A New Cinema EOS DSLR Body in 2013? [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

Tweet

Not just the EOS-1D C
There have been a few mentions of a new Cinema EOS DSLR body being announced in 2013. It would take on a smaller form factor than the EOS-1D C and would not shoot 4K video.

It wasn’t mentioned which DSLR it would be built around, but I think an APS-C Cinema EOS based around the upcoming EOS 7D replacement would be a good place to start.

The EOS-1D C has yet to reach the retail chain at the time of writing this, but it’s said to be arriving “very soon”.

From a new source, so take this with a grain of salt.

Preorder Canon EOS-1D C at B&H Photo $11,999

cr

[Daniel Flather]

RAW? 

[Lee Jay]

To be frank, any "cinema" body that doesn't shoot 4k or above should be DOA as of now.  The new 4k delivery specs specifically stipulate no upresing, so if you shoot cinema below 4k, you can never deliver at 4k, which would be horribly stupid on a big-budget enterprise (i.e. one that would use "cinema" cameras and not just dSLRs).

When a $300 gopro can shoot 4k, there's no longer an excuse for a cinema camera not to.

[StORM48]

Cinema this, cinema that... is there any possibility for making photo camera, for a change? 

[AG]

Cinema this, cinema that... is there any possibility for making photo camera, for a change? 

Yes your right if it wasn't for the...

1Dx
5D3
6D
7D
60D
60DE
650D
1100D
EOS M
The G series
and various Point and Shoots

it would ALL be about those 4 damn cinema cameras.

A little perspective goes a long way.

[bp]

To be frank, any "cinema" body that doesn't shoot 4k or above should be DOA as of now.  The new 4k delivery specs specifically stipulate no upresing, so if you shoot cinema below 4k, you can never deliver at 4k, which would be horribly stupid on a big-budget enterprise (i.e. one that would use "cinema" cameras and not just dSLRs).

When a $300 gopro can shoot 4k, there's no longer an excuse for a cinema camera not to.

The GoPro is a jittery 15fps at 4K (or something like that).  No 4K also has me scratching my head a bit on this one.  Why bother?  2.5K RAW video and a pricetag to match or beat the BMCC, and it could find a fanbase.  More 1080p low bitrate, and yeah, what's the point...

[expatinasia]

Considering the 1DC is a staggering US$12,000, I can't wait to see what the pricing on a lesser model will be.

Funny, I have used the word staggering in my last two posts here at CR, and both with were to do with prices!!

[mb66energy]

My first thought: Why just another SLR like camera for video - Canon is making its camera family more and more complex.

But: Why not? Each artist (or gear buyer...) has its own ideas about their "product" - photographs or movies. Canon does NOT mainstream their product portfolio but offer a vast range of different tools.

If I decide to go more into video (after having time to try it, a new PC) it might be a good idea to have a video capable camera which produces GREAT HD videos (with per pixel sharpness) and has good controls for aperture, shutter speed, iso etc.

After my experiences with my 600D the full HD resolution gives results which are technically far above movies made with Super 35 cameras. Viewing the smaller HD movies on an XGA beamer (1024 pixel horizontally) gives crisp quality at 2.5m projection width and 5 meters viewing distance. 4k Beamers are far away and just GOOD HD beamers are in the 5k€ region. So full HD in GOOD QUALITY will be sufficient for nearly all applications where the movie will tell us a story.

4k IMO is a new idea to make things incompatible and to sell new gear and to make things more complicated - with some exceptions. 7 years ago I searched for a large chip (Super 35mm) video camera with exchangeable optics - I had to spend roughly 100000€. I decided to wait a little bit and bought a house instead. The 500€ T3i (600D) does everything what I needed ... what a sense of freedom in terms of "you can buy valuable tools with a standard income".

[Denisas Pupka]

Maybe it was good idea to not hurry with 6D and wait for January 8th. Maybe some good surprises.

[Lawliet]

(i.e. one that would use "cinema" cameras and not just dSLRs).

Now imagine a cine cam that costs about as much as a normal dslr. Would that indie/TV/all kinds of limited budget crew rather use it or the more photo orientated body?
OTOH: the savings of picking a smaller cam over a 1Dc buy me how many globe-hours? I'd prefer streamlined logistics and handling.

[Axilrod]

When a $300 gopro can shoot 4k, there's no longer an excuse for a cinema camera not to.

Have you actually seen the 4K on the Gopro?  It's garbage and looks nowhere close to even a T2i, they only added it to fluff the specs.  And everything is still delivered in 1080p, 4K is still unnecessary at the moment unless you're working on big budget productions.  It sounds like the new Cinema EOS camera could be geared towards prosumers, in which case true 1080p RAW would be fine for me (depending on the price).  DSLR's don't even produce true 1080p, it's really only resolving somewhere around 900 lines, so true 1080p would be a noticeable improvement.

[Axilrod]

After my experiences with my 600D the full HD resolution gives results which are technically far above movies made with Super 35 cameras. Viewing the smaller HD movies on an XGA beamer (1024 pixel horizontally) gives crisp quality at 2.5m projection width and 5 meters viewing distance. 4k Beamers are far away and just GOOD HD beamers are in the 5k€ region. So full HD in GOOD QUALITY will be sufficient for nearly all applications where the movie will tell us a story.

4k IMO is a new idea to make things incompatible and to sell new gear and to make things more complicated - with some exceptions.

You think 4K is just to make things incompatible and sell more gear?  What about megapixels on cameras then?  Is that all a big scam too?  Did you think the same when it went from SD to 720p?  Or 720p to 1080p?  4K has alot of advantages and is the future, it's just following a natural progression of things getting better like any other product.

And while the 600D may be fine for you, there are plenty of people that want something more.  Canon DSLR's aren't even doing real 1080p, there is plenty of room for improvement.

[HurtinMinorKey]

To be frank, any "cinema" body that doesn't shoot 4k or above should be DOA as of now.  The new 4k delivery specs specifically stipulate no upresing, so if you shoot cinema below 4k, you can never deliver at 4k, which would be horribly stupid on a big-budget enterprise (i.e. one that would use "cinema" cameras and not just dSLRs).

When a $300 gopro can shoot 4k, there's no longer an excuse for a cinema camera not to.

Absolutely disagree. Raw is way more important than 4K. If you want to get the best IQ, Raw is the way to go. It'll be years before networks will be demanding things be 4k.  So the only thing 4K gets you is the ability to crop in post.

I hope it's a 7D-C, with 12bit raw, priced to compete directly with the BMC Camera.  But it better have at least 13 stops of DR or it's a non starter. And sadly I bet it won't, because they have to nerf it pretty bad so it stays "differentiated" from the 1D-C.

[mb66energy]

After my experiences with my 600D the full HD resolution gives results which are technically far above movies made with Super 35 cameras. Viewing the smaller HD movies on an XGA beamer (1024 pixel horizontally) gives crisp quality at 2.5m projection width and 5 meters viewing distance. 4k Beamers are far away and just GOOD HD beamers are in the 5k€ region. So full HD in GOOD QUALITY will be sufficient for nearly all applications where the movie will tell us a story.

4k IMO is a new idea to make things incompatible and to sell new gear and to make things more complicated - with some exceptions.

You think 4K is just to make things incompatible and sell more gear?  What about megapixels on cameras then?  Is that all a big scam too?  Did you think the same when it went from SD to 720p?  Or 720p to 1080p?  4K has alot of advantages and is the future, it's just following a natural progression of things getting better like any other product.

And while the 600D may be fine for you, there are plenty of people that want something more.  Canon DSLR's aren't even doing real 1080p, there is plenty of room for improvement.

1080p is IMO sufficient for 99% of all applications and if 1080p beamers in GOOD quality are roughly 1000 EUR/$ we will wait another 10 years.

The way from SD via 720p to 1080p made sense: Image width: 4m, viewing distance: 5m, pixel size: 2mm x 2mm - that makes sense because the eyes resolution is in that region.

You are right that 1080p misses 1080 real lines. IMO it would be a better route to get REAL 1080p before you increase the sheer number of pixels without transporting more information. Nothing against 4k but it should not be the next step before 1080p is ripe.

Resolution for photography is a different thing because a landscape photo is browsed by our eyes for a longer time, resolution is important - in movies the camera operator does that for you.

But the 18 MP of the 600D do roughly compare with the 10 MP of the 40D: Limitations of the lenses and especially sensor noise cancel the advantage of 80 % more pixels a little bit. Except in situations where you have perfect light, perfect subject and perfect aperture values.

[bp]

I hope it's a 7D-C, with 12bit raw, priced to compete directly with the BMC Camera.

Yes.  12bit raw would have me drooling.  Although I'd personally prefer full frame or APS-H, and perhaps 2.5K instead of 1080p