Cinema EOS 1D & EOS C500 for NAB

[DarkKnightNine]

All this suggests to me is that Canon has gotten a taste of the ridiculous prices that people in the cinematography world are willing to pay and have become a money hungry entity. They don't innovate or revolutionize, they only capitalize. Yes I'm sure both camera will be heralded as the greatest thing of the moment (until something inevitably better comes out), but there is absolutely no reason for those price points other than the foolishness of the industry for which they are being marketed to. Unfortunately, Canon has been bitten by that bug and we are seeing the same kind of inflated prices on the still photography side. There was no reason for the 5D Mark III to be that expensive. Heck Nikon had to buy components from other manufacturers for the D800 and yet they were able to keep the pricing lower. It saddens me to see Canon go down this road because it means that these kind of inflated prices may continue and thus become the norm for us still camera folks.

[Ranga]

I use a 60D with EF-S 17 55 and EF 50 f/1.4. All the newer lenses and bodies have been priced out of my reach. 60D with magic lantern to me, is more useful than the 5D mk III. Id be willing to go up to $4500 for an EOS 1D. Ideal price would have been around $3000. I will leave the expensive toys for the rich boys/girls and rent out a Sony F3 kit or a Sony FS100 kit for less than $200 a day.

[Drizzt321]

All this suggests to me is that Canon has gotten a taste of the ridiculous prices that people in the cinematography world are willing to pay

Yup, it really is kinda ridiculous. However, historically, it probably has actually cost that much for a lot of the equipment. After all, if you're going to be releasing a full feature length big movie, you better have the image quality (what defines that is left up to the cinematographer & director) to back it up. And that means really great lenses, lots of very well built tripods, dolly's, lighting (continuous! no fancy strobes for video to freeze the motion), all the people who have spent years learning how to use it, and the organization to bring it all together.

So, while it would be really nice to see some prices come down for some of the stuff that seems like it's just a firmware update away, *cough*Magic Lantern*cough*, the reality is that the high margin stuff at the mid/high end is where they really want to be positioned. And to meet the tolerances expected, it will actually cost more to produce and ensure that nearly every single piece of equipment delivered meets the QA standards for that product.

[Woody]

They don't innovate or revolutionize, they only capitalize. Yes I'm sure both camera will be heralded as the greatest thing of the moment (until something inevitably better comes out), but there is absolutely no reason for those price points other than the foolishness of the industry for which they are being marketed to.

Well, at least we know Canon won't go under anytime soon... Their profit may fall due to the strong Yen and other natural calamities, but they sure know how to recuperate their loss in profits. Sony, OTOH, is seriously bleeding.

Unfortunately, Canon has been bitten by that bug and we are seeing the same kind of inflated prices on the still photography side. There was no reason for the 5D Mark III to be that expensive.

It should be pointed out the prices of 5D3 vs D800 are not necessarily the same in every part of the world. In S.E. Asia, the D800 costs about US$100 MORE than the 5D3.

[Ivar]

Quite interesting.

Wasn't the reason for (somewhat questionable for 1Ds owners) merging the 1D and 1Ds to keep the costs down?

Now a similarily "megapixeled" with only some more video capabilities the new camera doesn't make sense, isn't it? Instead of the 1D & the 1Ds we would have the 1Dx and the 1DC(inema), history repeated.
Wouldn't a high MP 1DxS made more sense?

[simonfilm]

Does anybody know what could be the price of the componets that make up a C500 that has a price of $35000?

Thank you very much!

Simon.

[Canon-F1]

I seriously HOPE they keep the megapixels down. High Megapixels = bad video because of the downscaling that is needed..

well that is not true, if you use pixel binning.
and 18 MP would not be the optimum for 4k.

[Canon-F1]

Does anybody know what could be the price of the componets that make up a C500 that has a price of $35000?

Thank you very much!

same that makes ARRI cost 60k-120k i guess...

[dilbert]

Does anybody know what could be the price of the componets that make up a C500 that has a price of $35000?

Thank you very much!

same that makes ARRI cost 60k-120k i guess...

I imagine that because of the precision requirements for the engineering that there are either very few or no machines involved in the assembly, meaning hand tooled or low volume, pushing the prices way up.

The micro-focus adjustment in EOS DSLRs is an admission that the factory assembly line isn't that perfect for cameras/lenses. That sort of alignment problem isn't tolerable for professional film folks.

[DavidRiesenberg]

Does anybody know what could be the price of the componets that make up a C500 that has a price of $35000?

Thank you very much!

Simon.

I'd guess about $2000-$3000.

[dichiaras]

Canon EOS C500

To compete with RED Epic
4K at 120fps EOS RAW via 3G HD-SDI
At 60 fps EOS RAW from the C500 is 12 bit.
Priced around $35,000

Great, that's just the upgrade from my 1100D I was waiting for. 

[dilbert]

I seriously HOPE they keep the megapixels down. High Megapixels = bad video because of the downscaling that is needed.

Make it 22 mpx MAX. I was hoping it would not be more than 18 mpx.

Lets see, 4K done in the fashion of the C300 would require 39MP.
That's no downscaling or upscaling to get 4K video.
For 1080p video, 2x2 binning would suffice.

If you were acquiring a 4K video camera, wouldn't you want a sensor like this that didn't require any interpolation to decode the Bayer matrix?

Or would you rather a lower resolution sensor that required interpolation both up to 4K and down to 1080p?

[Musouka]

My guess is that people looking for an exciting still camera are going to be out of luck for another cycle or two, at least from Canon.   And with Sony's massive loss this year we might see some scaling back from that competition, so we are likely to see some serious stagnation for a while.

Under the One Sony plan, the company is going to "focus on digital imaging, gaming and mobile for growth, until those three make up 70 percent of its total sales in 2014." (source, emphasis added) so we can expect the company to push forward in the digital imaging arena with competitive products.

[Canon-F1]

Under the One Sony plan, the company is going to "focus on digital imaging, gaming and mobile for growth, until those three make up 70 percent of its total sales in 2014." (source, emphasis added) so we can expect the company to push forward in the digital imaging arena with competitive products.

question is.. focus on NEX or ALPHA?

will sony spend R&D on a sector (alpha) it will be very hard for them to compete?
they have to work on the lens lineup. im not sure that the results will justifie it.

but then... what do i know. 
i see only my surrounding and i don´t know a single person with a sony alpha.

[mb66energy]

My bet (from simply calculating ...):
It will have something around
  8 Mio x 5.3 Mio pixels
to allow 2x2 or 4x4 binning for quad HD (2160)/4k and HD (1080)
resulting in 42 MPix.

So it will be the high MPix alternative to the 5D Mk III with enhanced
and future proof video capabilities. And the studio cam for Hi Res stills. And an
alternative to other full frame cameras with roughly 40 MPix. And hopefully
a small raw with 10MPix with binning: Each resulting pixel created from1 red, 1
blue and 2 green photosites.