Canon EOS-1D C Available?

[marvinhello]

One thing I can't believe is that they are actually running with the $15k price.  I heard it may actually debut at $12k (kind of like the C300 was announced at $20k but debuted at $16k). 

Retail here in Australia is $9,999AUD
http://www.techrific.com.au/canon-eos-1d-c-digital-slr-camera-body-only-1dc-free-gift-12mth-local-warranty-p-2956.html

But I mean seriously what hardware on this thing is any different from the 1DX?  I know it has all the same still features, but I want to know what physical changes they made for this to shoot 4K or if it's just a $7k firmware update.  They said the price was due to "development costs," but they could have sold a hell of alot of these if they had priced it at $8k.

This is why I'm wondering how hard it could be for the ML team or similar to hack the 1DX with the 1DC firmware.
That would suddenly make this a $6500 camera (and have a lot of angry customers feeling ripped off)

the thermal design and some data processing module are different between 1D C and 1D X, the latter couldn't handle continuous 4K shooting, it's the heat and the huge amount of data.

[AG]

the thermal design and some data processing module are different between 1D C and 1D X, the latter couldn't handle continuous 4K shooting, it's the heat and the huge amount of data.

Or so we are told.

[gene_can_sing]

Someone mentioned they'd be surprised if they sold 100 of these things. I'd be surprised if they sold more than 5. Nobody I know who works in video and TV are excited about it. It's was announced days ago and nobody really even cares at this point, probably because of the ridiculous price.

Now Black Magic and Sony, they are making some serious waves in video. Could have been Canon, but they let it all slip away with their greed.

[mememe]

Is it just me or does this picture look like a really bad fake?

[jpk]

My opinion on this camera. The price will eventually be well south of $15k. It is a B,C or D camera that can be trashed in motion pictures. Your basic crash cam. There will be some that will actually use it to shoot some sort of budget features but essentially it is a disposable, relatively inexpensive camera that will put out high quality 4k images. If it survives an incident in a violent situation, great. Load it up and shoot again. If it's destroyed, write it off on the taxes. No value for stills as it was designed specificly as a secondary motion picture capture camera. All one has to do is look at how the motion picture industry has used the 5D2 and 7D and to me it only seems logical for Canon to produce a camera with a higher image quality to supliment primary cameras. Essentially a better 5d2/7D. That's my take.

[distant.star]

If you have received an EOS-1D C, I’d love to see an unboxing.

Unboxing???

For that money, they should hand deliver it in a mahogany cabinet!

[Axilrod]

My opinion on this camera. The price will eventually be well south of $15k. It is a B,C or D camera that can be trashed in motion pictures. Your basic crash cam. There will be some that will actually use it to shoot some sort of budget features but essentially it is a disposable, relatively inexpensive camera that will put out high quality 4k images. If it survives an incident in a violent situation, great. Load it up and shoot again. If it's destroyed, write it off on the taxes. No value for stills as it was designed specificly as a secondary motion picture capture camera. All one has to do is look at how the motion picture industry has used the 5D2 and 7D and to me it only seems logical for Canon to produce a camera with a higher image quality to supliment primary cameras. Essentially a better 5d2/7D. That's my take.

Someone posted that it's 9,999 in Australia," and our dollar is worth only a bit more so it may debut at a little more than $10k.  I bet that's why it isn't available for preorder yet because b&h isn't sure on the price.

[Axilrod]

My opinion on this camera. The price will eventually be well south of $15k. It is a B,C or D camera that can be trashed in motion pictures. Your basic crash cam. There will be some that will actually use it to shoot some sort of budget features but essentially it is a disposable, relatively inexpensive camera that will put out high quality 4k images. If it survives an incident in a violent situation, great. Load it up and shoot again. If it's destroyed, write it off on the taxes. No value for stills as it was designed specificly as a secondary motion picture capture camera. All one has to do is look at how the motion picture industry has used the 5D2 and 7D and to me it only seems logical for Canon to produce a camera with a higher image quality to supliment primary cameras. Essentially a better 5d2/7D. That's my take.

No value for stills?  It has all the same still features the 1dx has....

[paulrossjones]

i dont quite understand this camera.

its great that it has 4k. but the real strength i would have thought is to have 4k as a full frame camera- this is what would make it unique, and the best at something.
but it crops to super 35 when shooting 4k.  it also shoot 24frames only at 4k, which is ok for cinema, but not much good for TVC's.

but, hardly anyone really needs 4k, so i guess thats not a big deal. (ive asked many very good DPs, and they say 2k is more than enough res for all their work).

It does however shoot 1080p with full frame up to 60p which is great, but does so at a very reduced 4.2.0! why??? so you are paying for a 15k camera that shoots 4.2.0 for any usable stuff...

then the final very unprofessional aspect of this camera is the mini hdmi out- it doesn't have hdsdi out. this is the most unreliable/ unprofessional aspect of all hdslrs. its the biggest pain when ever i shoot.

so, why will people buy this camera with these specs? i can see the c500 selling like hot cakes, but this 1dc with all its limitations and weird dslr form factor seems odd. i think people that really need 4k will spend the extra for the c500- which really does have a great feature list.

i would have been keen on a 1dc being a photographer that shoots a little video, but the 4.2.0 1080p makes it pointless compared with a 5dmk3 or a idx.

paul

[jpk]

Value for stills? Don't understand this camera? Why when the 5d3 and 1DX are roughly the same MP's and do a great job with stills, and with video up to a point. The difference is the 4k image quality which seems to have become the professional threshold for high end video cinematography. Why have that feature on a DSLR if it wasn't targeted specificly at the motion picture industry. Why produce it in a DSLR body? Obviously the size of the 1DC means it can be mounted in places where larger and bulkier camera bodies cannot fit or need to be hidden or as a crash cam. Act of Valor was shot for the most part with 5 and 7D's. That leads me to believe this camera was specificly aimed at the pro movie making industry. 

I'm sure you can use it as a still camera but why spend what may eventually be a $10k body vs an $8k body just to shoot stills and have a feature/s you won't need or use.

[rustes]

Yesterday, 8/24/2012 ,  In my campus in Miami, there was a crew filming a TV ad for a congresswoman. I walked over to see what they were filming with...

Canon 1D C...

The camera had a property tag on it .... budgetvideo from www.budgetvideo.com

A local rental company here.

[paulrossjones]

Value for stills? Don't understand this camera? Why when the 5d3 and 1DX are roughly the same MP's and do a great job with stills, and with video up to a point. The difference is the 4k image quality which seems to have become the professional threshold for high end video cinematography. Why have that feature on a DSLR if it wasn't targeted specificly at the motion picture industry. Why produce it in a DSLR body? Obviously the size of the 1DC means it can be mounted in places where larger and bulkier camera bodies cannot fit or need to be hidden or as a crash cam. Act of Valor was shot for the most part with 5 and 7D's. That leads me to believe this camera was specificly aimed at the pro movie making industry. 

I'm sure you can use it as a still camera but why spend what may eventually be a $10k body vs an $8k body just to shoot stills and have a feature/s you won't need or use.

why would someone shoot a 4k movie with a camera with hdmi and the weird shape that the 1dc is? I shoot a fair bit of video with my 5dmk3, and its size is an advantage. but the 1dc is as large and as heavy as c300/c500 and the form factor is wrong for a motion camera.
Act of valor is a competent bit of film making, but you cant tell me there isn't a bit of canon sponsorship and PR going on there.
for most movies, the cheapest bit of the whole project is the camera. the slight price advantage of the 1dc wouldnt really be a big motivation to use it imo.

but i feel if they had added a decent quality 1080p or 2k video at full frame, then they would have made a great camera for people like me- who want a stills camera that doesn't excellent quality video. however, the 1dc will output 4.2.2 into a external recorder I believe. maybe that will be its redeeming feature.

paul

[Axilrod]

. That leads me to believe this camera was specificly aimed at the pro movie making industry. 

Everything under the cinema eos line is aimed at the cinema industry, $15k-$25k bodies and $40k+ lenses are nowhere close to the prosumer realm.

[jpk]

Value for stills? Don't understand this camera? Why when the 5d3 and 1DX are roughly the same MP's and do a great job with stills, and with video up to a point. The difference is the 4k image quality which seems to have become the professional threshold for high end video cinematography. Why have that feature on a DSLR if it wasn't targeted specificly at the motion picture industry. Why produce it in a DSLR body? Obviously the size of the 1DC means it can be mounted in places where larger and bulkier camera bodies cannot fit or need to be hidden or as a crash cam. Act of Valor was shot for the most part with 5 and 7D's. That leads me to believe this camera was specificly aimed at the pro movie making industry. 

I'm sure you can use it as a still camera but why spend what may eventually be a $10k body vs an $8k body
 just to shoot stills and have a feature/s you won't need or use.

why would someone shoot a 4k movie with a camera with hdmi and the weird shape that the 1dc is? I shoot a fair bit of video with my 5dmk3, and its size is an advantage. but the 1dc is as large and as heavy as c300/c500 and the form factor is wrong for a motion camera.
Act of valor is a competent bit of film making, but you cant tell me there isn't a bit of canon sponsorship and PR going on there.
for most movies, the cheapest bit of the whole project is the camera. the slight price advantage of the 1dc wouldnt really be a big motivation to use it imo.

but i feel if they had added a decent quality 1080p or 2k video at full frame, then they would have made a great camera for people like me- who want a stills camera that doesn't excellent quality video. however, the 1dc will output 4.2.2 into a external recorder I believe. maybe that will be its redeeming feature.

paul

Answer a simple question and you may understand why. Why would someone shoot any video production with a 5D2 or 7D DSLR with all the very good high end video cameras that are available? Now add to that the 1D-C. I think you will find your answer.

[peederj]

If this is 3-5x the price of the BMCC, why wouldn't they use the BMCC as a crash cam instead? What you _might_ lose in resolution...we won't know until someone shoots resolution charts with both...you regain in the BMCC's far superior RAW encoding onto commodity SSDs (which are faster and cheaper per GB than high-capacity CF cards).

The 1DC is not full-frame video btw...I think it crops to APS-H for video. Still, a bigger sensor, with better low-light, but the video output more or less sucks from it comparitively. I would rather have a C300 for the money and I think the C300 should cost more like $7,000. The C300 has good rolling shutter performance in its favor over all of these.

The reason I think 100 will be bought is because it's expensive and says Canon and there are 100 conspicuously consumptive collectors in the world who will just buy it for that and only that reason. I don't think anyone costing out a cinematic production is going to put these on the rental list...the rental houses may not even buy them. Canon may have to lend these to rental houses and productions or even pay productions to use them so they can showcase it as a demo. This may have been a cool idea when they thought of it two years ago but Canon has been overtaken by events and competitors that are in game shape.