Sam Scoggins
Well-known member
R&D is very expensive. We really need healthy high end sales and mass market sales to pay for all the R&D that has been happening. Technical innovation is going to take a hit I think.
US Camera Sales Dropped by 64% Last Month; Only Luggage is Doing Worse
- Thread starter Sam Scoggins
- Start date
Or is it?
It seems like the camera R&D is divided into two parts - sensors and then everything else. And sensors are Sony property, and the circuits boards can be bought off the shelf (which is why there were some supply problems with the camera parts that were made in China). This is why BMD and Z Cam can sell their 4K and 6K models for $1,000-$5,000. At ~ $2,500/unit sold, a company might need to only move 2,000-3,000 units of a particular model in order to pay for its R&D.
That is why there have been so many attempts by the independents to move into the pro camera market. Up until recent, there was enough money in it to carve itself a nice chunk of pie. With the falling prices and the rapidly improving quality of pro gear, however, the margins are going to become thinner and thinner and it's going to turn into a commodity market. Like oil, gas and soybeans.
Run&Gun
Veteran
That's a blanket statement. Maybe that does apply to the likes of BMD or Zcam or some of the mirrorless hybrids, but not Arri or upper end Panasonic or RED(well, I don't know where they source their sensors or who builds them to their specs) or Canon(at least not the C series and higher-end DSLR's and mirrorless).
When the original C300 was released in January, 2012, it was $16,000. Now, a $5,500 C200 wallops it on specs, while MKIII wallops it a lot more. And C500MKII is ten grand less than the original C500. And of the above are good enough to make movies on.
Side note - the inflation rate officially averaged about 2% since 2012 but that's a massaged stat. At 2.5%, it's a 20% jump, without the compounding. So, roughly speaking, $16,000 then is ~ $20,000 now and $25,000 is $30,000, making the new 300 and 500 being priced at roughly half of what the first generation's were. With the superior specs to boot.
Side note - the inflation rate officially averaged about 2% since 2012 but that's a massaged stat. At 2.5%, it's a 20% jump, without the compounding. So, roughly speaking, $16,000 then is ~ $20,000 now and $25,000 is $30,000, making the new 300 and 500 being priced at roughly half of what the first generation's were. With the superior specs to boot.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
To take a different approach, do we really need the relentless push forward of camera innovation right now? If we look at all of the now relatively common feature sets on low to high end digital cinema, mirrorless and even phones,
I personally am not left wanting, at least not get work done for paying clients. On top of that, who will have the money to buy all of this new innovation for a while, at least. No production equals very little need to update or upgrade what most of us already have. I agree, I do
think innovation is going to take a big hit but I don't think it is a disaster in the 2020/21.
I personally am not left wanting, at least not get work done for paying clients. On top of that, who will have the money to buy all of this new innovation for a while, at least. No production equals very little need to update or upgrade what most of us already have. I agree, I do
think innovation is going to take a big hit but I don't think it is a disaster in the 2020/21.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I want the new features, but I largely agree with you. My current cameras are adequate and I probably won't upgrade until clients need me to. My S1 lacks features of the S1H but is totally sufficient for what I use it for. It would be great if it had good AF, but I get by. I don't see a reason to upgrade it even for something like the R5. Maybe I would get an A7S3 to complement my FS7.
And my FS7 still has the same codecs as the FX9, though obviously lacking other improvements (color science, low-light ability, AF). I think my clients will still want to shoot on it for a while at least.
If I ever shoot my micro budget feature, I could do it with my S1 but I would rather do it with a Pocket 6K or an R5 or whatever cheap micro camera gives the best IQ and versatility at that point. But I'm not sure that type of thinking is a huge driver of camera sales as opposed to client need.
G
Guest
Guest
For personal ise, i’d like to see better dynamic range. It would be exciting to be able to frame almost anything and not worry about blowing out. But for the most part, i can at least run a red camera in dual exposure mode. Though it really isn’t the same thing. Alexa is close, but not quite there yet. And the Alexa struggles at iso3200 and doesn’t really do iso6400.
However, for work, i have been happy with video cameras since forever. Part of the fun is figuring out how to work around limitations.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Maybe its time we stop constantly chasing new cameras anyway. I have seen it as a form of obsession for a long time now with myself included. I bought a GH1, GH2, GH3, GH4 and eventually started to skip every new model because I was paying for incremental updates. Going forward those incremental updates are going to be much smaller.
Take the P4k for example. It fills the desires of a ton of film makers for years. The stuff most of us kept chasing every new camera model for. We fed into this culture of small incremental updates and allowed companies like Canon to trickle out new features at snails pace. Pare of me thinks we are only getting cool new stuff from them because sales have sucked. We used to think if we keep buying every new model it would give them money to keep innovating but in fact it kind of has has the opposite effect. Now that the sales are not as high suddenly companies like Canon are putting more into R&D so they can innovate and try to bring back some sales.
Getting back to the P4k. Since it checks off a lot of tick marks for users there isn't as much left to need to upgrade. We have reached a point where most of us have had cameras good enough for years now. Heck Hollywood still masters and delivers a lot of theatrical releases in HD and a lot of non massive budget movies are using ProRes vs Raw on cameras like the Alexa and have no problem grading at all. For some of us we have actually started demanding and seeking features that are starting to go beyond what even Hollywood is doing. Perhaps it is time to take a step back and focus on the more important stuff. Lighting, sound, acting, script writing, story telling, financing projects and promoting. The camera has become one of the least significant parts of film making now in terms of standing out and we will need to get back to the stuff that matters. There isn't a ton of room for the P4k to grow. Yeah there is the 6k but that more or less just adds more pixels to the video. The next camera could be 8k which again will just add more pixels to the game.
To be honest I have been done chasing iteration based cameras now for a few years. If I do get a new camera now it will likely be a P4k which will likely be my last camera purchase for many years to come. The camera industry needs to change to adapt.
Take the P4k for example. It fills the desires of a ton of film makers for years. The stuff most of us kept chasing every new camera model for. We fed into this culture of small incremental updates and allowed companies like Canon to trickle out new features at snails pace. Pare of me thinks we are only getting cool new stuff from them because sales have sucked. We used to think if we keep buying every new model it would give them money to keep innovating but in fact it kind of has has the opposite effect. Now that the sales are not as high suddenly companies like Canon are putting more into R&D so they can innovate and try to bring back some sales.
Getting back to the P4k. Since it checks off a lot of tick marks for users there isn't as much left to need to upgrade. We have reached a point where most of us have had cameras good enough for years now. Heck Hollywood still masters and delivers a lot of theatrical releases in HD and a lot of non massive budget movies are using ProRes vs Raw on cameras like the Alexa and have no problem grading at all. For some of us we have actually started demanding and seeking features that are starting to go beyond what even Hollywood is doing. Perhaps it is time to take a step back and focus on the more important stuff. Lighting, sound, acting, script writing, story telling, financing projects and promoting. The camera has become one of the least significant parts of film making now in terms of standing out and we will need to get back to the stuff that matters. There isn't a ton of room for the P4k to grow. Yeah there is the 6k but that more or less just adds more pixels to the video. The next camera could be 8k which again will just add more pixels to the game.
To be honest I have been done chasing iteration based cameras now for a few years. If I do get a new camera now it will likely be a P4k which will likely be my last camera purchase for many years to come. The camera industry needs to change to adapt.
Run&Gun
Veteran
I’ve actually been surprised. A lot of us thought there’d never be another “Betacam” and we’d never have cameras last as long again, either. Well, with the advent of solid-state media and file-based recording, having to have a specific format isn’t usually a problem and my three main cameras are all ancient in the time scale of tech, but are still widely accepted, requested and used. I bought my first P2 VariCam in 2011(introduced in 2008), the C300 started shipping in 2012 and the F55 2013. Most of my lights, now, were designed and manufactured after those cameras.
Bassman2003
Veteran
All this leads us up to why the R5 has Canon trying again. I see it as tech overload along with ebbing demand. The speeds and specs have caught up to what is needed at all levels so upgrades are going to be farther apart. If they want to sell lenses on a new mount they better make some hay now or the moment will pass in some respects.
G
Guest
Guest
Also good to remember R&D isn't just the sensor. The higher end cameras develop entire workflow systems. Black Magic is a bit of an exception, as they have a great eco system, but their cameras are affordable. They started with post(?) and camera is a wing of that. Though they also represent Australia, so they take pride in what they do and make really compelling products. I can honestly say they've made my life better. Red is pretty much just a camera company, and that is pretty rare, but they were started by a business man, and that may have influenced the company's culture early on, though, damn, would take that kind of crazy drive and business acumen to carve out a place in the camera world. Jarred is likely to push it into a camera lovers company, as I genuinely believe he is passionate about cameras and making great images, however his style is different, and that is good. Arri is a makin' solutions for makin' moving pictures company, with an emphasis on production. They are surprisingly well known well outside of their market. It has been a while since I have needed to work with them or their products, but everyone I meet mentions their name with 10minutes of conversation it seems. I guess that's what happens when you are expensive and quite literally the best. Panavision is a solutions and support for film making. You either know, or don't need to know. Amazing company if you are lucky enough to need them. Canon is an electronics and business solutions company... that does optics and so many things ,,, Panasonic even crazier, what do they not do? At this time, Zcam is a company that said, "cinema camera? We've been making cameras for years. We can do that, and for a lot less." Their boss has a sense of pride, and we'll continue to see more from them. They'll just get better. But they'll likely stay in the bang for buck zone. And they'll not have support, but just customer service. Remains unclear if they will create a workflow, or use existing standards.
It is important, I think, to see these companies, and understand who their customer is. Tells a lot about how they will treat you as a buyer over the years.
Sometimes surrounding tech can make R&D cheaper. Lens design definitely benefits from tech in the last 20years. Pretty amazing what can be done if you have some money, you can spec your own lenses these days, and if the design already exists, most of that money can just go to the making of the lens. But I'm talking higher end, as it wouldn't be worth the money for most people to have a custom Sigma level lens. Better to buy a few copies of a Sigma and then repose or re-coat, etc.
Cameras are starting to become like that too. Although, for me, if shooting raw, we are all doing our own R&D on the image and colours. The entire process of image making is a kind of R&D. And there are so many camera companies, seems frivolous to try and self manufacture, unless you just enjoy the idea of it. However, it does appear that making digital cameras is less in the realm of science fiction these days. Sensor companies are on their own rhythm now, and CMOS may be seeing the end of improvements. So, buying a batch of pre existing sensors seems feasible. Not sure if it makes sense financially to buy just a few Sony A7 style sensors, that would likely be expensive, and the S1H and Nikon Z already offer it with raw options. Good times. And apparently Red will custom bold for the right price. It's a big interconnected world, and that makes things pretty easy if you are born on the right side of the tracks, or have found a way across them.
Mass markets really do destroy the "Good, Fast, Cheap, Pick two" paradigm. It is crazy hearing people say it just isn't worth spending more than $3K on a camera anymore. But that's somewhat true. This Canon R5 is going to be challenging the Red Monster on some levels. And the Zcams are too. Copy paste knowledge and prefab parts are plentiful in the camera world now. Like building speakers almost. The steep ramp from good to excellence in speaker making is pretty apparent. Almost anyone can make a pretty good speaker from zero to hero in a week or two, but even the best speaker makers are constantly challenged by going even further that it requires some made science and art to get to that level, and there aren't enough years or brain cells to really ever achieve it. Seems like there is always another -nth of some decimal of some percent that is improved on that seems worth spending thousands and thousands on. And camera making R&D seems to be getting to that level. We may see more boutique cameras in the years (or decades) to come.
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
Ready for this. I hate learning new cameras. As much as I do it, i hate it. I feel like I have been on a constant tech training seminar since the DVX100. It was a fast stair stepping constant climb the last 20years, and I am too old and tired. I sometimes forget that I even make images. 01100100 01110110 01111000 01110101 01110011 01100101 01110010 , oh, sorry, I slipped into binary again.
John Brawley
Well-known member
I have an insider's knowledge on the BMD side of things.
2 things.
1. Sony aren't the only company making sensors. BMD have cameras with sensors from multiple companies, some you've never even heard of.
2. BMD design and make all their own boards in-house, including the PCB's...from scratch. All on their own machines. They are anti out-source and have always done this and it's one of their competitive advantages.
JB
I've heard of a lot of companies.
But this doesn't mean that they can't be bought off the shelf. It also doesn't mean that BMD has an A-to-Z control over the components other than to buy what suits the company.
Side story - back around 1987, when I was working retail for a SoCal chain, we decided to take apart a car head unit. It was a "house brand" but inside we found all the familiar names. Toshiba caps somehow stick out in memory. In today's electronics, the high end mods can also involve upgrading the capacitors, speaker posts, power supply, tubes (from the Chinese to the Russians to the NOS) in any tube based amps and preamps, et cetera, et cetera. None of this means that the modders or the OEM builds everything from scratch and even a high end equipment can often be a total mutt.
Which is how it works in the electronics industry. ARRI outsourced their ALEV sensor design to STM (now ON Manufacturing) and no one is having a cow that it isn't made in Munich.
Because the high end hybrids such as the 5D series are very profitable for therir manufacturer and simultaneously a great value for the consumers.
And they should be because, presuming there no release date gotchas, one gets a high quality stills and video camera in one body. Sure, it may not be as good for stills as A7RIV or GFX100 or for video as C500MKII but it does what it does very well, given its price point. To use a car analogy, it's like a high end BMW 3-series (or Genesis G70) - they have enough room to take friends and family to a ball game and enough horsepower and maneuverability to enjoy driving on a winding road on a weekend. It is neither a 911 nor an Escalade but, to use an old cliche, it checks a lot of boxes. It is, to use another cliche, isn't even a "jack of all trades, master of none" anymore. It's now the master of all trades even if it isn't the best tool for every job.
John Brawley
Well-known member
Sure. Point being, there's more than just Sony making sensors.
Commodity component items ? Sure. But they make their own boards. All of them. In house. To their own design.
I think you'll find two different companies have "made" the ALEV and one of them was involved with the design but err...stopped wanting to make it.
JB
As lockdowns continue on and social distancing is a fact of life, I believe the opposite of many here concerning the future of the semi-pro market.
I think the need for content will become exponentially more important.
People are consuming content like pizza from the only take away which is stll left open.
The amateur camera is dead. It is the cell phone.
However, the need for semi-professional cameras is not dead.
In fact I think that semi-pro video is one of multiple elements saving stills cameras from total irrelevance.
The key is realizing that there are no longer photographers or videographers out there.
They are all now content makers. With multiple skill sets.
Eventually, I think you will only have low end content and high end content. That's it. The equivalent of Youtube or Netflix.
The differentiation is based solely on whether you have a production environment/support or are just a one man band.
So, what this means is that the real advances are actually around the concept of ease of use, not quality.
When you have amazing AF, it's so that you can work alone.
When you have 8K, it is not for higher resolution/or added quality through downscaling (though you can do that if you want), it is really for cropping and different shot values from one camera position.
And when you have greater dynamic range, it is so that you can work under difficult, out of control lighting conditions, etc.
Most pro DP's don't need 15 stops of DR. They are building controlled situations where the dynamic range is often well contained within 2/3's of most camera's capacities.
So in my opinion the real reason why you will continue to see advances in semi-pro (beside the fact that technology always marches forward anyhow)
is not because any manufacturer particularly cares if you are technically on par with Hollywood quality.
They just want you to say: "My butt is covered for the variety of stuff I do (including my little dream of making an indie film that is a smash hit), if I buy just this one camera."
In short, they sell you a Hollywood ready Samurai sword in the promo (that's for dreaming), but in fact it's just a newer, more complete Swiss army knife for your outdoor excursions which is their target market.
That in a nutshell is the R5.
It's probably Canon's only chance for the semi-pro market at this juncture.
So which Swiss Army knife do you choose ?
I think the need for content will become exponentially more important.
People are consuming content like pizza from the only take away which is stll left open.
The amateur camera is dead. It is the cell phone.
However, the need for semi-professional cameras is not dead.
In fact I think that semi-pro video is one of multiple elements saving stills cameras from total irrelevance.
The key is realizing that there are no longer photographers or videographers out there.
They are all now content makers. With multiple skill sets.
Eventually, I think you will only have low end content and high end content. That's it. The equivalent of Youtube or Netflix.
The differentiation is based solely on whether you have a production environment/support or are just a one man band.
So, what this means is that the real advances are actually around the concept of ease of use, not quality.
When you have amazing AF, it's so that you can work alone.
When you have 8K, it is not for higher resolution/or added quality through downscaling (though you can do that if you want), it is really for cropping and different shot values from one camera position.
And when you have greater dynamic range, it is so that you can work under difficult, out of control lighting conditions, etc.
Most pro DP's don't need 15 stops of DR. They are building controlled situations where the dynamic range is often well contained within 2/3's of most camera's capacities.
So in my opinion the real reason why you will continue to see advances in semi-pro (beside the fact that technology always marches forward anyhow)
is not because any manufacturer particularly cares if you are technically on par with Hollywood quality.
They just want you to say: "My butt is covered for the variety of stuff I do (including my little dream of making an indie film that is a smash hit), if I buy just this one camera."
In short, they sell you a Hollywood ready Samurai sword in the promo (that's for dreaming), but in fact it's just a newer, more complete Swiss army knife for your outdoor excursions which is their target market.
That in a nutshell is the R5.
It's probably Canon's only chance for the semi-pro market at this juncture.
So which Swiss Army knife do you choose ?
Last edited:
JPNola
Veteran
Redtube
The name gives you cover for claiming you thought it was a website for RED cameras. :cheesy:
Sam Scoggins
Well-known member
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Maybe this is true but I feel like so much software/firmware goes into producing a workable camera that it's not as simple as assembling off-the-shelf parts. Unless technology and IP laws allow manufacturers to rip off other companies' software.
I appreciate that mentality but I wish BM could improve its QC and product reliability. It's the only thing holding me back from them.
I think I agree with you, but I have some caveats. I think there is/will be YouTube shows based on someone's face talking to the camera. But I think there are/will be low-budget shows/shorts that show on youtube and other internet venues that are produced hoping to be picked up by netflix or amazon. And I think there could be mid-level budget movies/shows that appeal to niche markets (eg Indian-Americans or hasidic Jews or some other minority group) that have a profitable audience but not big enough to sustain expensive production. And that's to say nothing of the commercial realm where there is probably a full spectrum of business budgets for targeted youtube/Facebook ads or splash page videos.
And also - Netflix will not keep spending at its current rate. It's putting on $3-4 billion/year in debt in an effort to create smash hits that form a proprietary catalog to cement market share. All its competitors are doing the same (amazon, apple, disney...) Eventually, there will be a new equilibrium and some of these players may exit the market. And then Wall Street will push Netflix to realize profits and it will start to cut corners. There will be less production, possibly, and I would bet 2 or 3 tiers of Production - tentpole big name stuff and then various levels of filler to keep the new content flowing. And they will try to make the filler as cheaply as possible to maximize profit.
And as far as cameras go, I feel like camera models are somewhat dictated by the client market. If someone is hiring you to take professional photos, they probably won't want you to show up with a smartphone, so you'll come with a DSLR/DSLM. Clients who expect pro video want it to look like an FS7/C300. (I have a corporate video agency who hires me to shoot with their GH5 unless their client is at the shoot, in which case they rent my FS7.) But there may be no need for something more expensive than that until you get to Arri/Venice full-featured cinema cameras.
So basically $2-5k DSLRs, $8-12k video cameras, $50-100k cinema cameras. Kinda like we have now? But I already feel like there are diminishing returns from each new generation of camera tech. That's why companies are desperately pushing 8K TVs/cameras, no?
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
I'm very excited about 8K TV's and 8K cameras.
For work, not so much. I am like most people. work is work. 2K/HD is easier and cheaper. I can keep gear longer and improve profits. However, in all honesty, on a creative level, I am looking forward to 8K. It just sucks for business, as an owner op.
For work, not so much. I am like most people. work is work. 2K/HD is easier and cheaper. I can keep gear longer and improve profits. However, in all honesty, on a creative level, I am looking forward to 8K. It just sucks for business, as an owner op.