C300: What should be the canon line up

indiawilds

indiawilds

Veteran
If you guys would have been the top executive at Canon then what decision you would have taken? What kind of camera line up you would have launched in the market?

What features you would offer in the C100, C300, C500, 1DC and any other new camera for filming? How will you differentiate between the models?

Will you also spray and pray like Sony ie lot of models hoping some of them click? Will you update models every year and launch Mark III, Mark IV, Mark V versions year after year?

Will you want cutting edge features, at times not fully tested or software not fully mature to be given in the cameras or wait for lower frequency updates but mature products?
 
I read most of your posts and they are full of common sense...

To answer this question I am reminded of a Business prase someone came up with one time "A confused mind always says no"...

If I was head of Canon:
- I would employ people to specialise in keeping an eye on and interacting with forums like this for a start.
- I would note and red flag people who say they Love Canon and have switched to the FS7 and FS5.
- I would have the 1DX2, 5D4 and Rebel and split features between them...
- I would have the C500, C300 and C100

C300 features would also be in the 1Dx camera so all that would distinguish it would be form factor...therefore if people wanted a different B-camera they would still opt for canon..
C100 would be the best it could be for that price point and that way people who needed multi cameras for multi camera shoots would buy C100s in their droves...

I would also develop dedicated support devices for Canon cameras at a sweet price point or a package price...

At some point camera features are not going to be major because we will reach the end of what is feasible....
 
Change Canon's greedy ethics and stop ripping people off with crippling their cameras, offer better after-sales service and remove their policy of in built obsolescence so you 'have' to pay for repairs or replacement or update. (same with the rest)
 
I would dearly want something like a C200, there's too much of a gap between the C100 MKII and C300 MKII.
It's annoyed me knowing I have to spend AU$22500 to go up one notch in the MKII Cinema EOS lineup.

The thing I'd love to inherit from the c300 is the better, detachable monitor, something like:

C100 MKIII: same as C100MKII but with XC-10 equivalent 4K and 10bit HD 60p XF-AVC, improved DPAF (I'm guessing this is on the way)

C200: Same as C100 MKIII but with detachable C300MKII monitor package (and EVF?), 12bit HD and better face detect DPAF (?), maybe SDI, maybe some extra HFR

I'd pay extra for that, as long as it was competitive against an FS7.

Otherwise, most people ***** about:

1. Lack of / limited high frame rates,
2. Lack of 4K,
3. Too slow product cycles,
4. Price compared to the competition
 
Id look to produce practical tools for doing work with.

C300 form is horrid.. go for a low thin shoulder cam

Id take DSLR technology from the 1dx2 (or whatever the new camera is called) and make it into a box cam for gimbals and mounting.. and I would add SDi

1dx2 .. how can you take it on a set when they have only consumer HDMI?

And they have to scrap the lens mount.. the FFD is way too long.


Hmm.. I just described the .. Amera and Alexa Mini. Seems like Arri make practical tools for doing work with.

But Arri is still too big and heavy and has no AF.. a big company like Canon should be able to eat them for lunch.
S
 
Three models: an SLR, a handicam, and a shoulder cam.
Global shutter across the board.
Abandon distribution codecs in cameras. Implement ProRes, DNxHD, and raw in all models.
 
Add 4k to the c100mkii and bring the other models prices down to what the industry is doing; C100mkii (w4k) should be under $5k (to compete with fs5). C300mkii 4k should compete with FS7 in the $8-10k range. C500mkii 8k when it ships should be around $15-20k (when we all know it's going to be a $25k plus camera). As a famous Presidential candidate might say, sales would be HUGE!
 
The problem with the definition of a "lineup" is that its models will always be introduced piecemeal - today, it's a new DSLR; tomorrow, it's a fixed lens camcorder; and a year from now, it's a high end pro camera. And then the cycle renews. And what Canon has right now, especially visavis Sony, is an an unfinished lineup. Two years ago, with 5D MKIII, 1DX, 1D C, C100, C300, C500, it was complete. Two years from now, it'll be complete as well.

And Sony will still be a generation away.
 
Last edited:
By the way, total photo/video units shipped globally went from 121 million in 2010 to the projected 35 million in 2016. The low end market is basically being eaten by smartphones and the decline will continue, as the next generation of smartphones will have a multiple focus length ability. With that in mind, the Japanese companies that control the industry will attempt to stave off their inevitable collapse by trying to hold the prices steady, their costs low while simultaneously diversifying into other imaging areas. That will likely mean a lot fewer models than in the past, with even the $800-$1,200 pieces being good enough for most consumers (G7, A6300). Hypothetically speaking, if one pulls a sensor from one camera, interface from another, codec and the processor from the other still, one can make a feature film quality camera for around $2,500 right now. Canon, Nikon, Panasonic and even Sony will do their darnest that this doesn't happen in 2016 but they may be helpless to prevent this beyond 2017-18.

PS. As I mentioned the component pull - the A6300 sensor and processor, the NX1 HEVC codec (can be upped to 120 Mbps, which will give video quality of ProRes HQ off the SDXC cards), pro work flow of the Panasonic YAGH, camcorder style body.

Or, as some might say, a well executed BMD URSA Mini 4.6K. Which was priced at $5,000 a year ago and should be priced at $2,500 now.
 
I had started this thread because I found that though in thread after thread people go and blast Canon, there is very less constructive criticism. If at all they are scattered and difficult to collate. So I thought there may be many many constructive responses from people in one thread and it will help all of us while speaking to Canon representatives or drawing their attention. Each person has his or her own perspective. So no view is perhaps right or wrong. It all depends whether it is practical and if it can fit in with an overall strategy.

Every company has a camera model or two or twenty. So if you were Canon how will your cameras be different than others? How will you differentiate? How will you satisfy the feature film guys, the doc guys, the owner/operators for weddings/corporates and indie crowd? (and ofcourse the internet warriors. :) )

Canon tries to find out if there is a need and creates a product. The video in the 5D II was purely from the perspective of news gatherers also being able to record a few mins of video footage. It is ofcourse history that the adoption was from every field. C100 was originally planned for people upgrading from the DSLRs/weddings etc and hence the features like one shot AF. It is another matter that a lot of professionals put it to good use.

So if talking about an entire line-up is a big ask, what is that camera (with what features) which will be wildly successful like that 5DII, C100, C300.

I hope all good suggestions (without negativity) can be in one single thread so that all of us can forward it to Canon.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi
 
I think that the manufacturers need to go on a course of how to shoot. Then design falls in to place naturally.

Maybe Im blinkered in that I feel that I know 'how to shoot' - Im not saying Im good - just have a little training in putting together a simple sequence.. maybe others dont want to do this.. I dont see why not as the simple sequence is what makes 90% of watchable material.

So.. I want to be able to do a wide, a medium and a CU with one lens.

I want to be able to monitor my picture in the sun and I want to be able to check my (off centre) focus, I want to do this while im rolling and without unsettling my shot. I also want my batteries/cards not to fill/die.

Ideally Id want a solid codec (1080-10bit-log) and have the ability to expose.. build in ND.

So base video camera should hit that.

The XF10 cannot manual focus and the fixed lens is not wide enough FOV. #fail

One could argue that a C100 and an 18-135 does it.. but the codec is no good. #fail

C300ii and Cn7zoom sort of gets there for the price of a BMW. I don't know the details but Im thinking the ergonomics are a bit crappo and there is not electronic zoom (is there?) needed as 120 is a bit short.

I dont aspire to a C300ii Cn7 zoom combo.. Id like it but I wouldnt re-arrange my finances for it.

Once you have hit base then you have a clear route for higher end versions and future upgrades.. (in order!)
Sdi out
Timecode in
Lut management
many audio channels
onboard backup and lutted proxies
stabilisation
af
quality meta data with accelerometer and gps
global shutter
12bit
HFR
Higher HFR.
Even Higher HFR.
2.5k
4k
5k

Incidentally.. you must always have higher HFR than your directors phone.. it is a matter of pride

BTW Sony are equally clueless as are BMC and Panny (the 2 Varis seem logical, sort of)

Of course one could be cynical and suggest that ommissions from the current line up keeps the sales industry going

S
 
Last edited:
Once the 4K/media/codec dusts settles in a year or so, Canon and Sony will probably have fairly identical lineups up to ~ $30,000. There'll be a DSLR/DSLM APS-C 4K camera for around $1,000, with a "consumer" codec and SD cards. There might be be a "high end", APS-C 4K camera with more pro features. There'll be a "large body" 4K camera, good enough for a movie set, but crippled and in need of accessories for $3,000-$3,500. The $5,000-$7,000 range is where it may be getting interesting in 2016-17 because, hypothetically, something like FS7II or C100MKIII/C200 could combine everything that Sam asks for in the above post. Will it? I think not. And that's because there's no one to upset the apple cart with BMD failing with their URSA Mini update (so far) and Red using this opportunity to cash in on their technology.

And, by the way, the manufacturers know what the ideal camera might be. That is why they're not interested in making it.
 
The thing is there is not really any camera at any level that I admire.

The EX1 is close for the time with a lens you can almost focus manually. (fly by wire fu-ked all modern glass!)

Heavy cine cams are just about fit for (that) purpose if you are in the old world of a focus puller and actors moving to marks.

But overall point me to one impressive bit of design?
 
Hello everyone. If I was the CEO of Canon my Line Up would be this:

C100 mark 3 (7000$):
- UHD, 8 bits 422 (30/60 fps)
- HD, 10 bits 422, 60 fps, 120 fps with crop sensor
- Dual pixel only in the center of the image with face detection


C300 mark 2 (13 000$):
- 4K/UHD, 10 bits 422 (30/60 fps)
- 2K/HD, 12 bits 444 (30 fps) and 10 bits 422 60/120 fps (with no crop sensor)
- Dual pixel for all the image with face detection


C500 mark 2 (20 000$):
- 8K, 10 bits 422, 30 fps
- 4K/UHD, 12 bits 444 (30/60 fps) and 10 bits 422 120 fps (with no crop sensor)
- Dual pixel for all the image with face detection


1D C mark 2 (7000$): Same as 1D X mark 2 with C-Log and C-Log2

XC10 should have a continuous aperture.
 
Last edited:
C500 MKII would/should be double the price of C300 MKII, so it'd be $7000 for C100III; $13,000 for C300II; $25,000 for C500II.

All three should be "camcorder/pro camera" rather than DSLR shaped. Which probably will not happen.
 
Michel Talaïa said:
Hello everyone. If I was the CEO of Canon my Line Up would be this:

C100 mark 3 (7000$):


C300 mark 2 (13 000$):


C500 mark 2 (20 000$):

1D C mark 2 (7000$): Same as 1D X mark 2 with C-Log and C-Log2
.
Click to expand...


So you would still deliver three cameras that dont sit on the shoulder and one camera that even though it costs above $5 has no SDI?

And no single lense solution for less than $25k?
 
For the form factor I think XLRs should be built in the camera body but that's all I would change. The C100 mark 3 compete with Sony FS5 which don't have SDI either.

morgan_moore said:
And no single lense solution for less than $25k?
Click to expand...

I don't understand what do you mean. Can you precise? Canon have a lot of good lenses in the 1000/2000$ range.
 
Last edited:
Michel Talaïa said:
For the form factor I think XLRs should be built in the camera body but that's all. The C100 mark 3 compete with Sony FS5 which don't have SDI either.



I don't understand what do you mean. Can you precise? Canon have a lot of good lenses in the 1000/2000$ range.
Click to expand...

Considering my 'basic requirement' of being able to shoot a basic video with one lens - a wide a mid and a CU the main canon offering is the CN7 PL zoom.

Lenses like the 24-105 do cover the job.. but only on a full frame camera.. or with a booster .. boosters do not fit canon mount cameras.

The 17-55 and 18-135 are admittedly options, crippled on either reach or speed (not to mention gaff manual handling)

If Canon implemented digital zoom in HD or somehow got round this problem they would do themselves a favour and make a shooting package that might actually work for shooting a 'basic video'

This thread is about how Canon can improve. Im saying the ability to simply shoot a basic video, even in HD, would be a good place to start :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top