The NABShow is usually where Canon does its major Cinema EOS announcements, and this year will be no different.
We're told to expect two new Cinema EOS camera bodies announced. One of the cameras will be the follow-up to the Cinema EOS C300 Mark II and the other camera will be some kind of high frame rate specialty body.
We previously reported that the C300 Mark III would have a sensor upgrade option for future 8K options. We're told that this is still the case and that the C300 Mark III might also get a full frame sensor size upgrade option. The C700FF sensor would likely be the sensor used.
Both cameras will reportedly be EF and PL mounts, unfortunately, there is no RF mount options being announced for NAB.
Canon will also likely announce a CN-E 100mm cinema prime lens alongside the already rumored PL-mount versions of the CN-E prime lenses.
I don't let myself get excited about these rumors anymore because I have given up hope that Canon will service the small independent one-man-band filmmakers. The C100 was the harbinger of false hope.
Canon already did it (closely) with XC-10 and 15 but at 1K over the price point you want.
Don't need RAW and C200 is too big and pricey. Many like me want Canon's version of the Sony FS5. Bring it in around $5000
My comment was meant as a hint to Canon people (who have nothing to than just read all internet forums :) that the EOS RP misses some basic video modes which seems like a intended crippling (24p 1080 FF and 1080p modes with EF-S). I thought about the EOS RP as a good universal tool for photography (EF, old FD glass) and video with EF and especially FD glass with great manual focus. The crop with EF-S lenses @ 1080p had been a good option to have a 16-35 equiv solution with my EF-S 10-22. The 6D m ii sensor isn't the best in DR but it would have been acceptable.
@bhf3737
About your remarks about XC-15: An interesting camera but I would have been absolutely fine with good 1080p footage. And interchangeable lenses are essential for me. The X-15 and the C100 too lack internal XLR ports with phantom power - both need an additional adapter box.
Finally: I will try to take first serious steps into video with 600D and M50 + a Tascam DR-70D Recorder + 2x Rode M5 MP . I am happy that I bought the external recorder and no phantom power box because both cameras have strongly noticeable noise in the mic input. The Tascam and the M5s from Rode give exceptional sound quality and the whole setup isn't that bulky compared to these professional solutions. By the way I plan to use 30cm distance between the micros so the setup is non-standard and a little bit larger compared to mono or XY-recording solutions.
Well, if they kept external raw you could still do pro res raw externally with atomos. At least for 24p and 30p currently. Sadly whenever i need to do high frame rates I’m switching off of atomos and onto an oddesy on the ole c500, and 13 minutes at 120 fps takes up a terabyte on that thing. Sheesh. :/
Generally with Canon it is probably better on focus what we get, because not all (if anything) will be what we want. But at least, whatever it will do, it will do that very well, it is always the same all over again...and again...and some rumours are only good for giving people false hopes on that ;)
I was hoping it was a c500 MK II. This all sounded like them bringing out some RED competitors to me.
I’m curious what you shoot. The wish lists I see in the forum often seem odd or incongruous to me and I feel like I’m out of touch.
I think it's interesting when you look at the specs for the C200 and the Fs5markII, even two years down the road the C200 looks like a modern offering with 4k/60 and beefy internal codecs. The Fs5 II, only a year old, seems "so two years ago" with everything all the Sony fans "womp-womp" about with Canon cameras. --limited 4k capabilities, no 4k/60, no DCI (even though the sensor is DCI) and generally puny internal codecs. Sure the base camera is a little lighter, (mostly due to what I'd call consumer level construction) but it also has lower spec'd everything...size difference isn't really dramatic..the cameras are just differently shaped. While I get that the C100 was a lot smaller, my guess is cooling the internals 4 4k has a whole lot to do with why both the c200 and Fs5 are so generally bigger.
Who knows..canon may see a market for a smaller 4k camera than the c200..but I'm guessing that it's the C300's turn, as the C200 is obviously selling well where it is (and still at its launch price after two years, almost unheard of for a Canon or Sony video camera).
It seems like someone hankering for a C100 mark III should be looking at a Fuji XT-3. Priced with a lens and a gimbal at about half the price of a C100 III (in theory) with generally great specs image quality.
I imagine (if they did do both) that the c300 MK III would be more in line with the red gemini, and the c500 MK II would be more in line with the red helium/monstro, or vice versa, I might have that mixed up a bit. The Gemini is the only Red camera I actually like. It's actually decent in low light, something red always had trouble with before.