Inside the Canon EOS-1D C

[jondave]

IP is priceless, and Canon like anyone else can sell it at any price they want. Software companies have been doing this for decades.

I sincerely hope the usual Canon bashers here don't rant in this thread cause Canon is selling the same hardware for double the price. As I always say, if you can't afford it, don't buy it. Just because you can't afford it doesn't mean you should rant about it - if you're so pissed go invent one yourself and I dare you to sell it at the price you're thinking of.

[victorwol]

IP is priceless, and Canon like anyone else can sell it at any price they want. Software companies have been doing this for decades.

I sincerely hope the usual Canon bashers here don't rant in this thread cause Canon is selling the same hardware for double the price. As I always say, if you can't afford it, don't buy it. Just because you can't afford it doesn't mean you should rant about it - if you're so pissed go invent one yourself and I dare you to sell it at the price you're thinking of.

Ditto!!!

[Marsu42]

You shall not alter, modify, disassemble, decompile or otherwise reverse engineer the Software and you also shall not have any third party to do so.

I hope this announcement will be enough to make people leave us alone about hacking the 1D

Thanks for the information, just as everyone else I never read the fine print (and am not a lawyer) :-o

[pp77]

>Firmware
>The EOS-1D X has some traces of the EOS-1D C firmware code and the features are locked. We don’t know how much of the firmware is the same.

For me this statement strongly implies that it can be done in principle....

[NormanBates]

Fair or not, this "same hardware at twice the price" thing is not going to earn them a lot of sympathy

[LetTheRightLensIn]

For me the base problem i can see here is not with the people that are purchasing this camera and their wealth.

It's more to do with the fact that canon has priced this camera at the point it has to not hurt sales of their other products like the 1DX and the C100 (both of which retail for around $7k).

If they reduced the price of the 1DC to say $500 more than the 1DX who honestly would buy the 1DX anymore?
Let alone the C100.
So instead they put it up with the C300 and claim that its double the camera than the 1DX and thats why its double the cost.

I don't understand why Canon cant just put 4K into the 1DX, call it the 1DX Mk2 or 1DX "C" or whatever at the same price point as what the 1DX is now and thats the end of that.

They would create a second "DSLR video Revolution" as they like to call it, and the other manufacturers would have to play catch up again.

Oh well greed/profits always win out in the end.

Indeed they could've made a 5D3 perhaps too that would've flow off the shelves in a way that made the 5D2 look like it never sold a copy, instead they are not just one of many and no longer own the very market they had created. It's not the way to become a huge, dominant company. I guess it is the way to be ultra-conservative and slug along just being one in the crowd though and getting some intense profits per copy at low copy sales though.

The only reason they even created the revolution to begin with is because they didn't even have a clue. The second they get a clue they kill it off. I was afraid once we first heard rumors about C cams and C100s it was over.

But who knows maybe going this conservative route gets them more money in the end. Or maybe not. Anyway they have made their decision.

[syder]

And changing some flags in the 1dx firmware via ml probably wouldn't be illegal either, Canon doesn't make you sign a contract "no 3rd party firmware allowed" when selling the camera. But as it is, even targeting a whole department of lawyers on a single person might have some impact :-o

actually, when you download any canon firmware update you agree to these terms:

You shall not alter, modify, disassemble, decompile or otherwise reverse engineer the Software and you also shall not have any third party to do so.

I hope this announcement will be enough to make people leave us alone about hacking the 1D

There's a big difference between what corporations put in end user license agreements (ie what they wish to happen) and what is actually legal.

For example Apple said much the same thing about all iOS devices in their EULAs - however when they went to the US library of congress to ask to have iOS jailbreaking formally declared to be an illegal act, their case was thrown out as it was decided that once a consumer has purchased a device they are free to install whatever (legally created and obtained) software they wish. That doesn't stop Apple releasing firmware updates which patch the methods by which jailbreaks occur, and Canon could certainly do this, but simply saying it's illegal to install software on devices which own isn't true.

I would imagine that in the US at least this would set a very strong legal precedent should Canon actually decide to go after anyone for writing custom firmware for a 1DX

[Ellen Schmidtee]

actually, when you download any canon firmware update you agree to these terms:

You shall not alter, modify, disassemble, decompile or otherwise reverse engineer the Software and you also shall not have any third party to do so.

I hope this announcement will be enough to make people leave us alone about hacking the 1D

Easy to write, not so easy to enforce.

E.g. John could ask Peter to download the firmware for him. Peter did not ask John to do anything with the firmware, and John did not agree to the terms. John doesn't even have to name John, so Canon would have to prove in court that Peter downloaded the firmware himself.

[japhoto]

The price aside, this thing could make an epic long exposure tool if the sensor cooling works also for stills...

[dolina]

If Apple Inc cannot bring the jailbreakers to justice what hope of Canon Inc? They have better luck stiffing the grey market imports.

4K video should not cost that much!

[NormanBates]

4K video should not cost that much!

And it won't. It's just that it won't be Canon selling the cameras.

[max]

 

http://www.cinevate.com/blog/canon-1d-c-motion-image-photography
Amazing what they can extract from a video! 8MP images... imagine what can be done!
All those almost pics that you would get!

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If Apple Inc cannot bring the jailbreakers to justice what hope of Canon Inc? They have better luck stiffing the grey market imports.

4K video should not cost that much!

The real danger, as some have said, is that they could start encrypting firmwares in future bodies and make it 10x more difficult to make ML for say the 5D4 or 7D2 and so. So many believe it is best to let sleeping dogs lie. 1DX/C doesn't get publicly unlocked and Canon doesn't make it a true mess to code for future non-1 series bodies.

[Portrait_Moments_Photogra]

they would “bring the might of its legal team” to anyone that attempts to modify at the software level,

DEAR CANON

leave your customers alone - we bought your over priced camera - let us do what we want with it.
 besides - it did not cost you anything for ML to do their work.

~ we can sue you too you know - you have no business what we do with our cameras.

[Area256]

There's a big difference between what corporations put in end user license agreements (ie what they wish to happen) and what is actually legal.

For example Apple said much the same thing about all iOS devices in their EULAs - however when they went to the US library of congress to ask to have iOS jailbreaking formally declared to be an illegal act, their case was thrown out as it was decided that once a consumer has purchased a device they are free to install whatever (legally created and obtained) software they wish. That doesn't stop Apple releasing firmware updates which patch the methods by which jailbreaks occur, and Canon could certainly do this, but simply saying it's illegal to install software on devices which own isn't true.

I would imagine that in the US at least this would set a very strong legal precedent should Canon actually decide to go after anyone for writing custom firmware for a 1DX

I think if someone unlocked code features in the firmware of the 1DX to let it do 4K, than Canon would have a case - it would be like using software you didn't pay for.  If, however, someone writes 3rd party software, like ML, to do 4K video without using hidden Canon code, than they have less of a case in the US (based on the above ruling).  Although it's possible that like nVidia's graphics cards, they have some kind of hardware switch that will make it impossible to access the required bits of hardware.