain special modes, like the high speed cropped ones mentioned above, that will ALSO screw up the proxy numbering. Do you like those relatively inexpensive C100 batteries that last all day? Well, these are double or quadruple the price, and they don't last all that long.

What could the C200 possible offer? Eight-bit 4k? I never thought I'd say this, but I'll just save my back and my wallet and go buy an A7sII.

Oh god. What have I become? What have you done to me, Canon!

 

[NorBro]

But at some point new generation cameras will have to replace older ones.

The C500 was $30K once and the C300 Mark II's tech and features replaced it and it went down to $6,999 and kind of just bobbled there until it was discontinued.

The C300 Mark II will be replaced in the same way.

 

[nyvz]

But at some point new generation cameras will have to replace older ones.

The C500 was $30K once and the C300 Mark II's tech and features replaced it and it went down to $6,999 and kind of just bobbled there until it was discontinued.

The C300 Mark II will be replaced in the same way.

Yes, in about 2 years... C500 came out in 2012, C300II came out only just over a year ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Canon_Cinema_EOS_cameras

C100 line does seem like it might be due for an update given the past timeline, but they likely won't create a product to supercede the C300II or C700 for at least another 1.5-2 years.

 

[NorBro]

The product life cycles shrink as the future unfolds.

(Guys with Betacams still remember how long they kept their cameras for, ha.)

C500 was shipping in late 2012 and discontinued in late 2016. [4 years]

Wouldn't be farfetched to see the C300 discontinued in late 2018. [3 years; Late 2015 - Late 2018]

It's all silly speculation and we don't know anything about the camera, but either way, we need new Canon cinema cameras.

 

[Run&Gun]

The product life cycles shrink as the future unfolds.

(Guys with Betacams still remember how long they kept their cameras for, ha.)

C500 was shipping in late 2012 and discontinued in late 2016. [4 years]

Wouldn't be farfetched to see the C300 discontinued in late 2018. [3 years; Late 2015 - Late 2018]

It's all silly speculation and we don't know anything about the camera, but either way, we need new Canon cinema cameras.

My first Betacam was my primary camera for six years. Then I bought a better one and it was my primary for three years, until I went HD with my first VariCam. BUT I couldn't fully shake my Betacam until sometime well into 2011, possibly 2012. ~15 years for me! In the overall industry, as a format, it had more staying power than a porn star on Viagra and there were guys getting 10+ years out of individual camera models/bodies. BUUUT, my tape VariCam is over ten years old, now, and I can't seem to shake it, either. I had a network request for it last fall. TAPE! I couldn't believe it, either. And the 'ole girl still looked as good as she did on day one.