CANON U.S.A. INTRODUCES EOS-1D C DIGITAL SLR CAMERA FEATURING 4K HIGH-RESOLUTION VIDEO CAPTURE

[tjc320]

WOW, I was hoping for $8000, EXPECTING more like $9000 to $10,000, but $15,000 GTFO o.O

This isn't a "DLSR" it's their C300 with a few less things for almost the same price.

If I'm gunna spend this much money, I rather buy a R.E.D. Scarlet
at least I KNOW what I'm getting.

WTH is Canon doing....

Keep in mind a Scarlet will cost you about $25,000 after buying everything you need. That's another 10K so it's not really comparable. You may be able to get buy with spending $20,000 but you'll be limited.

While it's true that the 1D Cinema doesn't have all the features that the C300 has - it does have one major thing over it: 4K output.

[Axilrod]

Look bro.  From whatever angle you look at this thing It's is an instrument of Photography. IT IS A Digital SLR THAT SHOOTS IN 4K. Digital Cinema Cameras across the board don't have shutters in them that flip.  even old motion picture film cameras had a rotating shutter wheel.  If it looks like a photo camera.  Snaps like a photo camera.  IT'S A PHOTO CAMERA! (that happens to shoot in 4k).  and I promise you at 15,000 film makers and television producers AREN'T GOING TO SHOOT WITH SOMETHING THAT IS A PHOTO CAMERA

How many references to cinema, filmmakers, and directors do there need to be for you to accept that this was made with filmmakers in mind?  Why are they releasing it at NAB and not a photo expo? 

You can call it a still camera if you want, but this isn't being marketed towards photographers, it's under "video cameras,'" and it's part of the CINEMA EOS line, so how exactly is this not supposed to appeal to filmmakers?  I guarantee you more filmmakers will use this than photographers.  I'm sure the majority of photographers would prefer a 2 1DX's over this thing.  There are absolutely no advantages to the 1DC over the 1DX in terms of stills, so why would a photographer want to spend $7k more?

People have gotten used to shooting video with DSLRs and have spent thousands of dollars working around it's form factor and all the recent video camera releases have had a more modular design.  They shoot commercials, TV shows, movies with a 5DII/7D/5DIII, why in the hell would they reject this just because of the ergonomics?  If the image quality is good, people are going to use it, bottom line.  Oh and I'm not your bro.

[gene_can_sing]

Canon has completely JUMPED the Shark lately with their very overpriced Video offerings.

Contrary to what many stills people have been posting, just because you work in TV (as I do), does NOT mean that I want to spend an arm and a leg for a sub-performing video camera like what Canon has been offering.

I had about $8K to spend on a camera, and now I'm afraid it's going to Sony who is going to clean house in the $4K to $10K range because of Canon's many miss-steps in video.

They need to replace their marketing division in video because they just keep missing the mark.

No matter how much cash you have, if you're smart, you still want what's best for you money, and Canon video is NOT that.

[Axilrod]

Canon has completely JUMPED the Shark lately with their very overpriced Video offerings.

Contrary to what many stills people have been posting, just because you work in TV (as I do), does NOT mean that I want to spend an arm and a leg for a sub-performing video camera like what Canon has been offering.

I had about $8K to spend on a camera, and now I'm afraid it's going to Sony who is going to clean house in the $4K to $10K range because of Canon's many miss-steps in video.

They need to replace their marketing division in video because they just keep missing the mark.

No matter how much cash you have, if you're smart, you still want what's best for you money, and Canon video is NOT that.

We can only hope that Canon has something else planned down the line, but I'm not going to hold my breath.  If this camera had higher frame rates, built-in ND's, and a host of other features I wouldn't complain at all, but from what I've seen the thing just isn't worth $15k, there are so many alternatives in that price range it just doesn't seem like a standout. 

[ces416]

Look bro.  From whatever angle you look at this thing It's is an instrument of Photography. IT IS A Digital SLR THAT SHOOTS IN 4K. Digital Cinema Cameras across the board don't have shutters in them that flip.  even old motion picture film cameras had a rotating shutter wheel.  If it looks like a photo camera.  Snaps like a photo camera.  IT'S A PHOTO CAMERA! (that happens to shoot in 4k).  and I promise you at 15,000 film makers and television producers AREN'T GOING TO SHOOT WITH SOMETHING THAT IS A PHOTO CAMERA

How many references to cinema, filmmakers, and directors do there need to be for you to accept that this was made with filmmakers in mind?  Why are they releasing it at NAB and not a photo expo? 

You can call it a still camera if you want, but this isn't being marketed towards photographers, it's under "video cameras,'" and it's part of the CINEMA EOS line, so how exactly is this not supposed to appeal to filmmakers?  I guarantee you more filmmakers will use this than photographers.  I'm sure the majority of photographers would prefer a 2 1DX's over this thing.  There are absolutely no advantages to the 1DC over the 1DX in terms of stills, so why would a photographer want to spend $7k more?

People have gotten used to shooting video with DSLRs and have spent thousands of dollars working around it's form factor and all the recent video camera releases have had a more modular design.  They shoot commercials, TV shows, movies with a 5DII/7D/5DIII, why in the hell would they reject this just because of the ergonomics?  If the image quality is good, people are going to use it, bottom line.  Oh and I'm not your bro.

No one cares what it's being marketed as.  Put it next to a Playstation 3 on a the Sony website doesn't make it a Gaming system.
If this is in fact a digital cinema camera.  Shouldn't  the majority of the features resemble that?

Where are the XLR inputs?
An adjustable screen maybe?

By the way... If you tell any major production company that you are going to shoot a tv show primarily with DSLR's you'd give someone a heart attack.  The reason TV shows used Those cameras is because of their affordable price.  I promise you, nobody would have ever used a 5d Mark II if it cost $15,000
show me a  show that shoots "regularly". on a 7d

And I'm sorry about the bro comment... that was rude.

[tjc320]

No one cares what it's being marketed as.  Put it next to a Playstation 3 on a the Sony website doesn't make it a Gaming system.
If this is in fact a digital cinema camera.  Shouldn't  the majority of the features resemble that?

Where are the XLR inputs?
An adjustable screen maybe?

By the way... If you tell any major production company that you are going to shoot a tv show primarily with DSLR's you'd give someone a heart attack.  The reason TV shows used Those cameras is because of their affordable price.  I promise you, nobody would have ever used a 5d Mark II if it cost $15,000
show me a  show that shoots "regularly". on a 7d

And I'm sorry about the bro comment... that was rude.

I think you're both 100% accurate. It is a camera made for still photos. However, they are marketing it towards filmmakers. This, I think, is the fundamental reason why Canon is completely screwing themselves. I'm assuming they have a plan for these cameras and a long term goal for the line as a whole. Right now, I just don't see it. They sure aren't making it clear either.

I think Canon just needs to listen to users first and look at what their market is and how they can best compete with other companies.

A lot of info on these cameras should surface in the next few weeks that could help. Maybe they will lower the price like they did with the C300. Who knows...do they (Canon)?

[bp]

show me a  show that shoots "regularly". on a 7d

Last Call with Carson Daly
They shoot with 5D's and 7D's

[Axilrod]

No one cares what it's being marketed as.  Put it next to a Playstation 3 on a the Sony website doesn't make it a Gaming system.
If this is in fact a digital cinema camera.  Shouldn't  the majority of the features resemble that?

Where are the XLR inputs?
An adjustable screen maybe?

By the way... If you tell any major production company that you are going to shoot a tv show primarily with DSLR's you'd give someone a heart attack.  The reason TV shows used Those cameras is because of their affordable price.  I promise you, nobody would have ever used a 5d Mark II if it cost $15,000
show me a  show that shoots "regularly". on a 7d

Ok, I get it, you would never use this camera for a video production, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world feels the same way.  I would imagine people would love to use it as a B cam or in tight situations (which is the reason they used the 5DII on House).  People use rigs, external recorders and external monitors, and this cam would function just as well using said equipment.  I think this thing is crazy overpriced regardless, but I can see people opting for it in certain situations.  It's kinda hard to judge until we see the footage coming out of it, it could be ridiculously incredibly awesome, and in that case I'm sure it would be well received.  I think if the resolution is really amazing that people would be willing to deal with the hassles involved with shooting with a DSLR body.   We'll see.

[mccrum]

"Honey, you know how we've been saving to buy a car?  I got a camera instead!"

$15,000.  And there are a lot of people who are going to buy two.  Wow.

What's a Hasselblad up to these days, maybe I'll get back into film...

[gene_can_sing]

"Honey, you know how we've been saving to buy a car?  I got a camera instead!"

$15,000.  And there are a lot of people who are going to buy two.  Wow.

What's a Hasselblad up to these days, maybe I'll get back into film...

I guarantee the 1D-C will be a flop. I work in video and TV, and people are pretty bummed about it, especially since it's $15K.

The super high end Canon going for $35K. Now that camera seems to be worth the price because it's way up there in performance, but the 1D-X just seems like the world's most expensive firmware update.

Canon video is going to lose their shirts, and Sony is going to capitalize big time.

[JR]

"Honey, you know how we've been saving to buy a car?  I got a camera instead!"

$15,000.  And there are a lot of people who are going to buy two.  Wow.

What's a Hasselblad up to these days, maybe I'll get back into film...

I guarantee the 1D-C will be a flop. I work in video and TV, and people are pretty bummed about it, especially since it's $15K.

The super high end Canon going for $35K. Now that camera seems to be worth the price because it's way up there in performance, but the 1D-X just seems like the world's most expensive firmware update.

Canon video is going to lose their shirts, and Sony is going to capitalize big time.

Not sure about that but it does feel like the video group is in charge now does it!

[DavidRiesenberg]

Like I said before, what irks me is that 1D-C is virtually a 1D-X with a video firmware which means that theoretically the 1DX should be capable of delivering the same image. The only difference being is that Canon knows that they cannot milk 16K from stills photographers but hope they can do so from the video crowd.

[neuroanatomist]

I guarantee the 1D-C will be a flop. I work in video and TV, and people are pretty bummed about it, especially since it's $15K.

Canon video is going to lose their shirts, and Sony is going to capitalize big time.

Gene_has_been_singing_this_tune_for_months. 

I used to work in academic science. My lab mates and I would go to a scientific meeting, see the latest golliwog instrument, and say wow that's great, but no one will ever buy that, it costs way too much.  Now I work in pharma, and I have a multimillion dollar annual capital budget - what was insanely overpriced before is now quite affordable.  Point is, Canon seems to be targeting big-budget studios and filmmakers with their recent cinema releases (note: they call it the Cinema EOS line, not the 'video' line), and not indie filmmakers.  Canon's goal isn't to please everyone, it's to turn a profit.  If the quality is high, just as I have no problem spending $1MM on a piece of scientific instrumentation, major studios will have no problem spending $15K on a camera.  Heck, buy ten, they're cheap.  Probably not a flop, again, provided it delivers on quality.

[dilbert]

I guarantee the 1D-C will be a flop. I work in video and TV, and people are pretty bummed about it, especially since it's $15K.

Canon video is going to lose their shirts, and Sony is going to capitalize big time.

Gene_has_been_singing_this_tune_for_months. 

I used to work in academic science. My lab mates and I would go to a scientific meeting, see the latest golliwog instrument, and say wow that's great, but no one will ever buy that, it costs way too much.  Now I work in pharma, and I have a multimillion dollar annual capital budget - what was insanely overpriced before is now quite affordable.  Point is, Canon seems to be targeting big-budget studios and filmmakers with their recent cinema releases (note: they call it the Cinema EOS line, not the 'video' line), and not indie filmmakers.  Canon's goal isn't to please everyone, it's to turn a profit.  If the quality is high, just as I have no problem spending $1MM on a piece of scientific instrumentation, major studios will have no problem spending $15K on a camera.  Heck, buy ten, they're cheap.  Probably not a flop, again, provided it delivers on quality.

I still think that if it had of been announced at $8k, people would have been saying "Why isn't it $4k?".

If you're a professional and this is what you need then you work on your budget and find a way to make it fit and bring it into your tool set, not complain that it is a few $ more than you've saved.

[AG]

“The Canon EOS-1D C digital SLR camera was designed in response to the needs of filmmakers, television producers, and other high-level motion-imaging professionals,” stated Yuichi Ishizuka, executive vice president and general manager, Imaging Technologies & Communications Group, Canon U.S.A. “Not only does it combine 4K and Full HD video capture with a convenient design, its use of dual CF cards also offers an efficient workflow compatible with today’s post-production requirements.”

If you're not in that group of people above then why are you complaining about the price?

Clearly Canon understands who its target audience is and clearly some people would like to think they're part of a group that quite clearly they're not.

I understand your logic, but in this case why a DSLR? This isn't what "high-level motion-imaging professionals" need.
Thisisnot a specialized video camera, super basic features like SDI or XLR are missing, i mean even the display is 3:2, not even 16:9 !!
This is just an unlocked 1DX

I can clear this up easily.

Form Factor.

Take for example the episode of house that was shot on the 5D2, The reason why they used that camera was due to its size, it was able to produce nice pictures and be able to be positioned in awkward spots to attain the best angles. Something that you can not do with a camera in a rig/cage or large footprint (ARRI etc).

The 1D-C increases the viewing format but keeps the form factor.

Its that simple.

As for those bitching about the price, its like point & shoot users complaining the xD series are too expensive. When in reality an xxxD would suit their needs.