Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera

[gene_can_sing]

The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)

Canon needs to start competing in video instead of riding on their fast fading name. Cut prices and start making competitive products. Even in stills, Nikon has the better bodies now. That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.

Canon had to do so little to own the video market, but the way they played their cards was like going into the NBA finals with a 30 point lead in the fourth quarter and somehow losing. Seemed almost impossible to do, but they lost the video market they should have owned.

[Nishi Drew]

The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)

Canon needs to start competing in video instead of riding on their fast fading name. Cut prices and start making competitive products. Even in stills, Nikon has the better bodies now. That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.

Canon had to do so little to own the video market, but the way they played their cards was like going into the NBA finals with a 30 point lead in the fourth quarter and somehow losing. Seemed almost impossible to do, but they lost the video market they should have owned.

I, along with those countless others joined Canon on the journey of HD-DSLR video, and it was awesome, right at the beginning. Canon somehow lost out on the point of the 5D being popular because it was a "Cheap 35mm sensor with HD video" and decided the world wants the Cinema cameras instead, not the same camera system with improved specs and usability of the new feature. Soon after, every other manufacturer embraces the roll of putting video in their still cameras and moves forward with the evolution, even m4/3 looks to be better what's up with that?

[jhines]

That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.

Amen!

Canon's cinema line has alienated pretty much of all Canon's customers who bought their DSLR's for video. The sad thing is that in order for the DSLR's to step up their quality they will be stepping on the toes of their Cinema line (C100,C300, etc). You can't even get 1080p 60P for less than $15,000 with Canon and that's utterly absurd when every cheap point and shoot from Sony has had it for the last 3 years for a few hundred dollars. Time for Canon to wake the F up.

[lola]

Unfortunately for me; I'm not surprised even a bit...
Fortunately for Canon, there are so many fanboys who won't get anything out of this video...

[sb]

This is embarrassing to watch. Not that an SLR needs to be able to compete with a dedicated video camera, but at least put up a fight in the DR department.... And the price point - OMG... At sub $3000, this video camera is probably the best bang-for-buck on the market. 5DMK3's footage looks like it's been downsized to 720p and then stretched to 1080p. I dont understand what Canon was doing for the past 5 years.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)

Canon needs to start competing in video instead of riding on their fast fading name. Cut prices and start making competitive products. Even in stills, Nikon has the better bodies now. That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.

Canon had to do so little to own the video market, but the way they played their cards was like going into the NBA finals with a 30 point lead in the fourth quarter and somehow losing. Seemed almost impossible to do, but they lost the video market they should have owned.

Yup.
They had the market, until their marketing realized it and then they went and tossed it (not completely but a lot). As you say they could've so utterly entrenched themselves as THE player in the small pretty high quality little body video field. Instead they went to their internal segmentation, cripplings, delaying until they absolutely must release something game and now they are just going to be one of many side players quite likely.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)

Canon needs to start competing in video instead of riding on their fast fading name. Cut prices and start making competitive products. Even in stills, Nikon has the better bodies now. That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.

Canon had to do so little to own the video market, but the way they played their cards was like going into the NBA finals with a 30 point lead in the fourth quarter and somehow losing. Seemed almost impossible to do, but they lost the video market they should have owned.

I, along with those countless others joined Canon on the journey of HD-DSLR video, and it was awesome, right at the beginning. Canon somehow lost out on the point of the 5D being popular because it was a "Cheap 35mm sensor with HD video" and decided the world wants the Cinema cameras instead, not the same camera system with improved specs and usability of the new feature. Soon after, every other manufacturer embraces the roll of putting video in their still cameras and moves forward with the evolution, even m4/3 looks to be better what's up with that?

Exactly. Idiotic. The world already had the other stuff. That ws NOT their revolution and now they need to cripple their revolution to protect the other stuff. And we have the 5D3 video and video features not at all what they could have been (even with the given hardware) and the 1DX needs a $6000 firmware update, etc.

[gene_can_sing]

The funniest thing is that if they did the 5D3 right, it would have probably been the biggest selling large sensor video hybrid camera in history. For every C300 they sold, they would have sold 100 5D3s if it was done right.

But now as it stands, nobody really cares about their cameras for video and the 5D3 has very lukewarm sales for the video crowd (not even close to the 5D2 or the 7D). Not only did they lose huge amounts of sales, they lost a huge amount of respect from their video customers and once people leave, it's hard to get them back.

For me, I bought a Sony FS700 and I absolutely LOVE it. Great camera for the price. It's been about 1 1/2 years since I've bought anything Canon, and that's not going to change until they make something worth buying.

[willis]

Should make that test again and change 5D3 to C100.

[Woody]

It's been about 1 1/2 years since I've bought anything Canon, and that's not going to change until they make something worth buying.

For me, the 6D will be the last Canon purchase I make. After that, I don't see myself getting anything from them until something worthwhile comes along.

I am however not so certain if the marketing folks are at fault. I suspect the recent spate of retiree is making its toll on the company.

[PVS]

THIS^ is a lot of difference canon has to catch up with.

[risc32]

Again, I'm not a video guy, but while i see the blown out stuff here and the crushed stuff there in the 5d image, this BM image looks hdr artificial to me. It's almost all mid-tones. Is that the end target, or from that they can make something really nice? because if that's it, i'm not so sure i'd take the BM over the 5d in this shot. Can't they just put a wicked tone curve on the the 5d and get something pretty close. again, just a photo guy here, so try and take it easy on me

THIS^ is a lot of difference canon has to catch up with.

[verysimplejason]

Again, I'm not a video guy, but while i see the blown out stuff here and the crushed stuff there in the 5d image, this BM image looks hdr artificial to me. It's almost all mid-tones. Is that the end target, or from that they can make something really nice? because if that's it, i'm not so sure i'd take the BM over the 5d in this shot. Can't they just put a wicked tone curve on the the 5d and get something pretty close. again, just a photo guy here, so try and take it easy on me

You mean you don't like the picture because it seems HDR?  I think the BM picture is nearer to what the human eye can see than the one produced by Canon.  I think BM has its DR expanded that's why it almost look like a "natural" HDR.  I think the end target should always be the performance of the human eye and from what I see, BM is nearer to reality.

[PVS]

it's not just the highlights area, there's noticeable difference in darker shadow areas too.

[cayenne]

<snip>

It's definitely not a perfect camera (but there isn't really such a thing), but  I'm still interested.  I may end up opting for the MFT mount instead of the EF.  I'd probably end up shooting in 1080p ProRes most of the time, but true 1080p is still going to look much better than the 5D3.

I'd read something about them coming out with a different mount...the MFT.

What exactly is a MFT mount...and why would you want it over the EF? If not the EF, you'd not be able to use all your Canon glass...which is good stuff, no?