« on: July 19, 2014, 12:45:45 AM »
Canon unfortunately underestimated the degree of innovation that companies like Sony are capable of. So they started this "cinema" line, put in a few bells and whistles and the price tag to go along with it. I don't mind that they charge a premium for the C100,300,500 because they are strict video cameras. But when they take a 1dx body, and unlock it to do 4k and then charge 10k for it. It's a little bit ridiculous. The 1DC doesn't belong in the cinema line, its ergonomically not a strict video camera, and frankly will be squashed by the competition in the next year or so in specs and price. I'd like to see them start a new line of video centric dslrs. Let them do internal 4k, 4:2:2 for $4K. That would sell like hot cakes. Obviously they would have to cripple them in some way as to still make their cinema line attractive for the more serious cinematographer. Ergonomically the cinema series would already be worth the upgrade.
Canon are currently market leaders in high end stills and low end professional "cinematic" video. Their current cameras already sell extremely well. The 5D Mark III, C300, and C100 outsell all direct competitors (based on what little reliable information is available regarding marketshare). Lenses sell great because bodies sell well. It's as healthy an ecosystem as any company can have in this difficult industry.
Also, what you consider bells and whistles most owners and operators consider to be awesome ergonomics, a great image, multiple professional gammas, and a ton of features (EVF, scopes, good audio inputs, etc.) that you'd pay a lot to add on to a dSLR. How much have you used the CX00 cameras to be such an expert on their feature set, which is extensive and really powerful?
Why would Canon undercut itself in markets in which it is already the leader and already selling cameras with high prices and presumably high margins? Sony and Panasonic are undercutting Canon and that is why you see the better price/performance there... If you want what they offer, buy it. Canon won't offer that line of video dSLRs you want until Sony and Panasonic start eating up their market share so, maybe in 5-10 years, not now. Panasonic already offers it. Why not buy it from Panasonic? At the worst it will encourage Canon to make the camera you really want.
If there's any market they need to address it's the high end. The C500 is not a serious Alexa competitor. The C500 Mark II needs to be. This is a high margin, mature market and it is completely controlled by one camera.
Indeed they are market leaders as of now, but as I pointed out the 1DC doesn't belong where it is and at the price tag, when you have an a7s and GH4 at a significantly lower cost producing great imagery. It won't be long before one of these companies does get it right (much sooner than 5-10 years) with internal 4k , better codec. Regardless of where Canon is now, and how well their gear sells everyone else is catching up quickly. Sony arguably has better sensor technology than Canon as of now. I do envision and predict that Canon will release an excellent video capable dslr in the near future, one that competes with the current offerings. Canon has even stated itself that they need to improve the video on their dslr offerings.
The 1dc delivers built in 4k with acceptable skew and a standard lens mount with native cinema lenses. The gh4 has one of these things... A7s has none. And it's also a top of the line $7k stills camera. The only camera I'd take over my mark 3 is a medium format back... Only cameras I'd take over my c100 would be a c300 or Alexa/Amira. Canon offers the best gear for the price and it sells accordingly.
Fwiw Canon has been on top longer than Apple ever has. Windows and Android beat Apple's OS market share even now.
If you disagree, buy elsewhere. Not everyone can afford the best, fewer still are willing to pay for it.